Superfreak
Verified User
Wow... that is a brilliant response
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Nancy has been waiting because she wants more than just impeachment-JAIL!!
- Thread starter Bill
- Start date
Wow... that is a brilliant response
But there is no evidence that they did anything other than discuss his peace plan
Why are you telling so many obvious lies?
They also discussed the status of the Trump Campaign and Manafort's strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states. Months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal polling data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
The Mueller report showed no evidence the data shared was tied to Russian interference.
Mueller's report literally says the guy Manafort was sharing polling data with is assessed "by the FBI to have ties to Russian intelligence"
Again, why are you telling such obvious lies?
Superfreak
Verified User
Yes it is because the question of why did Manafort share the polling data with Russians hasn't been answered.
Why did Manafort share polling data with Russians when he was campaign manager for Trump?
AGAIN... Ukraine vs Russia. They are two distinct countries. Yes, Kilimnik was a soviet citizen, he is still a Russian citizen as far as I have read. But you keep implying that it was shared with the Russian government or their groups involved in the interference. You have NO evidence of that.
Again... Stop with your bullshit about my not reading the report.
Why? The fact that you haven't read the report is your greatest weakness in this debate.
First, you said that Manafort didn't share polling data with Russia - THAT WAS YOUR ORIGINAL POSITION.
THEN you said that Manafort sharing polling data wasn't illegal - SO I GUESS THAT'S ADMISSION OF COLLUSION
THEN you said that the guy Manafort shared polling data with wasn't tied to Russian Intelligence - EXCEPT THE MUELLER REPORT EXPLICITLY SAYS HE DOES.
So why are you lying so much?
I don't understand why you are going to these lengths?
It makes no sense.
AGAIN... saying someone 'has ties' is ambiguous at best.
No it's not.
The FBI determined he had ties to Russian Intel.
So before, when you said there was "no evidence" of those ties, you were bullshitting, weren't you?
Superfreak
Verified User
Why are you telling so many obvious lies?
They also discussed the status of the Trump Campaign and Manafort's strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states. Months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal polling data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
Mueller's report literally says the guy Manafort was sharing polling data with is assessed "by the FBI to have ties to Russian intelligence"
Again, why are you telling such obvious lies?
Again, you fail to comprehend what you are reading. Saying the FBI 'assesses he has ties' means they are pretty confident he does. THAT DOES NOT MEAN HE SHARED THE DATA. What part of that are you failing to comprehend?
yes, they worked together 10 years. They discussed that and the peace plan etc... that is not evidence that the data was shared. What part of that do you fail to comprehend?
But having ties and USING TIES are two different thing
Oh, he used those ties.
He met with Kiliminik several times during the campaign, and shared polling data with him throughout. He discussed the campaign's strategy in the states he shared the data with Russia.
So if that's not "using ties", then what is it?
Superfreak
Verified User
Manafort stayed in touch with these contacts during the campaign period through Konstantin Kilimnik, a longtime Manafort employee who previously ran Manafort's office in Kiev and who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf
If you read the Mueller report, you wouldn't make such obvious lies.
Because you made such obvious lies, we cannot trust you to speak honestly about anything here.
You've lied so much in this thread, that I don't believe you even know what it means to tell the truth.
No, you continue to lack the understanding of the words you are quoting.
Superfreak
Verified User
Oh, he used those ties.
He met with Kiliminik several times during the campaign, and shared polling data with him throughout. He discussed the campaign's strategy in the states he shared the data with Russia.
So if that's not "using ties", then what is it?
OMG... no moron. There is no evidence that Kilimnik shared the data with his 'assessed ties' to Russian intelligence. I am not disputing that he talking with his friend and shared data with him. I am disputing your claim that there is evidence Kilimnik shared the data with Russians trying to interfere.
There is NO evidence that the data was shared with those 'ties'... NONE
You are functionally illiterate.
Separately, on August 2, 2016, Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort met in New York City with his long-time business associate Konstantin Kilimnik, who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.
...
They also discussed the status of the Trump Campaign and Manafort's strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states. Months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal polling data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting.
So Kilimnik = FBI assesses to have ties to Russian Intelligence...and Manafort caused polling data to be shared with the guy the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian Intelligence.
Superfreak
Verified User
You are functionally illiterate.
Separately, on August 2, 2016, Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort met in New York City with his long-time business associate Konstantin Kilimnik, who the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.
...
They also discussed the status of the Trump Campaign and Manafort's strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states. Months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal polling data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting.
So Kilimnik = FBI assesses to have ties to Russian Intelligence...and Manafort caused polling data to be shared with the guy the FBI assesses to have ties to Russian Intelligence.
The irony of your first sentence is strong.
AGAIN MORON... SHOW THE EVIDENCE THAT KILIMNIK SHARED THE DATA WITH RUSSIANS.
There is NO evidence that the data was shared with those 'ties'... NONE. Nothing in your quote shows that. Nothing that showed the data went to Deripaska. AGAIN... EVIDENCE MATTERS. Not supposition. Not 'well he has ties so we think he might have done something with those ties'. EVIDENCE.
Kilimnik is the "tie". He's the one with the ties to Russian Intelligence. So by sharing polling info with him (WHICH YOU DENIED MANAFORT EVEN DID AT FIRST BEFORE ADMITTING HE DID IT BUT SAYING IT WASN'T ILLEGAL), he was sharing it with Russia.
So your position has shifted a couple times here:
1. Your initial position was that Manafort didn't share polling Data
2. THEN your position evolved to say that sharing polling data wasn't illegal
3. THEN your position evolved again to say that sharing polling data wasn't illegal and the guy he shared polling data with had no ties to Russia.
4. THEN your position evolved again to say that sharing polling data wasn't illegal and the guy he shared polling data with did have ties to Russia, but there's no evidence Russia did anything with it EXCEPT FOR THE FACT THAT THEY DID BY TARGETING THE SAME STATES FOR TROLLS THAT THEY GOT THE POLLING DATA ON.
So your position in this debate has changed three times.
At what point are you just going to give up?
There is no bad faith.
From you, it's nothing but bad faith.
The bad faith was present when you stupidly thught you could get away by making sophistic argument.
The bad faith was present when you tried to obfuscate what Barr was lying about on April 20th.
I have yet to see you make a good faith argument on this, or any other thread.
All you do is exercise sophistry because ultimately, you're insecure.
It wasn't you calling me a liar when I was quoting portions of the report?
You mean MIS-QUOTING them?
Yeah, your sloppiness is ever-present.
And AGAIN... Mueller summarizes that Manafort "expected" something of Kilimnik.
He expected him to share the polling data with his Russian ties that the FBI says he had.
And he did share that polling data with them; that's what Gates' trial revealed in the footnote I quoted.
Russia took that polling data and used it to direct their troll army in PA, WI, MI, and MN.
"Mueller’s office also didn’t identify evidence that Manafort’s sharing of polling data was connected to Russia’s meddling in the campaign."
Right because of this part that you leave out because, as usual, you exercise nothing but bad faith:
"Because of questions about Manafort' s credibility and our limited ability to gather evidence on what happened to the polling data after it was sent to Kilimnik"
Why did you leave that part out of your post? It's because you're a habitual liar, isn't it? So why do you do that? Why do you leave out exculpatory bits from your posts? It's because you're not secure in your argument, is it? Wouldn't it be an exercise in bad faith to deliberately withhold information that damages your argument? I mean, I know you have no character, but do you really lack all ethics?
I am not the only one stating this. You need to learn what words mean before you use them.
No...what's happening here is that you are cherry picking certain parts of sentences from Mueller's report to misrepresent them, which is exactly what Barr got called out for doing. Only, you're not as clever as Barr...so your obfuscation just comes across as amateurish.
So you say this: "Mueller’s office also didn’t identify evidence that Manafort’s sharing of polling data was connected to Russia’s meddling in the campaign."
But what you left out was this: "Because of questions about Manafort' s credibility and our limited ability to gather evidence on what happened to the polling data after it was sent to Kilimnik, the Office could not assess what Kilimnik (or others he may have given it to) did with it. "
Why did you leave that part out of what you posted?
It's because you're a lying piece of shit, isn't it?
Wow... that is a brilliant response
Get used to hearing it, because once he's gone every fucking argument you make will be met with that sentence right away.
You're going to have to explain why we should trust you after you were so stupid, you got conned by Trump.
AGAIN... Ukraine vs Russia
What does Ukraine vs. Russia have to do with Manafort sharing polling data from PA, MI, WI, and MN with Russian spies for months during the campaign?
Are you saying that Manafort was colluding with Russia to give them polling data to help Trump win and in exchange, they would support Russia's Ukraine position?
That's collusion, isn't it?
AGAIN... Ukraine vs Russia. They are two distinct countries. Yes, Kilimnik was a soviet citizen, he is still a Russian citizen as far as I have read. But you keep implying that it was shared with the Russian government or their groups involved in the interference. You have NO evidence of that.
What does any of this have to do with why Manafort shared polling data from PA, MI, WI, and MN with Russian spies?