While the criticism directed at social media is certainly warranted. I feel compelled to take exception with your reliance on false equivalence. It's kinda qualitatively different when you're actively engaging in illegal activity while working hand in glove with a clandestine foreign intelligence service to undermine your own countries democratic elections on behalf of an adversarial foreign nation state. If you can't see the difference, then keep at it. I assure you it's there. But if you already know that then you go ahead and keep explaining to folks how apples and oranges are the same things because they're both round fruit.
Not really, it's common knowledge. There are a pile of dead Russians ex-IC people all over Europe, the existing Mueller indictments, the Crowdstrike DNC Russian APT attributions, all of our own lying eyes...
Funny, I must have missed the Mueller indictments relating to collusion or coordination of any kind (it's coming any day now, though, right?). I've seen a number of process charges. I've seen a handful of Russians charged with, essentially, social media ads and trolling and setting up a Michael Moore rally in NYC. And, of course, Manafort, who is dirty AF (right up there with the Podestas, the Clintons and the rest), but nothing relating to the Trump campaign. And if dead men do tell tales, as you seem to imply, I would think Seth Rich would have quite a story indeed.
>"Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past."
But your opponent is correct. Manafort indictment is about laundering money he made in Ukraine before 2014. It really has nothing to do with him being a campaign manager in 2016. Moreover, I bet this activities as a campaign manager were examined under microscope, and nothing shady was found, otherwise he would be indicted.
Both of those are specific legal definitions. Could you please elaborate on what your point is?
We can only speculate, but if you lie to the FBI, I would assume it's very likely that you have something to hide. Whether those plea deals led further down the rabbit hole to people who were guilty of further crimes we don't know. Maybe a few of them were on that list. Maybe some will get revealed later. I'm hopeful we will uncover the truth in time.
