But the part you missed was that Russia didn’t claim to be backing Trump. That info is being reported from leaked documents over secret meetings in the Kremlin.
That would be a big difference, because it doesn’t mean we’re using Russia’s public affairs team as a trustworthy source. It means we’re using leaked documents from the Russian government as a trustworthy source.
The PA team says that Russia wasn’t involved in backing Trump, and they’re declaring it loudly. The documents, which weren’t supposed to be seen, say something else.
Ostensibly, only one of those sources is actually supposed to be a source of information, which makes the information that WASN’T supposed to be a source more trustworthy, assuming it is verified properly.
So if you want to argue that to normies, that’s the argument you need to focus on. Because pretending there isn’t a difference between leaked secret documents and their professional spin doctors is kind of silly.
In general, I am not going to accept at face-value what a propaganda spokesman from a foreign country says about a secret election interference operation they are accused of nor expect them to talk honestly to the public about any secret documents relating to these operations. Why would you?
Where are these leaked documents? Have you read them? Can you confirm they come from a reliable source? Or are you just listening to your preferred spin doctors that confirm your world view using documents that come from sources such as Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS?
Your sources and documents have proven to be garbage for the last 5 years. Why should we be willing to take them at face value now? I was taught to believe once a liar, always a liar and experience has proven this axiom to be true far more often than not.
You fascist pieces of shit have slandered the best President for the people of this country in the entirety of its history, since he came down the escalator. You fascist pigs spent 2 years investigating President Trump and how many millions, yet found nothing. You spied on him, accuse him of all types of nefarious conduct and it is proven nothing but lies EVERY SINGLE TIME. And we should put credence in your accusations now?
So if a Biden administration document was accidentally leaked confirming that Clinton is sucking down adrenochrome from harvested children, and the Psaki denied it, you'd say, "Oh, okay then, nevermind, guess I was wrong,"?
I'm not telling you what to trust or not trust. I am saying that telling us the secret documents about Russia wanting to support Trump in private are false because Russia's spokesperson said so is going to be a wildly ineffective and uninspiring argument. People trust info that powerful people want to keep secret, not what the powerful people insist is true.
You guys know this better than anyone, I would assume.
Almost!
But the part you missed was that Russia didn’t claim to be backing Trump. That info is being reported from leaked documents over secret meetings in the Kremlin.
That would be a big difference, because it doesn’t mean we’re using Russia’s public affairs team as a trustworthy source. It means we’re using leaked documents from the Russian government as a trustworthy source.
The PA team says that Russia wasn’t involved in backing Trump, and they’re declaring it loudly. The documents, which weren’t supposed to be seen, say something else.
Ostensibly, only one of those sources is actually supposed to be a source of information, which makes the information that WASN’T supposed to be a source more trustworthy, assuming it is verified properly.
So if you want to argue that to normies, that’s the argument you need to focus on. Because pretending there isn’t a difference between leaked secret documents and their professional spin doctors is kind of silly.
In general, I am not going to accept at face-value what a propaganda spokesman from a foreign country says about a secret election interference operation they are accused of nor expect them to talk honestly to the public about any secret documents relating to these operations. Why would you?
LMAO
Yep, and any minute now, Adam Schiff is going to produce that hard evidence that he saw with his own eyes that proved Trump was a Russian stooge.
Aaaaaaaaany minute now...
"Leaked documents"... Thanks, I needed a laugh this afternoon.
Louise Mensch would be proud of your skills of deduction.
No disrespect. Here's a suggestion. Being succinct sells better. Otherwise 'normies' gloss over the message and only read the beginning and end.
Luckily, I'm talking to Q researchers, not normies.
I was trying to be nice.
"Because pretending there isn’t a difference between leaked secret documents and their professional spin doctors is kind of silly."
You don't trust what foreign countries say, but still trust a leaked document of... what they say.
I get there is a difference between public and personal conversations, but the key word here is trust.
Where are these leaked documents? Have you read them? Can you confirm they come from a reliable source? Or are you just listening to your preferred spin doctors that confirm your world view using documents that come from sources such as Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS?
Your sources and documents have proven to be garbage for the last 5 years. Why should we be willing to take them at face value now? I was taught to believe once a liar, always a liar and experience has proven this axiom to be true far more often than not.
You fascist pieces of shit have slandered the best President for the people of this country in the entirety of its history, since he came down the escalator. You fascist pigs spent 2 years investigating President Trump and how many millions, yet found nothing. You spied on him, accuse him of all types of nefarious conduct and it is proven nothing but lies EVERY SINGLE TIME. And we should put credence in your accusations now?
Fuck off shill.
So if a Biden administration document was accidentally leaked confirming that Clinton is sucking down adrenochrome from harvested children, and the Psaki denied it, you'd say, "Oh, okay then, nevermind, guess I was wrong,"?
I'm not telling you what to trust or not trust. I am saying that telling us the secret documents about Russia wanting to support Trump in private are false because Russia's spokesperson said so is going to be a wildly ineffective and uninspiring argument. People trust info that powerful people want to keep secret, not what the powerful people insist is true.
You guys know this better than anyone, I would assume.
name checks out.