It's only a conspiracy if it somehow benefits their side to say it is. There are zillions of coincidences every day. If they find a coincidence that benefits their agenda, it's a conspiracy. Some guy who once had lunch with Hillary Clinton died of a heart attack? She must have had him whacked. Do it enough and half the country thinks Hillary's had more people whacked than John Gotti. Right-wingers live off of this kind of misinformation. Conservatives more susceptible to believing falsehoods
Not everything is a conspiracy: fact check true. But MOST conspiracies could be SHUT DOWN by simply telling the truth. The JFK assassination comes to mind. However Epstein Island The White House Plumbers and Richard Nixon MK Ultra Operation Northwoods Gulf of Tonkin Tuskegee and syphillis Operation Paperclip Operation Mockinbird The Dalai Lama was a CIA asset The 9/11 Hijackers were CIA assets These conspiracies are true, and were perpetrated on the American public, by leaders on both teams in Washington. Edit: Epstein Island was not perpetrated by leaders in Washington.
The fact that everything has to have “sides” is the problem. We can’t just look at a situation based upon facts and merits. First and foremost it’s all about sides.
Considering that you apparently believe that there are no coincidences and seem to subscribe to the theory that Biden is weaponizing the DOJ against his "enemies" just out of curiosity do you think that the Obama and Biden administrations went after Bob Menendez because they tried (in the case of Obama) or may try (in the case of Biden) to improve US relations with Cuba considering that Menendez is of Cuban decent and strongly opposes that position.
When did I say there are no coincidences? The Biden Administration is clearly weaponizing the DOJ against its enemies. That is much closer to the “Epstein didn’t kill himself” level of conspiracy than Alex Jones “they’re turning the frogs gay.” It’s clear because they’re treating Trump in a manner no former President has been treated, and he also happens to be the chief political threat for this Administration, AND Joe Biden himself violated the Espionage Act. I’ll tell you what though: if you have no problem with this, you should have nothing to worry about in regards to what’s coming. It’s only going to be more of the same.
I assume that your statement that "the Biden Administration is clearly weaponizing the DOJ against its enemies" is based on the indictments of Trump and his associates. You are aware that the indictments were handed up by grand juries that reviewed extensive documented evidence which indicated there was probable cause to believe that multiple crimes were committed by the defendants, the principle defendant in particular. Whether you're willing to admit it or not you implicitly believe that the only way to avoid allegations of "weaponization" would be to give a political opponent of the administration immunity from prosecution regardless of any evidence that he may have committed serious crimes. Also keep in mind that under special counsel regulations, Merrick Garland's authority as AG is limited to overruling the decision of a special counsel (in the case of Trump) to pursue an indictment. Under the regulations the AG cannot overrule a decision by a special counsel not to indict. For reasons that have been stated in multiple posts by myself and a number of other posters there are signficant differences between Biden's possession of classified documents (the same also applies to Mike Pence) and that of Donald Trump. You're correct. Trump is being treated differently than any other former president has been treated because he has acted differently than every other former defeated president. Unless I missed no other defeated incumbent president has attempted to instigate a coup d'état as did Donald Trump. Every other defeated incumbent president in American history going all the back to John Adams following the 1800 presidential election has acceded to the peaceful transition of power to his opponent. Do you really think that the events of January 6, 2021 for which Trump is being prosecuted as well the related schemes like the false electors would have ever happened had Trump conceded like every one of his predecessors?
No, I believe charging one person for a crime while not charging others on the opposite team for the same crime... and going out of your way to target chief political rivals, threats, and liabilities is weaponizing the justice system. I stopped reading there because I've had enough of your bullshit.
Lol... "rabble rousing" must mean to speak out against government injustice to you. Yep, that's the win at all cost psychology. Even if it means being dishonest with yourself. Having said that, I have no like or dislike for this man's "musings," nor does it matter if he's right or wrong. I just laugh at the Leftists here that will agree with injustice to make their side look "better," and to help their cause against anything/anyone that they are NOT politically aligned with. I laugh at the in-lock-step sheeple THAT ARE FOR GOVERNMENT ENSLAVEMENT OF THE PEOPLE...
Gotta say that you knocked it out of the park. Karl Popper would be proud. I don't teach a history of science course, but I have been teaching research methods for over 20 years and increasingly dedicate the entire first third of the course each semester teaching critical thinking & reasoning in science despite it only being one chapter in the text. It is as important as teaching the technical ins & outs of sampling and methods (I've tried to push my dept to develop its own history or philosophy of science course as the first course in our methods/stats sequence). I mention this not to toot my own horn, but because your comment resonated with me. As I see it, the constant what ifs nails an (the?) underlying problem in human reasoning. For some, there can be no end to the what ifs and thus it's faiap skepticism running amok (albeit often inconsistently and/or haphazardly). Therefore, such people can never reach a point where facts can be accepted to their satisfaction or where they can deal with coincidences & randomness in a way that doesn't require ever more what ifs. As you mentioned, it can be fatiguing. (FWIW, my comment is not directed @Gatoragman)
Thanks for being a great professor. Some students won’t care, but there are others who will remember you for the rest of their lives. I kept up with my professor for at least 15 years post graduation, and he is the architect of my critical thinking methods. He’d often ask, “What do you believe, and why do you believe it?” We spent quite a bit of time on skeptics like David Hume, and the wisdom and power of skepticism became apparent to me, but also the dangers of taking it too far… as in Nihilism. My words, not his on that last bit. It’s useful as an exercise, but eventually you have to believe in something. I primarily studied philosophers(y) from antiquity until the end of the Scientific Revolution, though I did get to more contemporary thinkers like Popper. Thomas Kuhn might be my all time favorite. Bottom line, critical thinking is important and helps me to see things clearly. I recognize and accept my own biases, and. I think it helps to make me a fair person in debates.
Apparently your worshiping the former president to the point where you have elected to remain willfully ignorant. You still can educate yourself as to the differences between the Biden and Trump situations by clicking on the link below: Biden, Trump – and two very different classified document scandals Somewhat simplified but in an easy to understand format;
I am aware of the differences. I disagree that the differences are controlling. Worship of Trump? I'm a DeSantis guy.
