LosLobo

You mean like Trump debated Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Tim Scott, Mike Pence, Vivek Ramaswamy, Chris Christie, Doug Burgum, and Asa Hutchinson at the 2024 RNC Primaries. How did Trump do?

You seem confused Trump is the only coward here, except for those others who remain unaccountable, like their master, by being unable to support their rhetoric with evidence.

Seems facts 'escape you'! What happened to any place, any time? 'What happened to any time, any place to debate in September?'

Ever considered supporting your wild opinions with facts, otherwise others may consider you gutless.

Seems your issue here may have been the failure to have a following up test to ensure the first treatment worked. It is normal to have another breath test after completing a treatment regimen for H. pylori. This follow-up test is typically done to ensure that the infection has been fully eradicated. The breath test, often a urea breath test, is usually performed at least four weeks after the completion of the treatment. This follow-up is important because H. pylori can sometimes be resistant to treatment, and confirming its eradication helps prevent potential complications like ulcers or gastric cancer. Do You Need a Repeat H. Pylori Test After Treatment? (medicinenet.com)

Better still do you have any examples of cases where Trump has been a 'debate master', when up against a savvy experienced prosecutor? Pleading the fifth 450 times, refusing to take the stand and falling asleep isn't going to work with the voters on televised TV.

New Toyota Hilux Mild Hybrid Debuts Alongside Extended Family Of ProAce Vans | Carscoops

2024 Toyota Hilux Champ Pickup Debuts In Thailand As A $13,000 Workhorse | Carscoops

Ex-prosecutors are typically 'debate masters' because of: Courtroom Experience: Regularly presenting cases and responding to counterarguments hones their debating skills. Critical Thinking: Analyzing complex legal issues and evidence enhances their ability to construct logical arguments. Effective Communication: Clear and confident communication is essential for both debating and courtroom presentations. Presentation of Evidence: Prosecutors are skilled at organizing and explaining complex information clearly. Quick Thinking: They often need to think on their feet during cross-examinations and unexpected developments. Persuasion: The goal of persuading a jury aligns closely with the objective of debating. I suggest Trump as do most of his supporters here miserably fail debating in the area of critical thinking and the presentation of evidence.

Occam would suggest differently.

'Idiotic deflection'!

Are you saying Trump is lying?

Nothing like Jan 6th!

Just like Trump pardoned his criminal mates and one of his crime family members.

'Do some research' or Google until you find something that agrees with you. 'Quotidian response spouted by conspiracy theorists when they are unable to provide a reliable source to back up their delusional and uncorroborated claims'. Urban Dictionary: Do your research

I agree, but only from you!

Biden is out of the race so no point in demonising him anymore. But demented Trump is still in there and what a spectacle he makes with his many plane faux pas! Trump boards plane with toilet paper stuck to his shoe? Donald Trump Mocked For 'Intensely Focusing' On Not Falling Down (okmagazine.com) Donald Trump Can't Seem to Close an Umbrella in Viral Clip (people.com) Trump blames 'airports' gaffe on teleprompter (bbc.com) Did President Trump Salute Marines While Boarding? You be the judge, the optics says it all!

Apologies, as your reply was to me, I thought that the comment was directed at me.

I haven't heard anything about this, do you have any detail? I have been disappointed with Copilot lately and have been using ChatGPT as well now that it is free.

I don't remember saying I was a 'basic user'.

The Trump idiocracy is seemly devoid of any critical thinking as witnessed by their unswaying belief in the sole word of their master. The conversion was a private conversation between Kelly and Trump. Logic and reasoning suggest that it is impossible for 25 individuals to witness evidence of a negative or the nonexistence of a fact, especially if that fact existed unbeknownst to the person. Also, Occam's razor should reasonably cast doubt on the credibility of a known pathological liar and criminal when contrasted with the testimony of a general who has maintained an unblemished record.

I recently made transfers from my Bangkok Bank account to purchase a car. It appears that with new third-party transfers, there is a qualifying period. My transfers were capped at 500k per day, requiring me to contact the bank daily for each transaction. I completed one transfer one day and another on the day I picked up the car, using my laptop for enhanced security. It's advisable to inquire with your bank before attempting such a transfer. In my experience, the bank only answered specific questions when contacted and did not volunteer information for subsequent steps in the process, which I found quite frustrating and time-consuming, as it seems to operate on a 'need-to-know' basis.