Can you imagine if someone did this for the other guys?
Hey Biden actually is owned by the shadow government.
Do you have any proof of that?
Do I need proof? It’s right here!
Like Trump is allied towards Putin, but he is only allied to those who pay him. He’s a narcissist in debt. If Putin’s funds dried up, he’d just saying he never liked him in the first place, disobey any previous agremeents.
Let’s not ignore the billionaires who are American and have always been American puppeting him and the party in general.
It would be helpful to have it confirmed, but it’s highly unlikely. The KGB is generally hush-hush, so we’re going to have to decide without explicit evidence, but Occam’s razor is good enough for me.
Occam’s razor says that he’s a billionaire acting in his own self interest. Adding hidden unconfirmed assumptions that are unnecessary to explain his behavior is literally the exact thing that Occam’s razor says not to do.
The idea that Trump simply disagrees with you on foreign policy is a simpler explanation than the idea that he’s secretly controlled by Russia. The majority of his Republican base supports his stance on Ukraine, along with roughly half of the population as a whole. Why is it assumed that everyone would take your position on Russia in the absence of some secret plot?
Yes? I fucking hate Trump but I want verified shit to tag on him for his actual actions.
If we just allow anything to stick to a figure/political group no matter how false it is, it just gives them ammo. “Why would you believe I did X? They said I did Y and Z and no proof was there for any of it.”
Like imagine if someone said something that makes sense about Putin but wasn’t backed by anything in reality. Putin could now use that as a tool for propaganda/deflection. Same for any other figure in politics.
Genuinely, I want sources for all claims. Even if it questions my personal world views. Sometimes I’m just genuinely wrong about something and I like being corrected in a informative way.
Then why is he Krasnov?
Has this been confirmed?
Does it need to be?
Absolutely.
Claims usually do.
Can you imagine if someone did this for the other guys?
Like Trump is allied towards Putin, but he is only allied to those who pay him. He’s a narcissist in debt. If Putin’s funds dried up, he’d just saying he never liked him in the first place, disobey any previous agremeents.
Let’s not ignore the billionaires who are American and have always been American puppeting him and the party in general.
It would be helpful to have it confirmed, but it’s highly unlikely. The KGB is generally hush-hush, so we’re going to have to decide without explicit evidence, but Occam’s razor is good enough for me.
Occam’s razor says that he’s a billionaire acting in his own self interest. Adding hidden unconfirmed assumptions that are unnecessary to explain his behavior is literally the exact thing that Occam’s razor says not to do.
The question is specifically the billionaire’s behavior toward Russia.
The idea that Trump simply disagrees with you on foreign policy is a simpler explanation than the idea that he’s secretly controlled by Russia. The majority of his Republican base supports his stance on Ukraine, along with roughly half of the population as a whole. Why is it assumed that everyone would take your position on Russia in the absence of some secret plot?
Yes? I fucking hate Trump but I want verified shit to tag on him for his actual actions.
If we just allow anything to stick to a figure/political group no matter how false it is, it just gives them ammo. “Why would you believe I did X? They said I did Y and Z and no proof was there for any of it.”
Like imagine if someone said something that makes sense about Putin but wasn’t backed by anything in reality. Putin could now use that as a tool for propaganda/deflection. Same for any other figure in politics.
Genuinely, I want sources for all claims. Even if it questions my personal world views. Sometimes I’m just genuinely wrong about something and I like being corrected in a informative way.