YT posted a comment about posting a FB comment "Something should be done about China" and you said that if he replaced that with Congressmen the SS would show up at his door. I said that they never would. This is correct, your stance was not. There is no plausible scenario where the specific qualifier of congressmen would cause the SS to show up over a threat of that variety where that qualifier wouldn't make 'congressmen' irrelevant. It would save us both time if you would just admit you were wrong on this point. You said something that was factually incorrect, I replied with a short explanation "Probably never - the secret service does not guard congressmen" my statement is correct, not technically correct or usually correct, not 'debatable', its a simple fact and you're spinning around trying to change our points or something. Whatever the origin of your frustration, you wandered off on some tangent to make some point maybe, it does not change that your original statement is wrong and I corrected it and the last dozen messages have been me re-stating a fact while you blunder around trying to find some exception or rephrase. This began as nothing different from you saying the equivalent of "Try speeding past a FBI office, see how long before the FBI arrests you" and my replying 'probably never - they'd just call the cops' only even that's a stretch because in this scenario the crime at least actually took place under their nose. Why would the SS even be monitoring facebook for comments like "Something should be done about Rep John Johnson"?