are you speedrunning some sort of 'biggest amount of baseless assumptions about another person in one sentence'-title?

So you said this:

instead of the daily mail and their weird takes based mostly on hearsay and misconstruction

You did it first, honey.

All im pushing back on, is you claiming that 'its not a functional government'

I said it's a functional government, maybe i put it in a wrong way but i mean what i said. If that's all it take to tick you off then maybe it's a you problem.

i didn't accuse you of saying its a hellhole. The 1952 comment was rhetorically purely for dramatic effect and not a comment about you. Not everything is.

Didn't said you accuse me saying that, i simply stated that as a comparison.

tf has charlie kirk got to do with this?

Would've think an example that come after a statement is pretty obvious thing, but i expect too much it seems.