I love the way you dodge the issue "at bar" to throw out a legal term.
Fact is a judge would reign you in. Exactly why do you try to change the argument? We were discussing the SPLC and you throw in the NFL.
When I offer something of the sort, and I frequently do, it is as an illustration, to draw a picture for the less inclined to mental gymnastics.
Less equipped mentally, you got that?
You throw in the NFL or whatever off the wall
View attachment 260755 to try and get me off the scent.
This dog don't hunt like that, I pursue until I tree you or get tired, or don't give a

anymore. I really do like you Sammy.
"Ok, you had your water break, glad you had time to think of the NFL."
It might work something like this:
"I know this is not your statement, you do seem to support the mission, we do have your testimony in an earlier conveyance.
Exactly what is your interpretation of this statement,
And it still tends to emphasize splashy cases that are sure to draw national attention. The most notable, when I was there, was a lawsuit to remove a Ten Commandments monument that was brazenly placed in the main lobby of the Alabama Supreme Court building, just across the street from S.P.L.C. headquarters, by Roy Moore, who was then the state’s chief justice. Like the S.P.L.C.’s well-publicized 2017 lawsuit against Andrew Anglin, the neo-Nazi publisher of the Daily Stormer, it was a vintage example of the center’s central strategy: taking on cases guaranteed to make headlines and inflame the far right while demonstrating to potential donors that the center has not only all the right enemies but also the grit and know-how to take them down.