Also known as: derailment, “that does not follow”, also known as: derailment, “that does not follow”, irrelevant reason, invalid inference, non-support, argument by scenario [form of], false premise [form of], questionable premise [form of]) [form of])"
It appears to me that you are attempting to use a non sequitur to derail my point that your justification for your surmise that the POTUS was likely to accept bribes because he is a felon.
Therefore, logically, I believe it was a non sequitur (also known as: derailment, “that does not follow”, irrelevant reason, invalid inference, non-support, argument by scenario [form of], false premise [form of], questionable premise [form of]) for you to present such a flimsy argument.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.