Malcolm Nance...Its Official...

[grantcart]

44. There is a huge gulf between scepticism and cynical nihilism

Just as there is a valley between observation and silly mutterings.

Nance has not only been correct in advance of the herd he has actually written the text book on it.

Your response has little to do with Nance, or the written statement that has been widely circulated and embraced by both Trump and anti Trump partisans, and only confirms what is obvious, Trump is a subject of investigation.

You didn't enter the thread to raise a credible doubt to Nance's statement (The only relevant point being discussed is it to Trumps' advantage or disadvantage) but rather to parade your self reviewed premise that your self branded scepticism exists on a higher level than others.

But being doubtful of a very credible source with a deep history of careful and prudent observation is not scepticism but cynical desperation. Not finding a reason to doubt you seek to cynically embrace doubt whether the context supports it in any way.

While it is true that we shouldn't embrace someone SOLELY because we agree with them your responsev incorporates 2 fallacies
A) Straw man. When you posit we shouldn't believe some one because we generally agree with them you must be aware that no one suggested that we should do so.
B) Fallacy of the inverse. Just as we shouldn't be prompted to accept Nance SOLELY because we agree with him it is equally false to disbelieve him because we agree with him.

But really you just wanted to discuss yourself in a way that projects yourself of having higher standards than folks who are actually having an informed discussion based on facts and historical context.