(1335) Afternoon all. (1426)

 

The need for due diligence after ditching a priori assumptions

… being careful not to lie by omission along the way.

Take Donny for example … he’s a mixed bag … he did wrong imho not going after those who were going after J6ers … then there was Pammy doing a number on leading MAGAs to make them look stupid (Bindergate).

There are epfiles which have not been resolved, inc. Bannon refusing to explain, to come clean. He himself is taking a back seat in order to still have a part in the discussion but he’s doing it through others … on Rumble … I call that dishonest.

It’s our job to ferret out untoward doings and publicise them, hence we run Grifty and others on Ginge and Whinge. There’s much I for one agree with … that key people, for example, have much explaining to do and to that end, there are some great aggressively ferreting pundits online, inc. Leah.

However, due to my day job for decades, I’m exactly the sort who will pick up on shoddy hypothesising by deliberately selecting bad aspects of someone whilst playing down or even ignoring the good. I don’t mean the Iran proliferation, NATO, the presence of Wiles, Pammy, McCarthy K and so on … I don’t mean the overall score you’d give Donny …

… I do mean really untenable methodology designed to ensure Donny comes out worst, with Nixon second worst, whilst other completely corrupt POTUSes get almost a free pass.

If you concede that:

“I have spent more than two decades working in government, including time at the executive level advising CFOs in the Intelligence Community and DoD, and I follow the money on this administration every single day. What I am looking at reads like the most corrupt administration in American history. A lot of people have reached the same conclusion, and a lot of others have dismissed it as hysteria or answered it with Hunter Biden’s laptop. What bothered me is that nobody on either side had a way to check.”

If it can’t be checked, then how can you come out with a finite numerical graph like this?

The article started with the a priori assumption that Donny was most corrupt and she did ask compared to whom? Whom did she choose to compare him with? FDR and the gold (like Gordo)? Carter and his single term? Benghazi Killery and hubby’s corruption? How about Obama/Holder’s Fast & Furious, then the spying and Russiagate? How about autopen Biden and son’s laptop?

Quite ignored or played down in the graph. Whom did she compare Donny with? Nixon, who was nowhere near as corrupt as made out. Why not the bodycount Clintons?

Because she’s only interested in financial … where’s Fast and Furious, Benghazi or J6 discussed? Ignoring key components of corruption and pushing one aspect … financial opacity … it’s hardly good methodology. I have a book on JFK by Robin Ramsay … he details LBJ’s shenanigans … and then we could look at Vietnam after that.

Can she be cut any slack for being too young to know? Maybe.