No. Its accurate.
Like I said, its not 2017 anymore.
So, for example, we now know that PapaD never said anything (in early 2016 about Russia having emails-- he said then Russia he was told Russia has "information"), and that Downer never said anything about emails (again only "information.")
Yah yah; got it. You lied.
Both of those claims are false.
Indeed, every single claim you’ve made on this thread is false. Which is a minor record, even for a Trumpster.
I see you didn't read the article.
Oh well.
Right right. It’s the article’s fault you make shit up. Gotcha.
And...?
Hang on-- in 2017 we didn't know what Manafort was doing.
But we have known this in a general sense since Mueller and more specific since the Senate report. There is nothing new in the article.
I remember the day that the story that Trump had picked Manafort as his campaign manager quite well.
I already knew that Manafort was Moscow’s man. It wasn’t exactly a big secret around Washington. Manafort had been the PR flack that the Russian hired to paint a smiley face on their gangster candidate Victor Yanokovich.
Oleg Deripashka bankrolled the operation and Kilimnik was the FSB’s man. That he is a Russian intelligence agent was well known, and has now acquired the imprimatur of “high confidence”.
Manafort and Stone were business partners in the 1980’s. Of course, Trump would play his “hardly knew the guy” game when Manafort resigned.
Manafort had known Kilimnik for years before he got the opportunity to supply Trump’s poll research in order to sharpen the focus of their fake news and social media campaigns, which had been underway for several years before 2016.
Yeah, all that quoted above your post was before the election and before Manafort even joined the campaign and this article tries really hard to portray it as a plot to effect the election. I suspect the campaign data was nothing more than data that indicated Trump would win to counter all the media predicting a Biden win. Data that Kilminik could of discovered through a google search.
Yeah, all that quoted above your post was before the election and before Manafort even joined the campaign and this article tries really hard to portray it as a plot to effect the election. I suspect the campaign data was nothing more than data that indicated Trump would win to counter all the media predicting a Biden win. Data that Kilminik could of discovered through a google search.
Yeah, all that quoted above your post was before the election and before Manafort even joined the campaign and this article tries really hard to portray it as a plot to effect the election. I suspect the campaign data was nothing more than data that indicated Trump would win to counter all the media predicting a Biden win. Data that Kilminik could of discovered through a google search.
He wasnt "Russian hired". He was hired by Victor who was elected by the people of Ukraine.I remember the day that the story that Trump had picked Manafort as his campaign manager quite well.
I already knew that Manafort was Moscow’s man. It wasn’t exactly a big secret around Washington. Manafort had been the PR flack that the Russian hired to paint a smiley face on their gangster candidate Victor Yanokovich.
Oleg Deripashka bankrolled the operation and Kilimnik was the FSB’s man. That he is a Russian intelligence agent was well known, and has now acquired the imprimatur of “high confidence”.
Manafort and Stone were business partners in the 1980’s. Of course, Trump would play his “hardly knew the guy” game when Manafort resigned.
Manafort had known Kilimnik for years before he got the opportunity to supply Trump’s poll research in order to sharpen the focus of their fake news and social media campaigns, which had been underway for several years before 2016.
Manafort worked for Ukraine, not Russia, but I get the point.
In any event, he was hired over concerns of a brokered convention.
Like I said, Russia targeted the 2016 election. That is all that you have been documenting.
Public polling data. Lol.On Thursday, the Treasury Department unveiled new sanctions against the Russian government linked to its apparent hack of U.S. government networks. But the news release also included a statement clearly answering our second question above.“During the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign, Kilimnik provided the Russian Intelligence Services with sensitive information on polling and campaign strategy. Additionally, Kilimnik sought to promote the narrative that Ukraine, not Russia, had interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election,” the statement read.“Kilimnik has also sought to assist designated former President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych. At Yanukovych’s direction, Kilimnik sought to institute a plan that would return Yanukovych to power in Ukraine,” it read.Yanukovych was a member of the pro-Russian party for which Manafort had worked, the Party of Regions.That one sentence, though, appears to finally complete the long-speculated line from Trump’s campaign to Russian intelligence. It goes like this, according to the aggregated information compiled by various parts of the government:Collusion, definition: "An often secret action taken by two or more parties to achieve an illegal or improper purpose."
- Trump hires
- Manafort to run his campaign. Manafort then orders
- Gates, his deputy, to provide polling and strategy information to
- Kilimnik, their longtime colleague and, according to the Senate committee, a Russian intelligence officer. Kilimnik then shares that information with
- Russian intelligence agents.
"Very conservative" says it all.Public polling data. Lol.
just like when Bernie Sanders had his honeymoon in the Soviet Union? its a clear connection.It clearly ties his campaign to Russian intelligence.
Uh huh."Very conservative" says it all.
Only if you have the ability to connect imaginary dots.It clearly ties his campaign to Russian intelligence.
Is the Soviet Union linked to Sander’s campaign? Was he using Soviet intel against his opponent? McCarthy would have put him in prison at the thought. The KKK wasn’t managing Biden’s campaign either.just like when Bernie Sanders had his honeymoon in the Soviet Union? its a clear connection.
just like when Joe Biden worked with and had such a good relationship with segregationists? its a clear connection.
we need to step back and get some clarity on what a "clear connection" really means.
On Thursday, the Treasury Department unveiled new sanctions against the Russian government linked to its apparent hack of U.S. government networks. But the news release also included a statement clearly answering our second question above.“During the 2016 U.S. presidential election campaign, Kilimnik provided the Russian Intelligence Services with sensitive information on polling and campaign strategy. Additionally, Kilimnik sought to promote the narrative that Ukraine, not Russia, had interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election,” the statement read.“Kilimnik has also sought to assist designated former President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych. At Yanukovych’s direction, Kilimnik sought to institute a plan that would return Yanukovych to power in Ukraine,” it read.Yanukovych was a member of the pro-Russian party for which Manafort had worked, the Party of Regions.That one sentence, though, appears to finally complete the long-speculated line from Trump’s campaign to Russian intelligence. It goes like this, according to the aggregated information compiled by various parts of the government:Collusion, definition: "An often secret action taken by two or more parties to achieve an illegal or improper purpose."
- Trump hires
- Manafort to run his campaign. Manafort then orders
- Gates, his deputy, to provide polling and strategy information to
- Kilimnik, their longtime colleague and, according to the Senate committee, a Russian intelligence officer. Kilimnik then shares that information with
- Russian intelligence agents.
Sorry, but three middlemen between Trump and Russian intelligence agents...each with their own decision-making powers...means that there is no connection between Trump and Russian intelligence agents.
The left is absolutely predictable when it comes to creating false flags.
Innocent of a crime, because he has not been charged. You honestly believe he is innocent of these actions?Manafort and Gates might be guilty, but for them too it is innocent until proven guilty and for Trump that is also true. He is innocent until proven otherwise.
What lie from the right are you referring to on this one?The right is absolutely predictable when it comes to lying. And especially when it comes to telling the same lie in unison.
Do you really not notice that whenever you log on here, you're posting the exact same boilerplate lies about "the left" that every other Trumpist is? Do you have any idea how obvious it is that you're all watching the exact same propaganda then just repeating here - that none of any of this "I hate librulz" crap you post is even coming from you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?