When the Steele dossier conspiracy theories get so embarrassing not even Chuck Ross will mainline them.http://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/396307-Did-FBI-get-bamboozled-by-multiple-versions-of-Trump-dossier%3F …
-
-
I don’t want to misread I just want to understand why you write that Russia gave emails to
#WikiLeaks if you don’t have any solid evidence which can be independently verified -
And there you mischaracterize what I said again. I'm going to leave it at that. You may continue to mischaracterize my response to you all you want. But I will simply continue to note you're doing that.
-
I am sorry I don’t understand what I misread
-
I get that. That's fine. We'll leave it at that.
-
You are free to leave this convo but I still believe that journos have the duty to provide solid evidence for what they write
-
And you've done excellent work showing Assange's treatment by the UK. But no one has shown any evidence abt where the emails came from. And most attempts to do so get basic facts badly wrong.
-
What's your opinion on Binney and VIPS analysis re: download speeds?
-
They get basic facts so hysterically wrong as to make the value of the analysis moot.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
"where Russia gave Wikileaks stolen emails to publish." That's hard to mischaracterize.
-
Generally when people refer to a "response" it's the thing that comes after the question. YMMV
-
Perhaps. Your claim that Russia did it remains, though, despite the sort of qualifications offered post hoc.
-
Huh. How about that.
-
Geez.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
How did she mischaracterize?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.