Thank you for a thoughtful response. Much appreciated.

You mention Trump's "repeated mentions" that 'he's shot'. Firstly, as it pertains to my viewpoint on this, I'm mention that I'm a trained linguist (aka have diplomas / degrees in lingustics) and have professional worked in language all my life. So, when i hear something, my first focus is to examine it from a variety of angles, and pin down the exact meaning, if it exists, or any ambiguities, if they exist. (Ambiguities simply mean there may be multiple possible interpretations.)

So, for example: https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/is+shot

be shot

1. To be physically, mentally, or emotionally exhausted. : After two hours in the gym and another hour swimming, I was shot by the time I got home.

I'm already pretty shot from writing essays, and I still have another one to write for tomorrow.

2. To be in a bad condition or totally destroyed. : I wish I could have the repairs finished sooner, but I'm afraid your engine's shot. Between dealing with mounting debt, my four children, and my recent divorce, my nerves are pretty shot at the moment.

3. To be filmed. : The surprise independent hit was shot on a budget of less than $100,000.

4. Of resources, money, etc., to be wasted, spent, or used up. : I can't believe my entire budget for a week in Las Vegas was shot in the first day!

"is shot" is actually a very common idiom and has been in use for a long time:

So Trump's statement is perfectly explainable in the context it is used. In fact, it makes a LOT of sense in the context it is used.

One might argue "ooh, double meanings - he's secretly telling us. you know, comms", but it's certainly NOT required in order to accept his statement simply as it is. One might say it's ambiguous, but ONLY if Trump is ALSO saying Biden has been shot by firing squad.

So then, there are other questions. WHY would Trump say this i.e. "comms"? For what purpose? During the Q operation, comms had a very clear purpose, and they weren't just for anons. "Comms" is part of how the underbelly of the intel word communicates. But it always has a purpose and reason. So that really requires a clear answer, imo. IF trump is smuggling in some secret message to.... who? Anons? Then WHY? What for? What is the outcome?

I think it's clear that secret comms and hidden meanings are very attractive to some of us. And some of it is real, but not all of it, imo.

Also, you say "repeated" but I only know of one time, possibly two. Do you know of more? I don't follow DJT's speeches all that closely, but even if he said it 5 times,in the absence of any clear reason why I should not, I would interpret him as simply saying, "Joe Biden is kaput! Done. Joe Biden has lost his utility."

Salute corresponding to a funeral:

if Biden was dead, was he then executed just prior to the Jan 20 inauguration, so that he was given a state funeral? WHY would Joe Biden be given a state funeral? Would the WH's let him actually be elected, and then take him out, because "the election was stolen"? Could the ceremony have any other meaning? Symbolic meaning? I don't have clear answers, and I think its interdasting, but so far, it's not something I count as a being clear.

And yet there's nothing wrong with using circumstantial evidence to form a belief.

100% agree. No, 200% agree. But this is really close to my point. If pedes would acknowledge that its a belief, and then approach it as a belief, and recognize it as a belief, then I think, that's OK. But pretending that "my belief is correct and infallible, and obvious" I dunno. I feel like too many pedes don't reflect on what they believe and recognize WHY they believe it. Often, it's for emotionally driven reasons, imo. Not purely logical or empirical.

Also, to be frank, I'm vary wary of disinfo operations targeted at anons and awake people. I see them all around the place, and think they do a lot of damage. When I see people place emotional attachment into certain beliefs, I wonder, what is the benefit? Belief should be tempered and balanced with acknowledged fallibility. "I believe this, but of course I might be wrong" is a good starting point.

I also see a certain 'frenzy" around some narratives, where (in my view,) some people attach to them very strongly, but without a lot of those checks and balances.

Based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, despite the lack of absolute proof that I'd like to have. At some point, there's enough to form an opinion.

Yes, I agree with you here, too.

However, I think it's really important to NOT lose sight of the fact that belief is not equivalent to fact, and opinion is not equivalent to fact, and that as much as possible, we should be open to questioning our choices in belief and opinion, debating them, listening to other arguments, etc.

One example comes to mind: Human driven climate change. There are real, bonafide experts, specialists who know their stuff through and through who present their view on CC and offer a fact-based, evidence based, rigorously developed case why HDCC is a load of bunk. It includes not only the science, but also tangible and reasonable arguments for the WHY and the HOW, too.

So far, I've not see that vis-a-vis the Biden Not Biden arguments. Lots more too it all, obviously. I appreciate the thoughtful reply, and I'm certainly open to hearing WHY you believe what you believe or why you have the opinion you have. That's how we draw closer to truth: listening.

Thank you for a thoughtful response. Much appreciated.

You mention Trump's "repeated mentions" that 'he's shot'. Firstly, as it pertains to my viewpoint on this, I'm mention that I'm a trained linguist (aka have diplomas / degrees in lingustics) and have professional worked in language all my life. So, when i hear something, my first focus is to examine it from a variety of angles, and pin down the exact meaning, if it exists, or any ambiguities, if they exist. (Ambiguities simply mean there may be multiple possible interpretations.)

So, for example: https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/is+shot

be shot

1. To be physically, mentally, or emotionally exhausted. : After two hours in the gym and another hour swimming, I was shot by the time I got home.

I'm already pretty shot from writing essays, and I still have another one to write for tomorrow.

2. To be in a bad condition or totally destroyed. : I wish I could have the repairs finished sooner, but I'm afraid your engine's shot. Between dealing with mounting debt, my four children, and my recent divorce, my nerves are pretty shot at the moment.

3. To be filmed. : The surprise independent hit was shot on a budget of less than $100,000.

4. Of resources, money, etc., to be wasted, spent, or used up. : I can't believe my entire budget for a week in Las Vegas was shot in the first day!

"is shot" is actually a very common idiom and has been in use for a long time:

So Trump's statement is perfectly explainable in the context it is used. In fact, it makes a LOT of sense in the context it is used.

One might argue "ooh, double meanings - he's secretly telling us. you know, comms", but it's certainly NOT required in order to accept his statement simply as it is. One might say it's ambiguous, but ONLY if Trump is ALSO saying Biden has been shot by firing squad.

So then, there are other questions. WHY would Trump say this i.e. "comms"? For what purpose? During the Q operation, comms had a very clear purpose, and they weren't just for anons. "Comms" is part of how the underbelly of the intel word communicates. But it always has a purpose and reason. So that really requires a clear answer, imo. IF trump is smuggling in some secret message to.... who? Anons? Then WHY? What for? What is the outcome?

I think it's clear that secret comms and hidden meanings are very attractive to some of us. And some of it is real, but not all of it, imo.

Also, you say "repeated" but I only know of one time, possibly two. Do you know of more? I don't follow DJT's speeches all that closely, but even if he said it 5 times,in the absence of any clear reason why I should not, I would interpret him as simply saying, "Joe Biden is kaput! Done. Joe Biden has lost his utility."

Salute corresponding to a funeral:

if Biden was dead, was he then executed just prior to the Jan 20 inauguration, so that he was given a state funeral? WHY would Joe Biden be given a state funeral? Would the WH's let him actually be elected, and then take him out, because "the election was stolen"? Could the ceremony have any other meaning? Symbolic meaning? I don't have clear answers, and I think its interdasting, but so far, it's not something I count as a being clear.

And yet there's nothing wrong with using circumstantial evidence to form a belief.

100% agree. No, 200% agree. But this is really close to my point. If pedes would acknowledge that its a belief, and then approach it as a belief, and recognize it as a belief, then I think, that's OK. But pretending that "my belief is correct and infallible, and obvious" I dunno. I feel like too many pedes don't reflect on what they believe and recognize WHY they believe it. Often, it's for emotionally driven reasons, imo. Not purely logical or empirical.

Also, to be frank, I'm vary wary of disinfo operations targeted at anons and awake people. I see them all around the place, and think they do a lot of damage. When I see people place emotional attachment into certain beliefs, I wonder, what is the benefit? Belief should be tempered and balanced with acknowledged fallibility. "I believe this, but of course I might be wrong" is a good starting point.

I also see a certain 'frenzy" around some narratives, where (in my view,) some people attach to them very strongly, but without a lot of those checks and balances.

Based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, despite the lack of absolute proof that I'd like to have. At some point, there's enough to form an opinion.

Yes, I agree with you here, too.

However, I think it's really important to NOT lose sight of the fact that belief is not equivalent to fact, and opinion is not equivalent to fact, and that as much as possible, we should be open to questioning our choices in belief and opinion, debating them, listening to other arguments, etc.

One example comes to mind: Human driven climate change. There are real, bonafide experts, specialists who know their stuff through and through who present their view on CC and offer a fact-based, evidence based, rigorously developed case why HDCC is a load of bunk. It includes not only the science, but also tangible and reasonable arguments for the WHY and the HOW, too.

So far, I've not see that vis-a-vis the Biden Not Biden arguments. Lots more too it all, obviously. I appreciate the thoughtful reply, and I'm certainly open to hearing WHY you believe what you believe or why you have the opinion you have. That's how we draw closer to truth: listening.

Thank you for a thoughtful response. Much appreciated.

You mention Trump's "repeated mentions" that 'he's shot'. Firstly, as it pertains to my viewpoint on this, I'm mention that I'm a trained linguist (aka have diplomas / degrees in lingustics) and have professional worked in language all my life. So, when i hear something, I am trained to examine it from a variety of angles, and pin down the exact meaning, if it exists, or any ambiguities, if they exists. (Ambiguities simply mean there may be multiple possible interpretations.)

So, for example: https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/is+shot

be shot

1. To be physically, mentally, or emotionally exhausted. : After two hours in the gym and another hour swimming, I was shot by the time I got home.

I'm already pretty shot from writing essays, and I still have another one to write for tomorrow.

2. To be in a bad condition or totally destroyed. : I wish I could have the repairs finished sooner, but I'm afraid your engine's shot. Between dealing with mounting debt, my four children, and my recent divorce, my nerves are pretty shot at the moment.

3. To be filmed. : The surprise independent hit was shot on a budget of less than $100,000.

4. Of resources, money, etc., to be wasted, spent, or used up. : I can't believe my entire budget for a week in Las Vegas was shot in the first day!

"is shot" is actually a very common idiom used for a long time:

So Trump's statement is perfectly explainable in the context it is used. In fact, it makes a LOT of sense in the context it is used. One might argue "ooh, double meanings - he's secretly telling us. you know, comms", but it's certainly NOT required in order to accept his statement simply as it is.

Then, there are other questions. WHY would Trump say this i.e. "comms"? For what purpose? During the Q operation, comms had a very clear purpose, and they weren't just for anons. "Comms" is part of how the underbelly of the intel word communicates. But it always has a purpose and reason. So that really requires a clear answer, imo. IF trump is smuggling in some secret message to.... who? Anons? Then WHY? What for? What is the outcome?

Also, you say "repeated" but I only know of one time, possibly two. Do you know of more? I don't follow DJT's speeches all that closely, but even if he said it 5 times,in the absence of any clear reason why I should not, I would interpret him as simply saying, "Joe Biden is kaput! Done."

Salute corresponding to a funeral: if Biden was dead, was he then executed before Jan 20 inauguration, so that he was given a state funeral? Could the ceremony have any other meaning? Symbolic meaning? I don't have clear answers, and I think its dasting, but so far, it's not something I count as a clear factor.

And yet there's nothing wrong with using circumstantial evidence to form a belief.

100% agree. No, 200% agree. But this is really close to my point. If pedes would acknowledge that its a belief, and then approach it as a belief, and recognize it as a belief, then I think, that's OK. But pretending that "my belief is correct and infallible, and obvious" I dunno. I feel like too many pedes don't reflect on what they believe and recognize WHY they believe it. Often, it's for emotionally driven reasons, imo. Not purely logical or empirical.

Based on a lot of circumstantial evidence, despite the lack of absolute proof that I'd like to have. At some point, there's enough to form an opinion.

Yes, I agree with you here, too.

However, I think it's really important to NOT lose sight of the fact that belief is not equivalent to fact, and opinion is not equivalent to fact, and that as much as possible, we should be open to questioning our choices in belief and opinion, debating them, listening to other arguments, etc.

One example comes to mind: Human driven climate change. There are real, bonafide experts, specialists who know their stuff through and through who present their view on CC and offer a fact-based, evidence based, rigorously developed case why HDCC is a load of bunk. It includes not only the science, but also tangible and reasonable arguments for the WHY and the HOW, too.

So far, I've not see that vis-a-vis the Biden Not Biden arguments. Lots more too it all, obviously. I appreciate the thoughtful reply, and I'm certainly open to hearing WHY you believe what you believe or why you have the opinion you have. That's how we draw closer to truth: listening.