That is an expansion that is not part of the claim. His claim was that the Left was susceptible to conspiracies. Remember, I asked you what you wanted, and you said this...
Now, it was not that he simply could not find one, it was that he did not believe there was one. Very different. Further, you originally said that you wanted him to admit the sides are not equal, and he has clearly done that.
So again, what you said your goal was has been met, yet you are still going with this.
1st, is the issue that you felt he was saying the Left and Right are equal in terms of conspiracies. He disagrees.
2nd, based off of your understanding, you then ask for proof by an equal example, but, he cannot provide one because he does not think there is an equal to the example of the person on the Right you gave.
3rd, you continue to press him to back up the 1st even though he does not hold the inherent beliefs of the 1st.
4th, you say you are asking him to explicitly disagree with the 1st and he does.
5th, you go back to the 2nd asking him to provide an example that would show he does not actually agree with the 1st, which he already did in the 4th.
6th, you now say its really about the 2nd, but, that only came about in response to the 1st.