Goldstone's Bare Facts: Attorney, Damaging Information, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, Useful to the Trumps https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/08/06/goldstones-bare-facts-attorney-damaging-information-democrats-hillary-clinton-useful-to-the-trumps/ … Goldstone says he just did what he was told. That was sufficient in collecting another receipt showing Don Jr's willingness to conspire to help Dad.
-
-
Btw, for the purposes of the conspiracy case, it matters what Junior agreed to, not what Agalrov's basic facts were. He agreed to what Goldstone (w/some contrary evidence) claims was just exaggeration.
-
NB,
@aaronjmate, there were no 'stolen emails' references in the Goldstone messages to Junior, as I already noted to Marcy earlier. People are trying to raise this email issue after the fact w/ a disputed Papadopoulos Jan 27, 2017 claim w/ no hard evidence to back it up. -
Which is earliest: July 2016, January 2017, or October 2017?
-
I'd prefer a real-time receipt for the APRIL 2016 "thousands of emails" claim, esp when one of the principals is disputing that claim. But, sure, I'm willing to listen to any HARD evidence you claim to have.
-
We'll get that eventually. Just hold your horses for the indictment. Until then, which of those three is the earliest? It's not a hard question.
-
You're still begging the question, Marcy. Are we talking hard evidence or more of your disputed sources?
-
Who is disputing my sources? Two of them predicted stuff that made the GRU indictment. This is simple. Which of three dates is the earliest? Can you manage that simple question?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
1) you talk about how "Putin obtained receipts at each stage of this romance of Trump’s willing engagement in a conspiracy with Russians for help getting elected", and then go on to cite Goldstone! is Goldstone not an example to you of Putin's receipts?pic.twitter.com/mNy4Kd2rc3
-
2) somebody has to be exaggerating here -- either those think Goldstone was acting on behalf of Kremlin to engage in a conspiracy are, or Goldstone was in his use of "publicist puff" to secure a meeting his client wanted. I go with the latter.
-
Aaron I appreciate that this is very difficult for you to understand. By your interpretation, there is clear evidence that Don Jr wanted to conspire with the Russian state. And that's what prosecutors WILL present as evidence. I'm making more modest claim abt what Agalarov did.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.