Is this article what they're talking about, though?
Oops, the interview is only 30 minutes (between 30:00 and 60:00) and that link was supposed to start at the start of the interview but didn't. But yes, the article I linked to in my post is the article they're talking about. :p
Houston, TX Mary Gee, 84, aka "mama Mary" lost her son, an Army veteran to COVID earlier this month. Mary's apartment complex had no power for days & she was found dead from hypothermia. Her apt was ransacked with thieves taking her TV, phone & possessions https://t.co/W7xOPctbJUpic.twitter.com/r4dGTanKMd
This removal is the result of an extensive investigation led by @TheJusticeDept and supported by ICE’s Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Center and HSI Nashville.https://t.co/Dd7avWCEe8
Is this article what they're talking about, though?
Oops, the interview is only 30 minutes (between 30:00 and 60:00) and that link was supposed to start at the start of the interview but didn't. But yes, the article I linked to in my post is the article they're talking about. :p
Some news: The DEA has suspended an agent who was in the crowd, armed, outside the U.S. Capitol as a mob of Trump supporters besieged it, the first known case of authorities examining the conduct of a fellow federal agent during the deadly riot.https://t.co/HHEmOXEtYE
I just learned that two people pretty much torched their entire online history after the Biden election, apparently concerned that their online history would harm them.
One of them was traveling more often because flights were cheap and they thought that could prevent COVID symptoms with vitamin D and Zinc. I was looking them up because I was wondering if they were doing OK.
Honestly, I skimmed most of that because a) I'm supposed to be doing something else, and b) that writing style was really getting on my nerves, but it's kind of telling that they seem to leave out so many specifics.
I have actually seen conspiracy deniers who seemed to make that a kneejerk reaction, as though you'd have to be deranged to believe any conspiracy at all. (And even that characterization of 'conspiracy theorist' as a default nutjob was a sort of conspiracy in that it was introduced as a talking point by the Warren Commission, if I'm remembering it right.)
Of course there are conspiracies, and some of them are really wild. There are some we know about only after decades, and of course there are ongoing ones that won't come to light for a while, and some that will never be public knowledge. No reasonable person would deny that.
But what conspiracies are they talking about here?
And there are the conspiracies that are played out right in the open, in the bills presented to the Georgia senate and the US Congress and everywhere. And are denied by the people with their names on those bills.
The general argument seems to be that ‘conspiracies have existed thus presume conspiracy.’
My general rebuttal to taking that seriously would be, ‘we only know that conspiracies have existed because they are bad, leaky and often failed. That they appear to be all around just shows that most people suck at conspiracies.’
On the only hand it could be asshole-pedanticism where it’s true “Conspiracies” that is plans by a group to do unlawful things in secret, do indeed happen all the time, but most are like the “Hey dude, buy us some beer with this fake $20 and you can keep the change.” kind of conspiracy.
Re: Fucking right wing death cults
ignores when you set a start time on a video. 
Linear Mode
