Last I checked, your reply said the convo was going nowhere followed by a "Don't care" and a "Who are you arguing with or talking to? Bc you keep acting like I care." when presented with (a fraction of) your favorite prez's various misdeeds. Essentially confirming that you never really had any interest in the evidence of his and his company's laughably obvious financial malfeasance. And then I said that was fine, at least you were dropping the charade, and moved on.
And as far as being selective, let's look at the things I mentioned
in this post which you never addressed:
"Which, to reiterate, is that almost everyone who voted for him did so in part because he was supposedly a "good businessman." He wasn't. Trump claimed he was paying millions of dollars of taxes when he was first running. He wasn't. He stated he couldn't release his taxes because they were under audit. He could. He implied he and his companies were only utilizing legal means of tax minimization. They weren't. He implied that there weren't any major conflicts of interests, foreign or domestic, stemming from the fact that he and his children didn't divest themselves of their business while working for the taxpayer in the WH. Of course there were.
Out of that laundry list of lies, you selectively replied to just the part about he and his company's tax minimization being legal, and then when told that not even that part was true (given that Weisselberg is going to jail and trump has a big pending suit against him), you got all huffy with a case of the I don't cares. Which honestly makes your whole dramatic production with cries of hypocrisy about selective replying pretty hilarious.