Today's exercise in plausible deniability. I can't PROVE that AltNPS saw this in Reuters (posted three hours before they AltNPS did), but I have to believe that it's more likely than "the Alt National Park Service follows Trump on Truth Social." www.reuters.com/world/us/tru...
It seems more likely to me that someone behind the account must follow Trump on Truth Social? I mean it makes just as much sense. Not disagreeing with you overall, I just don't know that this specific idea is spot on.
Fair enough, and I agree that this is a weak complaint on my part. I'm just overly cynical about AltNPS, and I appreciate you checking me on it. I need that sometimes!
No worries! They don't seem on the level to me either...I don't think they're actively nefarious, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions and all that and I just don't trust that they're on the up and up.
I think that's an important distinction for me. I don't consider AltNPS nefarious as in "actively trying to sabotage a progressive movement" or anything. But I do consider them *ruthlessly* cynical! They're in this for clout and attention, not for genuine organizing, you know?
A lot of us like the idea of rebellion--secret codes, stand-offs, rogue federal employees--but it's got to be REAL, not cosplay bullshit!
Precisely!