DC Tom

Congratulations, my young padawan, you have embraced one of the three key rules for "How to appear smart." Namely: "Don't disagree with smart people."

"Deep state" has been coopted to mean some shadowy form of uber-government that plays the tune elected officials dance to. What it more accurately is, is the "bureaucratic state." The army of civil servants who believe they stand as the gatekeepers of the republic, and en masse can exert a large amount of influence in governance. Which is historically a real thing - for example, it's important to note that the NSDAP didn't really gain traction in the Weimar Reichstag until they started gaining the backing of the German civil servant class.

Pretty sure that most people accept that yes, in fact, Russia DID purchase advertising on Facebook and post memes in an attempt to influence the more soft-headed of the electorate. Personally, as you'd have to have been sealed in a barrel for 20 years to have not had an opinion on Trump or Hillary before the primaries even started, I think this... ...was largely ineffective. If it was, if anyone was so clueless as to be influenced by something like this, then democracy is dead anyway.

Quidditch warrior?

Plus...how do we even know they were on that jet? Maybe they were removed before takeoff? Maybe this was intended to fake their deaths, or to silence all the witnesses to their being taken off the plane? WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!1!1!!11!!1!!

Which part can you empirically demonstrate is wrong? (Note: "empirically" means "with evidence." Not just pulling something out of your ass.)

https://thegrio.com/2018/10/29/young-black-conservatives-stan-for-trump-at-white-house-leadership-summit/ You think Clinton's going to call for even more incivility? Maxine Waters going to call for Republicans to be harassed even more? You think I'll be assaulted by even more Antifa protesters outside my office?

The "equivalent?" It IS A five year old screaming "I know you are but what am I?"

Crushed, yes, crushed I am by your standard NPC response.

It's possible for there to be a conspiracy without it being a criminal conspiracy.

From anyone else, I'd take that as an opportunity to question my information. From you, I consider it confirmation. Didn't read it, did you?

Or as I once pithily put it: "The board's not anti-liberal, it's anti-schmuck. Stop being one."

Hey, if you don't like it, don't be retarded, and it won't apply to you.

No...because Tiberius is irrational. Greg is rational. He collects evidence, analyses it, and develops a theory to explain it and predict future evidence that may appear. That his theories are often crackpot (but not universally, which is an important point) does not make him irrational. What's more, like I said, he has and does accept criticism of his theories (you'll note that I provided just that above: stating that conspiracy theories are the crutch of the intellectually immature) and even change his mind. You should also note that, in "proving" he's "promoting" conspiracy theories, from his list of "theories in order of possibility," you cherry picked the "false flag" theory that he specifically considered least possible, and specifically by a wide margin, below three others.

The DoJ's OIG found that several senior people conspired to commit crimes. That's not a "conspiracy theory" in the canonical sense of "a hidden hand guiding everything to a predetermined conclusion." But it is a conspiracy, by definition.

I just had an uncle pass away who was mentally disabled - Down's syndrome, he lived to 56 (about twice the expected life span for a Down's sufferer). Good guy, very nice and friendly, more my generation than my father's, given his development. All us cousins basically grew up with him. He wasn't retarded. I'm also guardian to a nephew who had a high fever when he was 5. Cooked his brain. Functionally, he's about 16 (chronologically, 40). Developmentally disabled, yes. But not retarded. You, on the other hand. You're being retarded. Stop being retarded.

Generally...he doesn't. Greg definitely has a preference for conspiracies - if I had to guess, it's more because his writers' background biases him towards nicely wrapped-up plots. And in the greater context of his two years' of posts, it might end up being the same thing. But 1) he does present facts and derive theories from them, not the other way around (usually - the pipe non-bomber is a notable exception), and 2) he is amenable to correction. Neither is a trait held by true conspiracy theorists. Plus, while he may have posited two conspiracy theories, to posit is not to argue in favor of. I posit things I don't believe all the time, as should anyone with a pretense of rationality. It's a necessary step in falsifying hypotheses.

Whether you want to believe Greg's greater conspiracy or not, there's already compelling evidence and reports that FBI leadership in 2016 actively tried to manipulate investigations - to the point of falsifying them - to the advantage of Clinton's campaign. Coming from the DoJ OIG, that's pretty indisputable.

You're really so i word and c word that you can't w word the r word on the b word "other w word" your p word i word a word "other b word?" Y word a word i word.

Not materially.

Discount Linda Hunt and discount Liam Neeson?

Can't wait until they enter the country and discover that adults and children will be held separately to ensure no kids being trafficked... This shitshow is going to be awesome.

Or: "This is clear evidence Republicans are suppressing Democratic votes."

Like Saturday morning, when he got up and said "I'm going to denounce political violence!"