Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

[Hawk]

Yeah, but I'll obviously be turning that razor on myself when those secret high-level PapaD wire recordings drop.

[nsacpi]

Eager for dirt on the Clinton campaign? Yes. Eager for dirt on the campaign provided specifically by 'the Russians'? To me that's still less than determined, on a preponderance of evidence, especially when coupled with this notion of a quid pro quo in relation to sanctions/Crimea, as you've suggested.

it didn't matter to them that the Russians were the source and did the hacking...they knew that was the case as early as April

[Hawk]

it didn't matter to them that the Russians were the source and did the hacking...they knew that was the case as early as April

PapaD was told by his Maltese professor friend in late April that the Russians had "dirt" on HRC in the form of "thousands of e-mails". Any inference made beyond that (such as the genesis of the e-mails [state/DNC/Podesta] or if/how that information was repeated to the campaign) seems dubious in light of what we currently know.

[nsacpi]

PapaD was told by his Maltese professor friend in late April that the Russians had "dirt" on HRC in the form of "thousands of e-mails". Any inference made beyond that (such as the genesis of the e-mails [state/DNC/Podesta] or if/how that information was repeated to the campaign) seems dubious in light of what we currently know.

it seems more likely than not that Papadopoulos propagated the information to the campaign...it also seems more likely than not that the emails were procured by a Russian hacking operation...there are lots of details that we don't know...some of those details will never be known...others will be revealed in due course

[Julio3000]

Yeah, but I'll obviously be turning that razor on myself when those secret high-level PapaD wire recordings drop.

I'm not intimating that. I'm commenting on the fact that you took the party line reflexively on that one, and it's already pretty well punctured just with publicly available information.

Seriously. "Campaign proper" was your verbiage, but you're not willing to define it with any specificity, just assert that he wasn't part of it? Nice.

You're still of the opinion that he was not part of the "campaign proper"?

[Julio3000]

I wilt in the face of sarcasm from the guy who said that the investigation was dead in March.

[Hawk]

I'm not intimating that. I'm commenting on the fact that you took the party line reflexively on that one, and it's already pretty well punctured just with publicly available information.

Seriously. "Campaign proper" was your verbiage, but you're not willing to define it with any specificity, just assert that he wasn't part of it? Nice.

You're still of the opinion that he was not part of the "campaign proper"?

My usage of the phrase "campaign proper" was specifically designed to establish a rigid definition of culpability.

Do you consider PapaD a formal component of the Trump campaign?
What would you say his contributions were?
How much was he paid?
Did he have any sort of decision making authority at all?

Your goalposts have moved, and that's fine. But the context of the discussion that was being had when I referenced "campaign proper" was in relation to people with significant roles in the campaign (Trump Jr. / Sessions). I thought I was being charitable by expanding the net to include the underlings of underlings, but PapaD isn't even that.

Or do you think that he is? That's something you will have to sell.

[nsacpi]

Clovis count as campaign proper? Miller?

[Hawk]

Clovis count as campaign proper? Miller?

Were they paid?

[nsacpi]

Were they paid?

dunno

[Hawk]

I was paid for consulting work by a primary campaign. Does that mean I get to consider myself a part of that campaign proper?

[nsacpi]

I was paid for consulting work by a primary campaign. Does that mean I get to consider myself a part of that campaign proper?

I believe you're the one who introduced the distnction

[Hawk]

Do we consider Roger Stone part of the Trump campaign proper?

[Hawk]

I believe you're the one who introduced the distnction

More denominator, less distinction.

[Runnin]

Were they paid?

Trump never pays anybody he can get away with stiffing.

[57Brave]

Pence too is up to his lying neck.

Mike Pence to Hugh Hewitt 7/29/16: "If it is found that Russia or China or any other foreign power compromised the private email, or capture classified information, and then released that information through the Wikileaks or otherwise, there’d be serious consequences for that."

[nsacpi]

Pence too is up to his lying neck.

Mike Pence to Hugh Hewitt 7/29/16: "If it is found that Russia or China or any other foreign power compromised the private email, or capture classified information, and then released that information through the Wikileaks or otherwise, there’d be serious consequences for that."

was Pence campaign proper?

[Julio3000]

My usage of the phrase "campaign proper" was specifically designed to establish a rigid definition of culpability.

Ok. If you meant "paid senior staff" or "primary decision-maker," you could have said that.

Do you consider PapaD a formal component of the Trump campaign?

He was named, specifically, as a foreign policy advisor to the campaign. I can't parse how "formal" that is...I remember Carter Page saying he had signed an NDA, which certainly doesn't speak to having any significant influence, but at least it is, well, something of a formality. Some informal advisers are very influential, some are not. I'm not making the case that GP was, just that it's a bit of a twist to be flatly disclaiming that he had any influence at all, since that relies on a White House talking point, and they've hardly established themselves as a beacon of probity where this issue is concerned.

What would you say his contributions were?

He acted as a surrogate, made speeches and appearances and took meetings on behalf of the campaign. The fact that he emailed his "campaign supervisor" to apprise him of information or ask permission for certain actions, implies that he was working for the campaign. He corresponded with several senior campaign members, and apparently worked with Steven Miller on editing a major Trump foreign-policy speech.

Does this make him a senior member of the campaign, or mean that he had decision-making authority? No. But it seems similarly silly to act like he was just knocking doors or phone-banking. He spoke directly to the candidate in at least one meeting, and corresponded with two different campaign managers.

How much was he paid?

Nothing, reportedly. Same as Paul Manafort.

Did he have any sort of decision making authority at all?

Not that I'm aware of. This doesn't preclude him from being considered part of the "campaign proper," IMO. What he did have, apparently, was access to senior figures.

Your goalposts have moved, and that's fine.

Hoo boy.

But the context of the discussion that was being had when I referenced "campaign proper" was in relation to people with significant roles in the campaign (Trump Jr. / Sessions). I thought I was being charitable by expanding the net to include the underlings of underlings, but PapaD isn't even that.

Seems like he was at least an underling of underlings.

[Super]

was Pence campaign proper?

trump barely knows pence. if you think about it.

[Julio3000]

Jeff Sessions doesn't remember much at all.