Allegedly…

Yet another overused word.  There are variations, but Allegedly sounds like you know what you are talking about in just one word instead of saying, “Other conspiracy hoaxers are saying…”.

In the logical fallacy loaded debate and discussion world there is Just Asking Questions.  “Don’t you think a 2016 election of Hillary would have been worse than Trump?”  The context being that this is brought up now, we know the first term of Trump was a well documented disaster, there’s no plans to make any beneficial changes in a second term (quite openly I can add), and basically has nothing to do with the actual topic people do care about now.  “Was the virus leaked from a Wuhan lab?”  “Was it created as a bioweapon?”  “Isn’t it really just the common cold?”  I don’t know, I’m just asking questions!  When the reality is hey, I’m letting you know I think it was a lab leak, it is a bioweapon, and Hillary created it.  Whether I actually believe it or not, it’s the Hoaxer way of poking at the other side that has actual evidence.

In a courtroom setting things are alleged when one team has the podium for their turn to talk.  Evidence is being presented, then weighed and discussed by the jury and the final outcome is determined.  It helps to keep the jury focused on your message to bring up a brief recap of the currently undecided points of your case.  “Remember, the police allegedly found the loaded gun at the crime scene while it was still warm.”  Before going in to the importance of the gun being warm relating to close temporal proximity to the crime, and acknowledging that the gun evidence is disputed as maybe being planted by a crooked cop.  It’s uncool to blurt out stuff you know opposing council is going to object to and likely to be sustained by the judge.  Unless your judge currently holds one of six particular spots on today’s Supreme Court, then you can say whatever the fuck you want.

All evidence in conspiracy gematria is alleged.  There’s always zero actual value to it.  The entire point of the story is to attract a crowd who is addicted to wrong answers and bad information.  A crowd with preconceived confirmation biased ideas of what they want the outcome of the case to be, and would get held in contempt of court for making a scene if they were allowed in the courtroom and things didn’t go away.

Sometimes the conspiracy hoaxer will put up a Fair Use disclaimer at the start of the video.  That’s “Allegedly” content.  A legitimate Fair Use disclaimer relates to copyrighted material.  Hoaxers will display the disclaimer, and the video will be about other wackos discussing various non copyrighted wacko talking points.  The unneeded disclaimer subconsciously says, “Look at what a bad ass I am for violating copyright law and talking about the wrong information like it’s truth!  See, this other person also says it!”  A statement instead of a question.  I’ve also always been fond of the deliberate misspelling pseudo disclaimer.  I need to misspell Gem@tr!@ and \/axx33n because my video will get taken down by evil YouTube since I’m talking about something I shouldn’t.  I’m such a naughty bad ass!

More directly to the use of ALLEGEDLY in gematria narratives it goes like this:

BOMB THREAT=166 and KID ROCK=166 and don’t forget that this Kid Rock song was released 166 days before his birthday.  In that promo shot the evil MSM used he’s wearing black and red, and his hand is over his left eye.  We all know what that means!!!  Allegedly.

Again, a statement instead of a question.  Or rather a bold faced lie instead of an insincere question.

This can be merged with another, “I’m a bad ass” trick.  If a YouTube channel does legitimately get scrubbed by YouTube for violations or you fake they take it down, make a new channel.  Normies will buy in to the free speech rhetoric and assume that the story that the channel was taken down for is legitimate.  Not realizing that the person got their channel deleted for being a serial harasser instead of posting the joys of Ivermectin curing everything or whatever bullshit reason they claimed was responsible for the takedown.  They always comeback with an unproven alleged reason and have no good explanation for why they’re back if supposedly censored.

This fake proclamation of being censored is the main point of using ALLEGEDLY.  I’m naughty and sticking it to the man.  I feel your pain, brothers and sisters, and stick with me and I’ll teach you to be just as naughty as I am.  And instead of the ALLEGEDLY being at the start of a recap of actual allegations instead of court decided facts it comes at the end of a string of shallow fake evidence arguments.