Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)

nsacpi said:
in theory a back channel could be innocuous...in which case I suspect Mr. Nader would not have been questioned multiple times and Mr Prince would not have perjured himself
Click to expand...

What is your basis on Prince perjuring himself? Maybe I missed this news. Trying to get a report issued before deadline.
 
thethe said:
You are actually jumping on this based on the accounts if an unamed witness? Where he we seen this before?

Can this wait to be an actual story before it's a story?

Even at its worst it is portrayed as the start of a back channel. There is nothing wrong with that activity and demonstrate's no prior communications. Or else why go through this trouble?
Click to expand...

It's based on Nader's grand jury testimony. The article mentions that the testimony not the only evidence they have. Theyve known this for months (IMO) via intelligence agencies but now have a meeting participant corroborating it.
 
Julio3000 said:
It's based on Nader's grand jury testimony. The article mentions that the testimony not the only evidence they have. Theyve known this for months (IMO) via intelligence agencies but now have a meeting participant corroborating it.
Click to expand...

This article certainly isnt. There is no inclusion on the contents of that testimony. I'm not seeing where this story points to Nader contradix tong Princes account.
 
Julio3000 said:
It's based on Nader's grand jury testimony. The article mentions that the testimony not the only evidence they have. Theyve known this for months (IMO) via intelligence agencies but now have a meeting participant corroborating it.
Click to expand...

correct the WaPo reported the back channel angle months ago...Nader provides confirmation and presumably additional details
 
nsacpi said:
sources...i would infer at least one is from Nader's legal team
Click to expand...

Convenient to make inferences when trying to illustrate a story.

Even with that intellectual leap I'm still not seeing the crime here. What would prince be hiding from lying about this especially cause the lie in about setting up aline of communication which of course means there wasn't communication beforehand.

This is yet another example of a regurgitated story to keep the base lively going into the 2018 mid term elections. What's the new story here? Somebody unamed said prince didn't tell the truth? How does that change anything about hat actually happened and it's implications?
 
thethe said:
Convenient to make inferences when trying to illustrate a story.

Even with that intellectual leap I'm still not seeing the crime here. What would prince be hiding from lying about this especially cause the lie in about setting up aline of communication which of course means there wasn't communication beforehand.

This is yet another example of a regurgitated story to keep the base lively going into the 2018 mid term elections. What's the new story here? Somebody unamed said prince didn't tell the truth? How does that change anything about hat actually happened and it's implications?
Click to expand...

I dunno why Prince would say it was just a coincidence that he met this Russian at a bar over "just one beer"...i suspect we will find out
 
nsacpi said:
in theory a back channel could be innocuous...in which case I suspect Mr. Nader would not have been questioned multiple times and Mr Prince would not have perjured himself
Click to expand...

Right. It could have been innocuous, so why go to lengths to make it look hinky?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top