• NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I can’t help you if you reject evidence.

    What evidence? You haven’t provided any. You need to substantiate this claim:

    as the speaker she greatly normalized the corruption and made incredible money at the cost of her constituents.

    with some directly relevant corroborating information.

    • xmunk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Points at link.

      Points at the entire field of sociology.

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That link is an academic paper about social norms in general. It has nothing to do with Nancy Pelosi or insider trading or government corruption, which is why I said:

        directly relevant corroborating information

        You are drawing inferences based on assumptions. You haven’t provided anything that constitutes evidence.

        • xmunk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 months ago

          As I said in my comment above. We have one US Government, we cannot run experiments on it. I don’t know if you’ve ever worked in statistics or even just taken uni level statistics, but your desired level of proof is simply ridiculous and unattainable.

          Here, I have given you a mountain of data that paints a pretty clear picture but no, I can’t “prove” it was Pelosi - just like you can’t prove it wasn’t ancient aliens.

          I really do hope you’re trolling because this beyond silly.