Posted on 07/16/2017 9:20:22 AM PDT by JayGalt
Say that, in Summer 2016, a top Hillary Clinton staffer gets a message: “A Miss Universe contestant — Miss Slovakia — says that Donald Trump had sexually harassed her. Would you like to get her story?” The staffer says, “I’d love to,” and indeed gets the information, which he then uses in the campaign.
Did the staffer and the Miss Universe contestant just commit a crime?
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
In a country that doesn’t have Freedom of Speech, ya’ betcha.
Darn good analogy.
Wait a minute. A sensible and fair article from the Washington Post? What’s going on here?
Only if your last name is Trump or you are employed by someone whose last name is Trump.
Same old story with libs:
Do as I say, not as I do.
rwood
Its a crime when conservatives do it.
When the deep state and media due it in the service of progressive, statist American oligarchs, its called “good governance.”
See too, Volokh Conspiracy Editorial Independence
We are not Washington Post employees, and we have sole editorial control over the blog. We are very pleased to be working with the Post people, but please don't ascribe our views to them, or vice versa. Naturally, you shouldn't ascribe our views to our employers, either, or even to the other cobloggers. Each blogger speaks only for himself or herself.
All of the bloggers are prolific writers, so with a bit of study one can ferret out their leanings, quirks, blind spots, favorites, and so on.
Can the worm be turning?
I think some of the sharper minds on the left are pulling away from the insanity they see around them, those that have been bought and sold.
> We are very pleased to be working with the Post people, but please don’t ascribe our views to them, or vice versa. <
Thanks for the info. Now it all makes sense.
Nice background, demolishes the turning worm theory but I’m still hopeful.
First, we have the idea that the Russians "interfered" with our election. Exactly whom "the Russians" refers to is not entirely clear. Additionally and importantly, whether or not the Russians (in whatever form) interfered with the election has not the slightest thing to do with which candidate they (in whatever form) might have preferred to win. It could also be that the Russians (in whatever form) simply wanted to sow chaos; juvenile delinquent style. So far I have seen essentially nothing in terms of evidence that would help to resolve these distinctions.
To me, there are at least 4 possibilities for Russian interference, all of them ABSOLUTELY INDEPENDENT of which side they might have wanted to win:
1: It ("the Russians") could refer to a specific agency or entity within the Russian government. Hired by Putin, directed by Putin or a government minister within the Putin regime/government. Eg; the KGB or the GRU or some other entity that was specifically set up to target the 2016 election.
2: It could refer to a small group of operators hired by one or more oligarchs associated with the country of Russia. It is said that these oligarchs are "by definition" part of the government because Putin has jailed or confiscated the assets of these guys, one of whom Khodorevsky (sp?) was the one who somehow acquired most of Russia's oil production in the wake of the collapse of the USSR circa 1989ish. Thus they have been absorbed by the Russian Borg and are now "the same". In the typical way in which Americans like to encapsulate their thinking into McNugget sized pieces, these guys are sometimes referred to as "the Russian mafia" yet at the same time they are pictured as "part of the Russian government" which means the Russian government is a form of mafia, and if this is the case, then this possibility #2 is about the same as possibility #1. Fair enough.
3: It could be an ad hoc gaggle of 2-6 hackers who would otherwise be stealing credit card numbers or trying, as hackers do, to penetrate anything they can as "exploits" just for the thrill and challenge of seeing whether they can do it. If indeed the specific true nature of the "Russian interference" is the penetration and dissemination of the information and emails etc; they found on the DNC servers, then this effort need not have been a giant multi-agency effort. It could literally be a couple of guys working in their apartments. It absolutely could. If these same actors were able to breach Trumps' campaign servers, we have not the slightest idea of whether they would have copied WikiLeaks with exactly the same thing as they (assumedly) did with the Clinton servers.
The above possibilities, once again, are independent of a HRC v. Trump bias the actors/hackers might have had. Just because Trump won does not mean they were in favor of Trump. By no means. .
4: The last possibility is that HRCs' servers were breached by Bernie supporters furious at the way he was aced and extorted out of the whole election. Even with this possibility, the motivations behind the breach > leak are not clear. Was/were the disgruntled Bernie fan(s) who did this wanting to throw their support behind Trump or was their intention to vandalize and sabotage HRC?
But as far as the Trump Jr. episode is concerned, the offer of compromising (oppo) information on HRC allegedly that was the "bait" for DJT Jr. made by the Russian honeypot gal might have been done CLUMSILY ON PURPOSE with the specific intention of getting found out and thus backfiring on the Trump campaign! Which is kind of how it is working out, is it not? After all, the Russians know now; they may have known less at that point; that most anything inside the Trump campaign was leakable since it was being surveiled by the 0bama State Department and THAT department was riddled with eager leakers. So as far as I am concerned, even if this episode is shady in terms of showing a "willingness to collude" (which I think is BS but we no longer have any particular distinction between BS and reality) it could have been done as a DELIBERATELY PLACED LANDMINE to BLOW UP inside the Trump campaign. Which would by definition favor HRC.
I am thankful the trumps tried to get information on Clinton the criminal from any available source.
Something else to consider here is that the source the New York Times had for the Trump Jr. e-mail story had given this information to them a year ago. If this was such a serious matter, why didn’t they run the story before Election Day? I suspect it’s because the details behind the story may end up damaging Democrats more than the Trump people when all the facts are out.
The hollering over Russia obscures the fact Hillary got dirt on Trump from Ukraine...
Its not yet a crime to get information from foreign nationals and it isn’t treason.
Fake news media hyperventilating not withstanding, Don Jr. acted within the bounds of the law.
And we still have freedom of speech and freedom of association in this country.
All of this is a nothingburger.
Something else to consider here is that the source the New York Times had for the Trump Jr. e-mail story had given this information to them a year ago. If this was such a serious matter, why didn’t they run the story before Election Day? I suspect it’s because the details behind the story may end up damaging Democrats more than the Trump people when all the facts are out.
Something else to consider here is that the source the New York Times had for the Trump Jr. e-mail story had given this information to them a year ago. If this was such a serious matter, why didn’t they run the story before Election Day? I suspect it’s because the details behind the story may end up damaging Democrats more than the Trump people when all the facts are out.
Something else to consider here is that the source the New York Times had for the Trump Jr. e-mail story had given this information to them a year ago. If this was such a serious matter, why didn’t they run the story before Election Day? I suspect it’s because the details behind the story may end up damaging Democrats more than the Trump people when all the facts are out.
Sorry for the multiple posts. FR is a disaster.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.