Thanks, for your explanation!
Thanks, for your explanation!
It should be obvious this is the classic smokescreen gambit. Let's say you married a noxious bitch, and you want to off her ass. You hear she is going drinking with her gal-pack at a seedy bar. You setup an ironclad alibi, and unleash the hitman, who takes out everyone in the bar. All the other victims are the smokescreen, to obscure the fact that there was only one target. In this case of YouTube, the conservatives are already aware they are the targets on defunding. YouTube knows this too, and has likely figured out their shit is eventually going to get challenged in court, so they either have to stop doing it, or find a way to cloak it in 'plausible deniability'.
It should be obvious this is the classic smokescreen gambit. Let's say you married a noxious bitch, and you want to off her ass. You hear she is going drinking with her gal-pack at a seedy bar. You setup an ironclad alibi, and unleash the hitman, who takes out everyone in the bar. All the other victims are the smokescreen, to obscure the fact that there was only one target. In this case of YouTube, the conservatives are already aware they are the targets on defunding. YouTube knows this too, and has likely figured out their shit is eventually going to get challenged in court, so they either have to stop doing it, or find a way to cloak it in 'plausible deniability'.
(post is archived)