What's going on around here? (I have discovered an editorial process.)

There are 300,000,000 Americans. While not all of these vote, or are even "OF AGE," no living breathing POTUS can accept input from them all. Any selective process on it must be stated in the old but necessary way: "Access must be controlled." Please read on for suggested penalty to those who abuse the privilege.

If POTUS' election is a political accomplishment requiring any assistance at all, the person or persons who assisted the accomplishment are due some consideration for their loyalty and the political confinement that choosing THAT Candidate over others caused them to risk. Politically the compensation is improved access. All others pay through the nose, in either political capital, or money to finance the next campaign.

EVERY Election in which there are more nominees than candidates has ruined political careers as casualties of war. This causes humans to be bitter, and bitter humans of THAT political aptitude cause patriotic consideration of the part of a sentient Nation interested in self-preservation.

For this purpose, politicians, like spies and hunting dogs have "Handlers." A simple, very destructive paradigm for a "Handler," is outlined here:

Ignore/Isolate - the subject
Reward - when he craves/seeks attention from you
Secret - have an inside joke for a secret; books by Salman Rushdie are a good way to see if a person is liberal or conservative Muslim, as a crib to execution of the practice.
Test - loyalty
Escalate - take it to the next level

Punish/Destroy - at will after usefulness is ended

The sixth and final step was not one I was prepared to understand at any time before the present (see time date stamp if needed.)

I have humorously written that Apathy and Negligence guarantee Deniability.

In fact, Deniability is an abusable concept that is nonetheless necessary - I subscribe to Latin maxim "Abusus non tollit usum" not Square Distribution Justice.

As an example, during time of war, if a dissident can tie the POTUS up in legalities, the dissident can EITHER emasculate the nation, OR blackmail its progress to advance his agenda. For this purpose, strategists in various positions are held harmless by plausible explanations that their actions were benign to accusation.

To be able to deny completely, a secret must be kept, and secrets propagate proportional to the square of the number of their membership. For another perspective, contemplate the old saw "Knowledge is Power," in the legitimate context of Technocracy. Old Lions will adopt the "technocracy," of their discipline (whatever that may be,) for self preservation. Nowhere is this more prevalent than Bureaucracy.

Presumably, I will eventually be an old Lion myself. As my values become corrupted to the values of the system, my influence will wax, as my morals wane, until the casualty is ethics. I suppose that the quantum point in time when ethics die, is when I should be put out to Political pasture... destroyed in the Hollywood language of Washington. A good signal to look for is a numeric count of passive voice statements, put through the discriminating seive of responsibility (patriotic or no. The corruption I leave behind cannot justify my own continued participation; a new ethical Paragon must then be sought.)

Polities will raise up pedagogues to sove their problems for them - a Teacher.

The persons whose job it is to protect, and advance the agenda of the Politician, (usually Politicos of one estate or another, some will be Machiavels) will reliably keep their candidate innocent of connivance, conspiracy and wrongdoing, by limiting their knowledge - a human Politician can only read so many Britannica's in one lifetime; the statement, "I've forgotten more than you know," is a reality for competent Elder Statesmen. To set your Politician busy-work in his reading should still be regarded as disloyalty, and penalized with political assassination, in my book.

Having established by logic that access must be controlled both for expedience and politics, we must conclude that ethical Politicians will appear completely incompetent at the START of ALL INVESTIGATIONS. Their question will be, "What's going on around here?" and they will not know; in fact, they will have difficulty getting straight answers... the loyal handlers of opponents will collude with their own loyal handlers to keep them deniable as long as possible.

Parenthetically, you might think patriotism an adequate guideline - it is not. The system compensates for the lack of Socratic definition of Patriotism by simply allowing all politicians and politicos to regulate each other by a perennial controlled political mayhem of a political crash-up derby.

Returning to our discussion of the sounds you may expect from a healthy investigation, the bad-actors will follow hard-on with exclamations of "What happened?" Politically, they will pass around lit dynamite sticks of evidence in the hot-potato tradition, and the one holding the bag when it goes off gets to face the Bill Cosby public, when he asked his wife: "You had it last... what happened?" ["Himself" album, in re. the gender of their offspring.]

When things are brought to light in the papers, there are usually things that are not relevant, or are private just as there would be in a commonplace murder investigation. If the published news was ONLY the mechanism by which Politicians agree to keep their stories straight, you would not be able to learn through history; I have, and truth in advertising laws apply to journalists despite the fact that their degree will ALWAYS be in journalism, not the subject about which they are attempting to report.

Reviewing; Deniablity is necessary. Access must reasonably be controlled. "What happened?" is the sound of a caught Politico... its only a matter of time after that. "What's going on around here?" is a question to which only Thespians and other good-guys want answers.

On a personal note: If you've read this far, "the damage is done." I am prepared to state that I perceive an editorial process at work. This blog is a copy of stuff I had, saved to my HDD, from which I duplicated what I had put up at Slashdot. It did not adequately exhaust Slashdot content back then, and I supposed that I did not "Save" reliably enough back to HDD-land. Now I have stuff on HDD that isn't reflected here... I THINK including one that enumerated WHY politicians cannot be 100% forthcoming at all times. Highlighting my admittedly bad spelling, by corrupting online content to discredit my intellect is a good next step to take. I am FIXING ONE I HAVE FOUND!

I am also disturbed by inconsistencies in Directory comparisons ON the HDD. I have made a Political Project of reporting these to the Dallas Branch Office of _the_ (definite article means you don't affiliate like a serf,) FBI. If they do not reply, they will be Patriotically guilty of the flaw of Benedict Arnold. It is unavoidable... they have to come down here to even suggest I lied - which I did NOT! It _WILL_ appear to be a Bureaucratic oversight. It may be that, and not a flaw bureaucratically overseen. Bring me my Subpoena for "inciting to riot," and "sedition." People... I'm THAT MAD!