• Xenforo is upgrading us to version 2.3.7 on Tuesday Aug 19, 2025 at 01:00 AM BST (date has been pushed). This upgrade includes several security fixes among other improvements. Expect a temporary downtime during this process. More info here

The War Room Lounge v.8: Conor was Framed by the Deep State Edition

Status
Not open for further replies.
waiguoren said:
You edit your posts way too much.

Anyway, it's fertile ground for a bet.
Click to expand...

I think I don't edit them nearly enough. I always cringe at clunky constructions, typos, and clarification opportunities when I see old posts.

What's the bet?
 
Jack V Savage said:
I think I don't edit them nearly enough. I always cringe at clunky constructions, typos, and clarification opportunities when I see old posts.

What's the bet?
Click to expand...
Often I respond to a post of yours only to go back and see that you have added significant content to the OP.
 
waiguoren said:
I didn't intentionally change anything. It's really hard to figure out what you believe about this hacking incident. I think you would do both of us a favor by spelling it out in detail.
Click to expand...

There's a lot to the story, but what we've been discussing is that Russia met with the campaign about what to do with the emails they'd illegally acquired. During the meeting, representatives of the Russian gov't asked for policy concessions. Later, the emails were released publicly. That's it.

If you want speculation, note that Manafort was hired to run Trump's campaign despite questionable qualifications and well-known corruption just nine days after the hack were carried out. Papadopoulos was hired just two days after the hacks. And it's been reported that the only item on the GOP platform that the Trump campaign wanted input on was the stance with regard to Ukraine. I think those facts are connected.
 
Jack V Savage said:
There's a lot to the story, but what we've been discussing is that Russia met with the campaign about what to do with the emails they'd illegally acquired. During the meeting, representatives of the Russian gov't asked for policy concessions. Later, the emails were released publicly.
Click to expand...

I don't believe this. Do you believe the reporting we have proves this beyond a reasonable doubt?
 
waiguoren said:
I don't believe this. Do you believe the reporting we have proves this beyond a reasonable doubt?
Click to expand...

Which part don't you believe? The meeting happened. Russia had the emails at the time of the meeting. And concessions were asked for. All of that is well-established.
 
Jack V Savage said:
If you want speculation, note that Manafort was hired to run Trump's campaign despite questionable qualifications and well-known corruption just nine days after the hack were carried out. Papadopoulos was hired just two days after the hacks. And it's been reported that the only item on the GOP platform that the Trump campaign wanted input on was the stance with regard to Ukraine. I think those facts are connected.
Click to expand...
Dude, you just added this entire paragraph to the original post. That's super annoying. Just make a new post so I can respond without re-reading your old posts.

You can tell a lot of stories. I think it's more likely that Trump was sloppy with his hiring of Manafort. And Papadopolous wasn't "hired". He was a volunteer. I wasn't aware of the platform thing. Could you please post a link
 
Jack V Savage said:
Which part don't you believe? The meeting happened. Russia had the emails at the time of the meeting. And concessions were asked for. All of that is well-established.
Click to expand...
Yeah and that's not what you wrote.

You wrote: Russia met with the campaign about what to do with the emails they'd illegally acquired

Where is your proof of that?
 
^Or are you just saying that's what you believe but can't prove it?

Also you have juxtaposted the following two sentences

Russia met with the campaign about what to do with the emails they'd illegally acquired. During the meeting, representatives of the Russian gov't asked for policy concessions.

which implies a tit-for-tat arrangement, which also hasn't been proved. But maybe you're just saying that's what you think happened.
 
waiguoren said:
Dude, you just added this entire paragraph to the original post. That's super annoying. Just make a new post so I can respond without re-reading your old posts.

You can tell a lot of stories. I think it's more likely that Trump was sloppy with his hiring of Manafort. And Papadopolous wasn't "hired". He was a volunteer. I wasn't aware of the platform thing. Could you please post a link
Click to expand...

Maybe wait a couple of minutes before responding? I'm not going to change so the solution to your discomfort will have to come on your end.

Here's the most thorough bit I could find on the Ukraine thing:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ump-campaign-soften-platform-language-benefi/

I was relying on memory when I said it, but I just put in "gop platform ukraine" in Google. There are other interesting results.
 
waiguoren said:
Yeah and that's not what you wrote.

You wrote: Russia met with the campaign about what to do with the emails they'd illegally acquired

Where is your proof of that?
Click to expand...

I linked to the emails. In the link, there is both the setup to the meeting (they have dirt), and Don Jr. discussing what was talked about in the meeting (policy concessions).

waiguoren said:
^Or are you just saying that's what you believe but can't prove it?

Also you have juxtaposted the following two sentences

Russia met with the campaign about what to do with the emails they'd illegally acquired. During the meeting, representatives of the Russian gov't asked for policy concessions.

which implies a tit-for-tat arrangement, which also hasn't been proved. But maybe you're just saying that's what you think happened.
Click to expand...

We don't know what was given, if anything (though the platform change is one possibility). We know that there was a meeting while Russia had the emails but before they released them.
 
Last edited:
Jack V Savage said:
I linked to the emails. In the link, there is both the setup to the meeting (they have dirt), and Don Jr. discussing what was talked about in the meeting (policy concessions).
Click to expand...
First of all, you said they were asking for something "in exchange for the hacks", yet the DNC had already been hacked by the time of the meeting. Maybe you meant "hacked e-mails"? In other words, claiming that Russia hacked the DNC on behalf of Trump is very different from claiming that Russia had the e-mails already (Russia is always hacking our systems) and offered them to Trump later.

Second, how do you know that the material to which Goldstone referred was actually the database of DNC e-mails?

Third, what is your evidence that an actual tit-for-tat exchange occurred? Don Jr. denied it.
 
waiguoren said:
First of all, you said they were asking for something "in exchange for the hacks", yet the DNC had already been hacked by the time of the meeting. Maybe you meant "hacked e-mails"? In other words, claiming that Russia hacked the DNC on behalf of Trump is very different from claiming that Russia had the e-mails already (Russia is always hacking our systems) and offered them to Trump later.
Click to expand...

Yes, OK. In exchange for the hacked emails.

waiguoren said:
Second, how do you know that the material to which Goldstone referred was actually the database of DNC e-mails?

Third, what is your evidence that an actual tit-for-tat exchange occurred? Don Jr. denied it.
Click to expand...

Russia had possession of the hacked emails, and they wanted to meet about how to handle "high level and sensitive information." Is it possible that it's some other high-level and sensitive information? Logically yes (as in, we can't rule out the possibility with logic). Is it reasonable to assume that it was some other, unknown information? I don't think so.

Don Jr.'s denial doesn't move the needle at all. But as I said, we know they had the emails, we know they wanted to meet about how to deal with them (or some other sensitive info), and we know that in the meeting, they made requests.
 
Jack V Savage said:
Russia had possession of the hacked emails, and they wanted to meet about how to handle "high level and sensitive information." Is it possible that it's some other high-level and sensitive information? Logically yes (as in, we can't rule out the possibility with logic). Is it reasonable to assume that it was some other, unknown information? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

That's a point of disagreement between us. I think there is a good chance the Russia side was offering something other than DNC e-mails.
 
Political music. Why not? Or, philosophical at least.

Joy Division, Atrocity Exhibition.

An unflinching, gawking stare into dark heart of mankind.



Gang of Four, It's her Factory.

A fascinating, poignant meditation on gender inequality, longing without satisfaction, and the fecklessness of media manipulation, and suprisingly much more. Their economy of their lyricism is brilliant.



Just two, as it would be rather rude to spam the thread.



 
It's a nice spring day might as well take the kids and the snakes to the park

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,270,970
Messages
57,693,267
Members
175,809
Latest member
lawfulgood

Share this page

Back
Top