(01-09-2019 04:12 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 03:30 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 03:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 10:38 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 10:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I'm trying to understand what is so earth-shattering about this revelation. Revealing that Mueller has alleged something is not an admission that it happened.

I don't even understand how this is an admission of anything, since I'm guessing Mueller and his team are well aware of exactly what they have alleged.

Just another case of taking a factoid and trying to leverage it into something way more significant.

You're right that this revelation is not an admission, but that fact alone doesn't mean it isn't a significant development, especially since so many on here have been asking for evidence of collusion.

What is so earth-shattering that the special counsel is accusing Manafort of having provided private campaign polling data to a Russian with ties to Russian intelligence you ask? Well, just that, Trump's campaign adviser is accused of providing(you said provided) private polling data to a hostile foreign government, and what do we know that this foreign government did? They targeted specific populations in the US with propaganda and fake news in an attempt to influence the election.

So since the Russians were planning to execute this disinformation campaign, internal polling data would be beneficial with regards to who to target and this is a clear bit of evidence that Mueller believes that a significant player in the Trump campaign provided something of value regarding the election to the Russians.

I like the way you convert accusations and innuendo into proven facts, Lad. Polling data is so beneficial, it enabled the russians to elect Trump. Good thing they didn't use Hillary's polls they stole, since those showed her winning in a landslide, and they would have just given up. I wonder why Trump's polling data was o dadgum much better than the DNC's. You got a theory on that? Little green martians conspiring to steal the election?



Even if this polling data was provided to Russians, there is no indication it was of any use or if it was used, other than Hillary lost. Everything goes back to that: She was expected to win, she lost, something illegal must have caused it. I have been to the racetrack before, Lad, and seen favorites not only lose, but lose badly. It doesn't mean the race was rigged.

OO, you're missing the whole point that the outcome of the election doesn't matter. The act of conspiring with a foreign adversary is what matters! So you're saying that if HRC had contacted Russia and conspired with them to try and beat Trump, it wouldn't have mattered because she lost? Heck, based on this definition, even if that mythical phone call you love to reference (the one where Trump calls up Putin and asks for help) happened, it wouldn't be an issue because whatever Russia did, didn't materially help Trump. Again, if Person A tries to kill Person B, they are still gonna get in trouble with the law.

Also, the quality of Trump's private polling data compared to the DNC's doesn't matter.

Please try and actually formulate a rationale as to why the quality of the data and the eventual outcome of the election matter in this instance. The only way I don't see this as being damning for Manafort is if the special counsel is completely incorrect and Manafort didn't provide private polling data to a Russian agent.

Right now, the special counsel is accusing the former campaign adviser of providing a suspected Russian agent with private data about American voters, and that's a big nothing burger? If this is true, how is that innocuous?

First you need to decide if he is accused of doing it or if he did it.

But let's go with he did it, for now, since you and CNN and the DNC and Adam Schiff think an accusation against a Trump associate is proof..

What would be the importance of the polling data? It's like accusing somebody of telling the Russians the location of the White House. You can get polling data anywhere - CNN, ABC, the NYT, anywhere. No reason to think this was magic data, has the secret formula to winning.

Giving data is not a crime. You give us data all the time.

Giving nonclassified data is not a crime.

If we were at war, maybe it would be a crime. But we are not at war with Russia.

If it results in damages, then you can be sued for that. But first I have to show that i was damaged. What is the damage here? Can you and the rest of the howling mob show that even one vote was modified due to the data being provided? None of Hillary's emails showed illegal activity, so the problem is that maybe Russia targeted the Johnson house in East Lansing and provided them with factually true information that Hillary had done nothing wrong. Oh, the humanity!!! Did that make the Johnsons vote for Trump? So what is the problem? If I call a Russian and give him soil samples from the side of a road in East Texas, what is the problem?

Hillary lost. It was not collusion. Find another reason.

Why do I first need to decide if Manafort did this or is accused of doing it? What difference does it make in the context of discussing the severity of the allegation?

And you're right that giving the simple act of giving data is not illegal. But this raises the next logical question of why this data was given. What was its purpose and were their strings attached?

Private polling data like this is NOT like giving someone the location of the White House. If the polling data had been public knowledge, there would have been no reason for Manafort to provide it. This is allegedly private polling data, which would include a treasure trove of information that campaigns use regularly to try and win elections. This is the type of information could be very useful for a bunch of intelligence officers to use if they wanted to try and, say, influence an election.

And for the millionth time - is Person A tries to kill Person B and fails, they're still guilty of a crime. The outcome of an effort does not make someone innocent. Why would it here regarding conspiring with a foreign adversary?

Is it fun to continue to play stupid regarding the fact that the intention of an action matters? Between cab rides and soil samples, it's pretty impressive how intentionally obtuse y'all are being.