Being ID'd like that must have been Terryfying

You mean chapo finally got the Citations Needed bump, since Citations Needed is the official podcast of /r/chapotraphouse

I mean, ask yourself how many times you've seen Biden and other Dems insist that is very important we have a strong and respectable Republican party in this country?

I think they're in on the game.

Looks like I found a new book to read

I'm not suggesting that what you're speculating is impossible.

I'm suggesting your analysis is facile and uninteresting

If?

They caught Luigi in toon town smh my head

Exactly, the yardstick of critical support is not "some arbitrary measure of how much ideological inconsistency and discomfort I'm willing to stomach," it is utility. Necessity makes strange bedfellows and all that.

No one said you can't have critical support. The mod statement was just reminding you that criticism is the first half of "critical" support.

Conspiracy theory in the sense that they are, in fact, conspiring lol

Consent manufacturing machine goes brrrrrr

No doubt, but I'm specifically referring to comment sections of news agency posts. I feel (very anecdotally) that it seemed like the reception was near universally positive in the immediate aftermath of the event and the day after, but checking the comments on newer posts from those same news media accounts today feels like a switch has flipped and the sentiments expressed are now much closer to a 50:50 positive to bootlicker ratio.

I don't know how accurate my observations are, and I partly posted this to see if others have noticed the same shift or if I am just extrapolating from too small of a sample size.

but it's cool as hell he killed that CEO and I'm not going to pretend that it wasn't cool

Absolutely no one is saying you can't do that

is he a revolutionary hero and communist icon for it? no, shut the fuck up that's not what anyone is trying to say

Some people were more or less trying to say this, and those people are who the mod statement was directed at.

I feel like a good 90% of the posts I've seen complaining about the mod statement need to learn the concept "not every post I read is addressing me personally."

Oh, I'm sure there is organic versions of these sentiments going around.

It's more that, anecdotally for me at least, in the immediate aftermath of this event and the day after, the reaction seemed to be near universally positive even on the news agency posts, with only a few bootlicker posts sprinkled in.

Whereas today, the ratio to positive reaction to bootlicker seemed a lot closer to 50:50. I know it's not exactly a rigorous measure, but if it was entirely organic sentiment I don't think there would be such a rapid shift (that I may or may not just be imagining)

You sure are doing the meme of responding to "I like pancakes" with "oh, so you hate waffles??"

Yeah, that's the idea. This hearing was not the murder trial, so evidence pertaining to guilt or innocence is unlikely to have been discussed since it was not relevant to the matter at hand.

Which, as you said, means we have to wait for the trial to know anything conclusively. But the fact that he only disputed the cash does not necessarily mean he is admitting to the rest of it.

It's me, I'm everyone

Imagine it was true

Nice thought experiment, but in most cases we have the declassified documents from the CIA and other such organizations who originated the accusations showing that in their internal communications and records that were not public facing that they knowingly and intentionally lied to the public as part of their campaign of information warfare.

The inherent problem is that skepticism is an inexhaustible well. If the only principle guiding your analysis is skepticism, you will inevitably end up stuck in a perpetual and ultimately unproductive cycle doing little more than tilting at windmills.

This is why theory is important to study. You need to have a framework for understanding the world to build off of if you want to have any analysis that's more insightful than "what if we imagine that he had bad thoughts? Pretty scary, huh?"

What if we imagine a purple elephant? What if we imagine flying sharks? Makes you think, doesn't it??

You are either very credulous or intentionally engaging in bad faith, and I don't much care to figure out which