smittyoneeach's Journal: Oh, You Do Too Know That It's Purely Coincidental

On March 17, Hunter [Biden] accidentally admits it was his 'laptop from Hell.. The next day, DA Alvin Bragg indicts President Trump.
June 8, an FBI document is released showing that the Ukrainians paid the Biden crime family millions and millions of dollars. The next day, the Mar-a-Lago raid, and the Mar-a-Lago indictment.
Last week, Hunter Bidenâ(TM)s sweetheart plea deal fell through, when the judge realized that there was blanket immunity. The following day, a superseding indictment [was brought] against Donald Trump.
July 31, Devon Archer goes to testify in front of the House. That was only after they failed to put him in jail prior to the fact. What happens the next day? The January 6 indictment that weâ(TM)re here for today.
This is not a coincidence. This is election interference at its finest, against the leading candidate right now for president, for either party.

Will no one rid us of these turbulent conspiracy theories?

these "turbulent conspiracy theories"

[fustakrakich]

Biden/Trump has you so fished in

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

I am? By this farce? What part of "It's all bollocks" did you not hear?

Re:

[fustakrakich]

It's simply all the attention you give them, no such thing as bad press and all that

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Were it safe to ignore, I certainly would.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

If you and everybody did, they would go away. Your attention is just gasoline on the fire

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

So, your advice is to ignore everything*, with the certainty that it would all go away?

* Not saying 'the problem', as that would be pejorative

Re:

[fustakrakich]

The danger is always the followers

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

This is a fascinating theory. I can think of several possible meanings for "followers" here.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

Not a "theory", it's a most fundamental fact. All power comes from the followers, without them there are no "leaders"

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

Excellent point, but again: you're oversimplifying. The overlapping relational networks count, too. A graph is both nodes, as you rightly point out, and also edges.

Re:

[fustakrakich]

you're oversimplifying.

On the contrary, you introduce needless complexity, which I find to be a diversionary tactic to avoid dealing with the most fundamental of things. With humans personal choice is always personal

Re:

[smittyoneeach]

OK, maybe the point is that there needs to be an agreed-upon model for the discussion.

The data model *is* fundamental, and a Goldilocks proposition.

With humans personal choice is always personal

Right, but, short of going full-on Grizzly Adams, we have to externalize some functions in the name of having a society.