(01-09-2019 06:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 06:14 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 05:44 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 05:27 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-09-2019 10:38 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  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 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 think it is awesome that you know precisely what type and exactly the contents of any polling data. Can you use the super duper ESP power to call the stock market for the next week or so?

You're right that I'm making an assumption on what the polling data for a campaign included.

I mean, it could have just been a poll of whether or not people in Oregon prefer mayo to Miracle Whip.

Thank you for admitting you are making **** up that you have no first hand knowledge of. Cute little petulant defensive snipey comment at the end, but again, thank you for the admission that you are pulling stuff out of your ass.

Ah yes, I am making **** up.

What the allegation states: Manafort met with Konstantin Kilimnik (who is linked to Russian intelligence) and shared polling data related to the 2016 presidential campaign

**** I'm Making Up: that the polling data had useful information about the 2016 presidential campaign

Well, using deductive reasoning, one would assume that there was something useful in the data set Manafort allegedly gave. If there wasn't, why else would he have given it to Kilimnik?

I haven't made up what exact data was, I've instead offered my analysis of why Manafort providing internal polling related to the election could have been useful to Russia.

And I'm glad you found my snipey comment cute, just trying to keep up with the king.

More (stuff) you are making up: turning an allegation into a fact. Bummer, you forgot about that one.

Aside from the one stated above, all you are doing is (and apparently feel absolutely defensive about be called out about) is pulling *exactly* what was *allegedly* passed out of thin air. As I said, you have any picks for the stock market next week with that ESP power?

By the way lad, did you figure out the timing trick on your amazing 'low fruit' subsidy? You know, the timing issue that wipes out any sort of transfer to the producer? If you still think that is such an amazing transfer of wealth as a subsidy, tell me how to find one of those money trees and I can get my tax guy on it 'pronto'. Moolah is awasting.....