Today is that day that Trump seems to have defied Putin

[Igel]

10. Leb's bry ib in Labin.

"Cui bono?" is nice but fallacy prone.

It means, basically, who benefits?

Question is, who's doing the evaluation? I mean, if I had a lover and a stash of $ and a good income in TX divorcing my wife might be a good thing, financially. Then again, if my wife had a lover and knew about my income, she'd rake in child support.

It really depends on what the perp knows and values. If my wife in the preceding paragraph had no lover then why a divorce? if I valued family over $, why divorce?

Thing is, when looking at people from the outside, I don't know their motivations, what's important. And if I don't have a good suspect, that means I don't have any suspect. Because all the 'cui bono' crap is just that--crap.

Esp. if I'm biased--and think my wife must have a lover because low libido = wants another. Ignore actual wife. Or stats. My assumptions are facts, right? Why? Because me. I glory in me-ness. I'm never wrong, as far as I admit--and any evidence to the contrary means you're a traitor to the Cause.

So "cui bono?" works to the extent we know all the wants, desires, motivations of all those potentially involved.

Otherwise, "cui bono?"" = "what do I emote must be bad?" Hardly the same thing as guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.