When the digital history books are written on @maddow and other Cold War 2.0 enthusiasts twisting themselves into pretzels for “collusion”—it will also show that @wikileaks & Julian Assange—who have a 100% accuracy record—was made a Russian accomplice w/ ZERO concrete evidence
-
-
Only if you ignore all the concrete evidence.... for example every intelligence agency has made it very clear they were the
@dnc hack and put misinformation into social media...8 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ChristopherHahn @maddow and
If you read the DNI report, they provide no actual evidence to prove Russia passed the emails to WikiLeaks. None. If you’d like to cite what they are feel free.
2 replies 5 retweets 24 likes -
Replying to @JordanChariton @ChristopherHahn and
Russia hacked the emails. Wikileaks related them. There’s a thing in law called “circumstantial evidence.” Look it up.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @TheBlueApe @ChristopherHahn and
So you think you can come to a conclusion that the Russian govt provided
@wikileaks emails based on circumstantial evidence that is gleened from your own personal bias? We’re in trouble if that’s the new standard for truth2 replies 2 retweets 18 likes -
Replying to @JordanChariton @TheBlueApe and
Where are you getting that it’s circumstancial. Read the intel report presented to Congress
@BarackObama didn’t put sanctions in place for his health2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ChristopherHahn @TheBlueApe and
I did read the intel report. There was nothing in there that proved Russia passed off emails to WikiLeaks.
1 reply 3 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @JordanChariton @TheBlueApe and
Only if that’s what you believed before you read it... read it again!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ChristopherHahn @TheBlueApe and
You still haven’t provided the proof!
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @JordanChariton @ChristopherHahn and
Nor have you provided proof of all these mythical cutouts you allege exist between the GRU & Wikileaks. Absent such proof, the only reasonable inference is that Russian military intelligence directly passed the hacked emails to Assange. That’s how circumstantial evidence works.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Huh? So the standard is now for people to prove a negative? Do you realize how ridiculous it sounds that I or anyone would have to prove something DIDN’T HAPPEN when there is no proof it did? That’s why it’s on the prosecution to prove a crime
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.