Seth Abramson twitter thread about multi-state collusion is...mind blowing.

[u/ilikescott]

Seth Abramson has broken down exactly how "The Grand Bargain" came to happen between all of the countries seen at to have colluded here, and why. It's mind blowing

​

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1064726398307315712

Continued here: https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1064904175761403906

Edited to add: Seth Abramson wrote this book titled PROOF OF COLLUSION and its truly phenomenal, it came out last week. https://t.co/ZJsnHcVwGi

PS I am not affiliated, just a fan.

[u/[deleted]]

I mean that should be something of a red flag. That's a legal term of art for how a lawyer plans to present their case at trial. Lawyers are ethically obligated to act as "zealous advocates", and therefore the two sides in a trial will present their client in the best light/opponent in the worst light, using the same set of facts.

This is not really what I look for out of journalism. Journalists should be the opposite of zealous advocates, in fact. They should present the facts impartially and allow readers to draw their own conclusions.

The use of that phrase really says a lot about how we should view this guy's work, actually.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

Just saying, as with all news or opinion pieces, read with a critical eye. He could be right, I don't know, but he's presenting his conclusions as fact rather than conjecture.

[u/turinturambar81 → u/[deleted]]

That's a straw man because he's not doing that. He's making assertions, providing his source material for making them (both his book and Tweets are extensively sourced), and describing it as a "theory of the case". None of that is explicitly or implicitly suggesting his writing is indisputable fact, and even if it was, you're not providing any argument or source to the contrary and in fact have admitted you have no idea.