emptywheel

nonsense. page's testimony -- which you base your claim on and thus seem to take as credible -- makes it clear he did not meet sechin or had any hand in the deal.

It's not at all clear. Of course he denies a quid pro quo, but his shifty (and shifting) responses 'well we may have briefly discussed the Rosneft deal' (hmmm) suggest he may not exactly be telling the whole story.

so first you claimed it's "gained a lot of legitimacy" and now it's just "he may not be telling the whole story." got it. great stuff.

I wrote "gained more legitimacy," which it has, b/c Page had previously denied knowing anything about the Rosneft deal or even who Sechin was. "not exactly telling the whole story" - that's called understatement (suggests more than explicitly stated)

page never denied knowing who sechin was. now you're just making shit up.

"Page had previously denied knowing anything about the Rosneft deal *or even who Sechin was*." where did i misquote you?https://twitter.com/bernielosev/status/934197132906479616 …

"gained a lot of legitimacy" [your misquote] has a different meaning than "gained more legitimacy." Steele's claim re Rosneft deal now has "more" credibility but not necessarily "a lot of" credibility. See the difference?