Can we also draw a distinction between oppo research & what Russia was offering? Stop buying DJTjr's narrative that it was oppo.
-
-
Again, I agree it is different, largely bc it was offered up and discussed in context of quid pro quo. But oppo goes well beyond public info
-
Getting ppl to talk (human sourcing) is different than committing crimes to get the info. For example, torturing to get oppo, not ok.
-
I'm not sure where the torture came in? Comparison is Steele (no qpq) v Don Jr (implied qpq).
-
Steele conducting research not at the direction of a foreign power (so far as we know), asking sources to divulge, so not B&E to get it.
-
Oh. I see you've jumped ahead to assume the dirt that the lawyer was delivering was the emails. W/o (yet) evidence to support that.
-
We may get there. But thus far, as late as June 20, Steele's sources said the RU info on Hillary was stuff collected over years.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
very sleazy, but some distinctions: soliciting foreign gov-sourced info's fundamentally untrustworthy and implies a cost that is more than $
-
paying someone to vacuum up rumors is closer to normal wage. Gov could release info free if they wanted to, collecting rumors req legwork
-
and while not "public info", it is not necessarily secret either. Gov info like NV allegedly had's a product of the RF govt. Cost is unknown
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.