• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The second Steele memo

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
fskimospy said:
Why on earth would it do that? This is making even less sense than before.
Click to expand...

Since the information contained in the dossier is derogatory to the Russian government and accuses it of criminal misconduct, the idea that it was either a product of collusion with said government or that said government found it "useful" in any way is absurd.

Yet this argument will continue to be repeated, over and over again.
 
fskimospy said:
I'm still trying to figure out how anyone would be expected to compile intelligence on the actions of the Russian government without using sources in the Russian government. Maybe people on a tour of the Kremlin who got lost and wandered into a top secret intelligence briefing? (good thing that tourist speaks Russian!)
Click to expand...
I'm confused...is opposition research coming from hostile nations OK or not OK?
 
fskimospy said:
I'm still trying to figure out how anyone would be expected to compile intelligence on the actions of the Russian government without using sources in the Russian government. Maybe people on a tour of the Kremlin who got lost and wandered into a top secret intelligence briefing? (good thing that tourist speaks Russian!)
Click to expand...
Probably the same way our intelligence agencies gather information and not be in cahoots with said countries.

Somehow allied spies gathered intel from the Nazis without being willing accomplices.
 
fskimospy said:
What portions of the Steele dossier do you believe came from opposition research conducted by hostile powers?
Click to expand...
Using Steele as an intermediary to obtain opposition research from Russians is considered acceptable...while going directly to the Russians for opposition research is not?
 
woolfe9998 said:
Since the information contained in the dossier is derogatory to the Russian government and accuses it of criminal misconduct, the idea that it was either a product of collusion with said government or that said government found it "useful" in any way is absurd.

Yet this argument will continue to be repeated, over and over again.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if they are just really dumb about this or if this behavior is deliberate. How can someone be so dense as to not know the difference between actions and information from the Russian government and actions/information from people who happen to work for/with the Russian government? I mean were Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden's disclosures actions by the US government, or actions by people who WORKED for the US government?

I mean how do these people think spying works?
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
Using Steele as an intermediary to obtain opposition research from Russians is considered acceptable...while going directly to the Russians for opposition research is not?
Click to expand...
You do realize that probably most of these Russians weren't with the government and if they let it be known who they are, they will not be alive much longer. Nes pas?
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
Using Steele as an intermediary to obtain opposition research from Russians is considered acceptable...while going directly to the Russians for opposition research is not?
Click to expand...

Are you seriously trying to say that opposition research collected by Steele that happened to use sources within the Russian government is somehow comparable to the Russian government itself giving opposition research to Trump's campaign, obtained through criminal activity, as part of its attempt to influence the US election?

Your position is extremely confusing and I think we're all struggling to understand it.
 
fskimospy said:
I'm not sure if they are just really dumb about this or if this behavior is deliberate. How can someone be so dense as to not know the difference between actions and information from the Russian government and actions/information from people who happen to work for/with the Russian government? I mean were Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden's disclosures actions by the US government, or actions by people who WORKED for the US government?

I mean how do these people think spying works?
Click to expand...

I can't figure out if they are unable to make this distinction or if they think the information was passed on to Steele with permission from the Russian government as a kind of disinformation campaign. If it's the latter, it makes no sense since what is contained in the dossier is harmful to the Russian government. If it's the former, then you're right, they can't seem to understand the difference between the government itself and individuals within the government who went rogue and leaked information without permission. Either way this entire argument makes no sense.
 
fskimospy said:
I'm not sure if they are just really dumb about this or if this behavior is deliberate. How can someone be so dense as to not know the difference between actions and information from the Russian government and actions/information from people who happen to work for/with the Russian government? I mean were Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden's disclosures actions by the US government, or actions by people who WORKED for the US government?

I mean how do these people think spying works?
Click to expand...
It's freaking baffling. And I'm not talking about my understanding.
 
hal2kilo said:
It's freaking baffling. And I'm not talking about my understanding.
Click to expand...

My guess is they picked it up from right wing media at some point as I've seen the 'no, Democrats are the REAL COLLUDERS' narrative pushed pretty hard ever since the original narrative of 'this never even happened and Democrats are just butthurt over the election' fell apart in the face of massive evidence.

It's also impressive how seamlessly people changed over to the second argument with no admission of error even though it's mutually exclusive from the first.
 
hal2kilo said:
You do realize that probably most of these Russians weren't with the government and if they let it be known who they are, they will not be alive much longer. Nes pas?
Click to expand...
Does it really matter if any of the sources were with the Russian government or not?
 
Last edited:
hal2kilo said:
It's freaking baffling. And I'm not talking about my understanding.
Click to expand...

Is it the talking points brewed up at breitbart, the_donald and kin? Evidently they are getting more and more desperate thus these moronic self invalidating word spasm constructs... as a silver lining they also serves as a "how low can you go" benchmark for those people we engage with.. For example I observe that Taj has dialed it down as of late while Doc here is still doubling down on whatever stupid is getting peddled today.
 
Doc Savage Fan said:
Does it really matter if any of the sources were with the Russian government or not?
Click to expand...

Yes. Are you attempting to make the argument that when conducting opposition research, those researchers aren't allowed to ask people from other countries questions? If not, it's very unclear what your point is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top