Originally posted by King Kandy
You already admitted it was not clear-cut in earlier debates.
I don't recall.
Originally posted by King Kandy
I'd like you to reconsider the wording on this one with the following sentence. This is supposed to be someone breaking up with their lover or something similar.
"We could have been together."
Note that this clearly does not mean that they were never together, rather it is commonly used in the sense of "It was so good, it didn't have to end." The LT certainly has a formal quality to his speech and it seems to me that he was using the wording in the later case.
I disagree.
Cause the LT has never said the Stranger was his fourth face,
and,
the LT on panel clearly stated that he could of been, as the proof shows,
there's no indication of any kind to think otherwise,
and your analogy while cool, imo, does not relate to the on panel facts.
Originally posted by King Kandy
But we both admitted it was somewhat ambiguous, so I never brought it up again.
Again, I don't recall.
Originally posted by King Kandy
That is,
until it was confirmed by the bio that in fact my interpretation was correct.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
A few bios have errors, not many, and mostly involving minute details,
but they do, this is one of them, clearly exposed by the on panel evidence.