> That's only true in some kind of naive sense imho. My opinion is that the use of cui bono is simplistic and naive and therefore inherently prone to abuse. It

> That's only true in some kind of naive sense imho. My opinion is that the use of cui bono is simplistic and naive and therefore inherently prone to abuse. It is rarely a real tool for investigation and then only ever the starting point, but for many it is the conclusion. For example, to pick a controversial topic, who gains from Trump being investigated for multiple crimes before an election and so who is behind these investigations? The obvious answer, derived from cui bono, is that Trump is orchestrating these investigations into himself in order to profit financially and politically. It keeps funds rolling in, keeps him in the media spotlight whilst drowning out stories about his opponents and builds up his reputation as fighting against the the swamp/deep state/whatever. Pure genius, he's playing 4 D chess ;) However it is equally easy to make the case the the Democrats, judges, deep state, Illuminati, whomever... benefit from trying to stop Trump from being elected again. But which story you believe is totally based on existing bias, making cui bono nothing but a tool for confirmation bias.