[RD] How does one go about determining who and what to believe?

[metalhead]

Many state elections systems were also hacked, by the people who were trying to help Trump get elected. By the people who hacked the emails, who Trump's campaign manager and top advisor met with prior to that hacking taking place.

 

[rah]

Lumping all of them into the term "people" and saying that Trump's people met with these people is a bit of a stretch. Let's wait for the investigation to be complete before making generalizations like that. I'm not saying it didn't happen.

 

[Berzerker]

That has now been dropped. He has always maintained that the reason he did not submit himself for questioning was that he was concerned that he would be deported to the US. He was never questioned while in the embassy, so it appears they were never that keen to talk to him, just to get him under their control.

Apparently he's still not off the hook for failure to appear, but he is hiding from us too.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-faces-arrest-after-judge-rules-warrant-valid

You can't base criminal liability on some theoretical thing which might have happened.

So what is Trump's criminal liability again? How do you know information in the dossier wasn't acquired illegally?

 

[metalhead]

So what is Trump's criminal liability again?

I don't know why you need me to keep repeating this, but his criminal liability would come from participating in any way in either the dissemination of hacked emails, or having knowledge of or somehow supporting plans to hack voting systems by people trying to benefit him personally.

Conspiracy. Accessory. It all depends on their level of knowledge and participation. They did an awful lot of talking to Russians during the campaign that they later lied about. So, we'll see.

How do you know information in the dossier wasn't acquired illegally?

How do you know he obtained information illegally? The answer of course is that you don't.

This question is silly. If you don't even know that a crime has occurred, you sure as hell can't implicate someone in criminal behavior.

 

[Lexicus]

How do you know he obtained information illegally? The answer of course is that you don't.

I'll save you some time by explaining Berzerker's reasoning:

Both parties equally bad --> evidence that Trump colluded with Russians to influence election has become impossible to handwave away--> Hillary did it too

 

[Birdjaguar]

You can believe me: Trump is a Russian agent.

 

[Hygro]

Buh leeve me.

 

[Berzerker]

I don't know why you need me to keep repeating this, but his criminal liability would come from participating in any way in either the dissemination of hacked emails, or having knowledge of or somehow supporting plans to hack voting systems by people trying to benefit him personally.

Conspiracy. Accessory. It all depends on their level of knowledge and participation. They did an awful lot of talking to Russians during the campaign that they later lied about. So, we'll see.

How do you know he obtained information illegally? The answer of course is that you don't.

This question is silly. If you don't even know that a crime has occurred, you sure as hell can't implicate someone in criminal behavior.

He didn't participate, the Russians sent them to wikileaks. But Hillary did participate in leaking the Steele Dossier. And Trump only found out about the emails after they were hacked whereas she paid her operative to go snooping for dirt on Trump. So "it all depends"? It aint a crime if I know the Russians have hacked emails and I ask them to release the information, thats apparently what Trump did. His request came a couple days after the tower meeting.

I'll save you some time by explaining Berzerker's reasoning:

Both parties equally bad --> evidence that Trump colluded with Russians to influence election has become impossible to handwave away--> Hillary did it too

It's decidedly impolite to constantly mischaracterize things other posters write in order to troll them. Downright rude, as a matter of fact.- metalhead

I dont think they're equally bad, what Hillary did was worse - she rigged the primaries to screw Sanders, she got caught, bought dirt on Trump from the Russians and lost the election and complained.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

It's decidedly impolite to constantly mischaracterize things other posters write in order to troll them. Downright rude, as a matter of fact.- metalhead

While the irony of you quoting that was hysterical, if you are going to quote it you should probably quit doing it on a near daily basis.

 

[metalhead]

It aint a crime if I know the Russians have hacked emails and I ask them to release the information, thats apparently what Trump did.

Actually that is a crime. Coordinating the use of stolen emails for your own immediate personal benefit is a crime.

That's where his criminality would be found - in how much he knew and how closely his campaign coordinated with the Russians/Wikileaks in releasing the emails.

But Hillary did participate in leaking the Steele Dossier.

<citation needed>

And even if that was true, as I've told you several times (a theme in talking with you, I know), there is no evidence that any crime was committed in compiling the dossier. If you can't prove a crime was committed, you can't say someone committed a crime. Pretty basic stuff.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Pretty basic stuff.

If it were really basic it would be in a GOP talking point memo, or promulgated through Alex Jones and Breitbarf.

 

[FriendlyFire]

"if her campaign paid for the theft of material within Russia"

Then STEELE himself went and alert the FBI straight away because what he found was so alarming.
??????
LOCK HER UP !

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Then STEELE himself went and alert the FBI straight away because what he found was so alarming.
??????
LOCK HER UP !

Just for the record, there is no law on any books in any US jurisdiction against stealing things in Russia.

 

[Berzerker]

While the irony of you quoting that was hysterical, if you are going to quote it you should probably quit doing it on a near daily basis.

Hmm...the stalker is here with more insults, I'm so surprised. I spend an inordinate amount of time correcting mischaracterizations of my arguments and its usually you, mh, Lex and Sommers building the straw men. If I mischaracterize someone's argument, it isn't intentional. Thats not the impression I get when y'all do it because they're typically followed (or preceded) by insults. That shows your motive is not a good faith effort at debate, just a petty vendetta in your case because you hate my guts. So you have the credibility of an early morning Trump twitter rant.

Actually that is a crime. Coordinating the use of stolen emails for your own immediate personal benefit is a crime.

Asking for them to be released is not a crime.

That's where his criminality would be found - in how much he knew and how closely his campaign coordinated with the Russians/Wikileaks in releasing the emails.

Asking for them to be released before the election rather than after is not a crime.

<citation needed>

She called him a Russian puppet in their debates

And even if that was true, as I've told you several times (a theme in talking with you, I know), there is no evidence that any crime was committed in compiling the dossier. If you can't prove a crime was committed, you can't say someone committed a crime. Pretty basic stuff.

Well, it may not be a crime here for Hillary's operatives to obtain stolen dirt on Trump but it may be a crime in Russia. But I dont expect them to publicize the theft of dirt on Trump. The point is a former spy went to Russia with a piggy bank looking for dirt on Trump, its not far-fetched to believe he bought or acquired information that was obtained illegally.

Then STEELE himself went and alert the FBI straight away because what he found was so alarming.
??????
LOCK HER UP !

LOCK THEM UP! Did Hillary alert the FBI? She paid for the dirt.

 

[metalhead]

The point is a former spy went to Russia with a piggy bank looking for dirt on Trump, its not far-fetched to believe he bought information that was obtained illegally.

But who cares? You can't charge a crime on speculation. You need to prove a crime was committed. I don't give a crap what you think is far-fetched or not. Can you prove a crime was committed? No. Than your speculation is pointless.

Asking for them to be released before the election rather than after is not a crime.

That could certainly be a crime. You saying it isn't doesn't change that. Coordinating the release of stolen emails to help win an election would be a crime.

What legal training are you employing here to reach your conclusions, by the way?

She called him a Russian puppet in their debates

Is . . . is this serious? Your evidence that Hillary personally leaked the Steele dossier is that she called Trump a Russian puppet in the debates?

Do you honestly not see how dumb that is?

 

[Berzerker]

But who cares? You can't charge a crime on speculation. You need to prove a crime was committed. I don't give a crap what you think is far-fetched or not. Can you prove a crime was committed? No. Than your speculation is pointless.

Well, if you care about Trump getting (or benefiting from) dirt on Hillary, why wouldn't you care about Hillary getting dirt on him? Looks to me like both of them are sleazy people, I can only hope they're in cells right next to each other.

That could certainly be a crime. You saying it isn't doesn't change that. Coordinating the release of stolen emails to help win an election would be a crime.

So when you say it 'could' be a crime it is a crime but when I say something could be a crime, its speculation and dismissed. Was it a crime for the NYT to 'coordinate' the release of government documents stolen by Daniel Ellsburg?

What legal training are you employing here to reach your conclusions, by the way?

I need legal training now? I reach my conclusions based on the available evidence. Eh, I wouldn't even call them conclusions since my opinions change as new information comes out. I didn't even know Hillary's campaign was paying for the dossier until long after the fact.

Is . . . is this serious? Your evidence that Hillary personally leaked the Steele dossier is that she called Trump a Russian puppet in the debates?

Do you honestly not see how dumb that is?

I didn't say she personally leaked the dossier, I said she participated by divulging an allegation in the dossier. I was one of those people wondering why Hillary and Trump were calling each other Russian puppets in the debate, turns out her reason was the dossier.

There's a poetic justice in Hillary losing the election after she rigged the primaries to beat Sanders. Its kinda like the poetic justice when Obama beat her because she lied us into war with Iraq.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

spend an inordinate amount of time correcting mischaracterizations of my arguments and its usually you, mh, Lex and Sommers building the straw men. If I mischaracterize someone's argument, it isn't intentional.

Awwwww. Poor little misunderstood Berzerker, if there were only someone who could understand you. If only someone, somewhere on this benighted globe were smart enough to grasp. Alas.

As to this stalker nonsense, it isn't like I've shown up on your street, or at your business, or even on some other forum you haunt. You are the one who comes to me.

 

[metalhead]

Well, if you care about Trump getting (or benefiting from) dirt on Hillary,

I DON'T. Please tell me you are this dense on purpose. We covered this pages ago. The act of getting dirt itself is not the issue.

So when you say it 'could' be a crime it is a crime but when I say something could be a crime, its speculation and dismissed.

A crime was committed, the hacking of emails and of elections systems. The beneficiary of those crimes - the Trump campaign - met with the perpetrators of the crime many times, and later lied many times about those meetings.

So stay with me here - crimes were committed. There is strong circumstantial evidence that implicates members of the Trump campaign as either conspirators in or accessories to those crimes.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE SUGGESTING CHRISTOPHER STEELE COMMITTED A CRIME BUT WE KNOW THAT CRIMES WERE COMMITTED WHEN EMAILS WERE HACKED. I really do not know how this doesn't get through to you.

You could benefit from some legal training because I've explained this to you 4 or 5 times now and you just don't understand it.

 

[rah]

I know about the email hacks but I'm not as up to date on the election system hacks. I was aware that it was attempted but not if there was confirmed evidence that results were modified. Does that exist? And if so, could you provide a link because I would find it interesting. And is there any actual connection to Trump on that one or is that just speculation?

 

[Lexicus]

I know about the email hacks but I'm not as up to date on the election system hacks. I was aware that it was attempted but not if there was confirmed evidence that results were modified. Does that exist? And if so, could you provide a link because I would find it interesting. And is there any actual connection to Trump on that one or is that just speculation?

Afaik there is no evidence that vote totals were changed. As for links to Trump, that's what Mueller's investigating.
https://www.rferl.org/a/russian-hac...ate-intelligence-committee-says/29216441.html