A lead can be relevant without panning out. It might be reasonable to open a probe into someone based on limited information, but later discover no relevance to the core reason for the probe in the first place.
Touche.
Everything Timex is posting is pretty simple “I read the news 101” stuff. When you try to pick it apart as if you were poking holes in testimony given before a jury of 12 dumbasses, you come across as a combination of uninformed, disingenuous, condescending, and smarmy. That’s not the right way to have conversations with people, but given the morally bankrupt administration you’re defending, you’re making me think it might be the only way.
-Tom
Well, I read and watch the news too. I watch CNN all the time, and I see the constant allegations of collusion, repeated over and over again. And it looks like there is the possibility that Trump’s team didn’t collude with Russian hackers or their disinformation campaign, but that high-level officials violated all sorts of laws in reporting income and business dealings unrelated to collusion. I think there’s a distinction there worth noting and I can see how one might become frustrated with people conflating the two. And that holds even if I think Mueller was legally in-bounds to bring the indictments, which I do. But we’ll have to wait and see.
The core relevance is Trump or his campaign colluding with Russia, though, not Russia meddling. I’m sure you actually know that, though google is available if you want to look up the letter that appointed Mueller. So try again.
Hey Tom, chalk another up to the “education in how to alt-right” side for these gman conversations. When someone’s characterization of you hits too hard, repeat it over and over to try to make it sound ludicrous. I am excited for the “Smug Civility” t-shirts, though…
Again, I think Mueller’s indictments were legally in-bounds given his authorization and are proper and good. I am pointing out that the indictments (so far) have nothing to do with influencing the election or Russian meddling. They largely have to do with the consultant’s reporting of income and lying to investigators about it. There is a distinction there, ok? I think it’s a big distinction. And if that’s all the indictments pan out to be, this will be a lot of money and time spent to nail Paul frickin’ Manafort for money laundering and Georgie P. for lying about something or other. And that can reasonably frustrate someone trying to govern, even if that person thinks Russia did meddle – or even especially if he thinks that.
This is incorrect.
All of the indictments on Friday were directly related to influencing the election, as were the previous indictments of Russians.
That’s a good point. And alarmingly, one of the indictments said that a candidate for Congress (reportedly a Democrat?) sought hacked emails from the Russians.
So what you said was totally inaccurate.
Yes, the indictments so far do not formally allege that Manafort or the other Trump advisers or any American citizen colluded illegally (which was the source of Trump’s anger I referenced), but the statement you quoted is inaccurate based on last week’s indictments.
Note that Trump’s comment since the indictment of the Russians on Friday has been to criticize the Obama administration:
If he has said the probe should not have indicted the Russians, or that meddling should not be investigated, I have not seen that. I don’t think he has.
His whole thing is being upset that his campaign guys were nabbed for crimes (apparently) entirely unrelated to collusion and Russian meddling. That is what he considers a political “witch hunt.”
I haven’t seen this anywhere yet, where was this reported?
Aaron Nevins, a political consultant, has previously been linked by the Florida sun sentinel to Russian hackers. The sun sentinel says that on the same date the indictment claims that Guccifer got a request for stolen docs from a candidate for Congress, the Guccifer (Russian hackers) blog posted vulnerabilities about Annette Taddeo, who was running against Joe Garcia.
I think this was the part Joe hadn’t seen anywhere:
For instance, G.O.P. Operative Confirms Alleged Russian Hacker Gave Him 2016 Voter Data | Vanity Fair
another, lesser-known G.O.P. strategist was also in contact with the hacker at the height of the 2016 presidential election: Aaron Nevins
That’s this guy:
https://www.linkedin.com/in/aaronnevins
To be fair, he’s a mercenary so anything is possible, but also has as former credentials:
November 2010 – November 2012 (2 years 1 month)Tallahassee, Florida Area
Chief of Staff to State Senator Ellyn Bogdanoff
… who is very much a Republican.
Right, Garcia and taddeo are both democrats, and some looked at the timing of Guccifer’s dump about taddeo vulnerabilities (the same day that the consultant from Florida contacted Russia) as a sign it was one of the Democrats making the request. Not that it matters much, it’s hardly relevant and is also unproven at the moment
By my count, after waking up this morning and reading the latest posts in this thread since my previous one, Gman has talked in circles 4x in just a handful of posts. That’s kind of . . . impressive?
Also, this from The Hill:
As for this:
I’ve been having a productive conversation with people, including acknowledging some factual concerns they’ve raised and correcting what I’ve said. That is called a discussion. You have just contributed snark.
I’ll quote this from the Hill piece, as well, since it draws a distinction no one here wants to acknowledge:
“Unrelated” charges! You guys should harass the Hill writers, too.
He is a professional writer for the far right after all.
Correct, I hadn’t seen where anyone tried to name names, thanks @gman1225 and @Dan_Theman for the links.
No problem. As far as I know, seeking out hacked emails isn’t a crime (which is would explain why it was not charged) – unless the candidate helped or encouraged the hack. It would be similar in many ways to seeking to pirate software illegally stolen from a warehouse and uploaded online.
You left off the word “extremist.” Remember, I’m an extremist professional paid writer for the man!
Why is this shitstain still posting here? I thought he slithered back into his little hole but apparently not.
As I’ve already said, unlike people like you, I don’t find people who disagree with me to be intolerable, and I generally don’t try to harass them.