"difficult" isn't the goalpost we're hitting here. You're justifying "nothing can be done" "there’s no case the government can make that will stick, or even have any meaningful effect" and "long-term negative effects on the rest of us."

Go ahead and shudder: you were arguing futility and impossibility and have now triangulated to difficulty all while patting me on the head and condescending to my benighted comprehension of monopoly policy. This is kind of like arguing that blockchain is totally a database, well it's mostly a database, okay it's kind of a database nevermind my point still stands because I want it to.

Gentle reminder: you started this conversation by arguing I'd run you over in my car and are finishing it by "shuddering to think" of what evidence I'd take in an argument. To the best of my knowledge I've done nothing to earn your disrespect. I've let it be known that I feel it keenly.

Is it going to be difficult to go after 40% of the stock market? Undoubtedly. Is the toadie who cozies up to Bork the guy to do it? Certainly not. But my whole point yesterday is that the states would have to be chumps to join this case and nobody's said shit about that. they've been building their cases for years, probably because something like this is gonna be like storming Omaha Beach.

One thing I haven't done is move the goal posts from impossible and pointless to difficult and then act exasperated when my counterpart calls me on it.