The great Jane Mayer joins the long line of people who ignore the Guccifer 2.0 release to make Steele look better (and repeats other errors we've seen over and over).https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/03/12/christopher-steele-the-man-behind-the-trump-dossier …
-
-
I honestly don't have time to re-read that, I have to go to work. Can you please be less cryptic for those of us who haven't committed everything you've written to memory?
-
Congratulations. That's one of the most assholish things anyone has said to me in a while.
-
Dude, make the time to read it. Marcy's write-ups are a must read. Definitely the most substantive takes on the Russia investigation and one of the few outside of the box writers on the subject
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Isn't possible, at least with Schiff, the dossier is cited because it is public domain and most of the evidence he has seen is not?pic.twitter.com/dub6tKUqmG
-
No. Because there's a fuck-ton of better evidence in the public record.
-
sure but it is more obscure and shifts the battleground. I would argue leaving the right shadow fighting the dossier while the rest of the puzzle pieces are assembled make some sense. I would argue the right has put more eggs in the dossier basket than the left at this point
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It may be CYA, but Mayer's reporting indicates not complacency, but not a factor in decision making. Post election-different story.
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.