• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The question no one is asking

Kal'Stang said:
Difference being of course that Aldrich Ames was not an organization dedicated to getting a hold of classified and disseminating it to the public. Wikileaks is. Wikileaks has published classified information from pretty much every major political power in the world, including Russia. Sorry, but this is still not evidence of Russian Collusion to win the 2016 election.

But hey, if you really want to go down this road go for it. I'm sure some charge for collaborating with someone that is not a US citizen to affect the 2016 election could be made. Of course you'd also have to charge Hillary for the same since she enlisted a non-US citizen to dig dirt up on Trump. What was his name again..............?
Click to expand...

And neither is Stone.

And aside from the whataboutism, Clinton did not enlist an agent of the russian govt
 
sangha said:
And neither is Stone.
Click to expand...

Never said otherwise. :shrug: But to claim that collaboration with Russian agents to be true in this case then you would have to believe that Wikileaks are filled with Russians. They're not.

sangha said:
And aside from the whataboutism, Clinton did not enlist an agent of the russian govt
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter. :shrug: A foreign agent is a foreign agent. Doesn't matter what country they're from. If you're going to try and peg Trump with colluding with foreign agents then you're going to have to do the same with Hillary.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Never said otherwise. :shrug: But to claim that collaboration with Russian agents to be true in this case then you would have to believe that Wikileaks are filled with Russians. They're not.
Click to expand...

No, you wouldnt.


Doesn't matter. :shrug: A foreign agent is a foreign agent. Doesn't matter what country they're from. If you're going to try and peg Trump with colluding with foreign agents then you're going to have to do the same with Hillary.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Foreign agents work for a foreign govt

And I have said nothing about Trump. That is just a reflexive assumption on your part.
 
Xelor said:
Red:
Say what?

Applying Hawkeye10's answer to the questions asked:
  • Blue question:
    • One would ask Stone about "additional releases and what other damaging information [Wikileaks] had regarding the Clinton Campaign "because [Stone said] he was paying attention to what Assange was saying to the media, ... observant and ... had enough sense to understand that this[the hack and the information obtained and about to be released from it] was a big deal."
  • Pink question:
    • Someone in the Trump [campaign] assumed Stone [knew something] about the hacked emails, [even though the campaign employee knew that insofar as Stone wasn't part of the Wikileaks organization, Stone had to be presumed to have lacked] prior knowledge of [an upcoming] hack/release "because [Stone said] he was paying attention to what Assange was saying to the media, ... observant and ... had enough sense to understand that [the hack and the information obtained and about to be released from it] was a big deal."
First, I realize, Hawkeye10, that "your" answer is presumably what you think Stone would offer in answer to Sangha's questions. Now, with that out of the way....

I don't buy Stone's/Hawkeye10's explanation. I don't because the only thing that Stone could say to a rational person and that would give that person reason to think Stone had any awareness of the nature, extent and timing of upcoming Wikileaks releases of emails hacked from the DNC or Clinton, or Wikileaks releases of any other information damaging to Clinton, is something to the effect of this: "I have contacts who can give me advance notice of the nature, extent and/or timing of Wikileaks releases of information."

No amount of observation is going to allow anyone to tell folks in the "Trump Campaign about [Wikileaks'] potential future releases of damaging material," not about what'd be the content of those releases, not about the timing of those releases, and not about how many upcoming releases there'd be. The only way for Stone to obtain and share such information was for him to have a contact who was either:
  • part of Wikileaks management, or
  • someone who knew someone (etc.) who was part of Wikileaks management, or
  • someone who'd provided to Wikileaks the information Wikileaks management had agreed to release and who also knew of the agreement Wikileaks had made re: releasing that information.
Absent such a contact, Stone's remarks about upcoming Wikileaks information drops would be nothing other than speculation that was neither better nor worse than that which literally anyone could have made.
Click to expand...

I am telling you Stones story which if it checks out looks good to me, it makes me think that Mueller is abusing American citizens again for his pet political project.



I did not read more than a handful of words from your post....You cant be that much work, at least not to me.....you could rightsize your posts about 80% or so.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
I am telling you Stones story which if it checks out looks good to me, it makes me think that Mueller is abusing American citizens again for his pet political project.



I did not read more than a handful of words from your post....You cant be that much work, at least not to me.....you could rightsize your posts about 80% or so.
Click to expand...

Red:
I know that's what you're remarks were. I noted as much in my post. I guess the sentence in which I did contains many of the words you didn't read in that post....


Blue:
That's fine with you and me both. I just ask that you not reply to my posts you've not fully read.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom