stick is an effective argument strategy, but you're fooling all of no one here. You are clueless and sophomoric. And if you really have to ask what the difference is between a jury finding a defendant not guilty in a criminal case where he more likely than not "did it" (but the state failed to meet its burden of proving guilt beyond all reasonable doubt) to court after court after court laughing nonsensical procedural lawsuits that couldn't even plead a viable cause of action (unless the lawyers were willing to falsify their pleadings), were brought by plaintiffs with no standing to sue, or essentially added up to a list of theoretical grievances with no actual remedy that a court could provide, that only further proves the point. This has all been explained to you before but you're either too stupid, too dense, or too much a flat out dishonest liar to ever listen, so I think I'll refrain from doing so again.

Not to mention, that wasn't even the dumbest or craziest thing you said. You also claimed impeachment proceedings for the most egregious misconduct and abuse of authority in the history of US presidents were a "coup attempt" (as if you even know what those words mean -- guess we'll wait for you to explain why impeaching Clinton was *not* a coup attempt but impeaching Trump was), while arguing with a straight face that 1/6 was a peaceful political demonstration where a few people got out of line. To that I and any other halfway honest red-blooded American will kindly tell you to go fuck yourself with your half assed, half wit gaslighting. You simply aren't smart enough by a longshot to wage a successful psychological war on people who, by and large, are far more intelligent and issue savvy than your weird, Otto-esque ass could ever be. So you can piss right on off.