United States Congressional & Gubernatorial 2022 elections

[twig93]

@CSPAN

Here’s a Philadelphia Inquirer article from earlier this year doing the same thing:

That says it is exclusive to subscribers, so I haven’t looked at it, but if it’s merely speculating then that too is not an actual accusation.

[twig93]

@CSPAN

Then of course the raid happens and we get the more recent reminders to connect the dots. First the surely true anonymously sourced nuclear weapons article from WaPo

Your next article is MSNBC, so I’m not sure what’s in the WaPo article. But the MSNBC headline is speculating on the contents of the classified documents… decidedly NOT accusing him of selling them.

[twig93]

@CSPAN

Then other run with it. Documents as possible kompromat for Putin:

I don’t even know what that means, but the next article also appears to be more speculation on the contents of the classified documents rather than making accusations of espionage.

[twig93]

@CSPAN

Mention of Espionage Statutes involving “intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation:”

The first thing I noticed in the next article is: (emphasis mine)

While the warrant … does not accuse Trump of any crime

Seems pretty clear that they are not accusing Trump of espionage.

[twig93]

@CSPAN

Then it moves onto social media like reddit or twitter,

Wait, wait… do you mean to tell me that there are idiots with Twitter accounts? STOP THE PRESS!!!

Just kidding… randos making up dumb s*** on Twitter is evidence of precisely nothing. Same for Reddit.

[twig93]

So that’s it… you have provided zero evidence of anyone, other than random idiots on social media that is, accusing Trump of espionage.

[CSPAN]

@twig93

Just kidding… randos making up dumb s*** on Twitter is evidence of precisely nothing.

You asked “Who is making this association? So far you are the only one I’ve seen mentioning it.”

I answered with numerous examples. I didn’t see in your question where only certain people count.

Feel free to rephrase your question if you intended it to read differently. “Who of any importance is making this association?” is perhaps what you intended to type, but isn’t actually what you typed.

[Indy]

I have no doubt that Trump intentionally took classified documents to MaL. And, he played games to avoid returning them when he was called on it.

He is guilty by this standard “knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location”.

OTOH, it is a big stretch to say he sold them to some foreign government, or bartered them for something. Not impossible, but I haven’t seen any evidence.

If the Ds want to amplify solid information, fine. I think they hurt themselves by running with speculation.

[twig93]

@CSPAN

You asked “Who is making this association? So far you are the only one I’ve seen mentioning it.”

I answered with numerous examples. I didn’t see in your question where only certain people count.

Ok, fine. You and other random people on social media who very few people treat as an actual news source have made some wild accusations that as far as we know, no serious politician has (so far) made. Doesn’t seem like a major Democratic Party strategy at this point, which is what you seemed to imply.

[CSPAN]

If the Ds want to amplify solid information, fine. I think they hurt themselves by running with speculation.

To be fair, it’s not just the Ds that do this. We’re at a point, and have been more some time, where the rhetorical narrative almost always supersedes the factual narrative, sometimes to the point of outlets barely even caring about the factual narrative at all. I pointed out in another thread how Fox News of course did the same thing with Hillary’s emails in 2018 by making this foreign adversaries association.

[twig93]

@Indy

If the Ds want to amplify solid information, fine. I think they hurt themselves by running with speculation.

And so far there’s no evidence that as a party they are actually doing this. Maybe a few randos on the lunatic fringe, but not party leadership or anything.

[Indy]

Sure. Now I’m conflicted. I assume the Ds will be embarrassed and lose support from the Independents if it turns out their speculation isn’t true.

But, do I believe the same thing about the Rs? Or does their speculation just become “fact” from constant repetition, even if it never proves out?

Do I have different standards, or do I think their potential supporters have different standards? I suppose I’m assuming the latter.

[SteveWhite]

@twig93

That says it is exclusive to subscribers, so I haven’t looked at it, but if it’s merely speculating then that too is not an actual accusation.

I am a Inquirer subscriber, so I can read the whole article. I’ll repost part of it here. Note that it is explicitly labeled Opinion, not news reporting. It is also from Feb 24, so well before there was explicit government reference to the Espionage Act. Overall it (and that member of the Inquirer Editorial staff, is very anti-Trump.

It’s not unusual for American presidents to pursue a friendly relationship with the dictatorial monarchs of Saudi Arabia — sitting on the world’s largest oil deposits will do that — but no U.S. commander-in-chief has wooed the sheikhs of Riyadh with a greater zeal than Donald Trump and his entrepreneurial family.

Trump shocked the foreign policy establishment right after his 2017 inauguration when he made Saudi Arabia his first international trip, and he kept that focus on the billionaire regime throughout his presidency. Those courtesies extended to giving the young and ruthless Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, or MBS, a free pass for the brutal bone-saw murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, as well as the late-night bonding between MBS and Trump’s son-in-law and top adviser, Jared Kushner.

Now that the 45th president is an ex-president, exiled to his Mar-a-Logo mansion in Palm Beach, the Saudis don’t seem to have forgotten Trump, Kushner, and the services rendered during those four years in the White House. Earlier this month, Bloomberg reported that Kushner has been traveling through the Middle East and met again with his old pal MBS as he woos the Saudis’ massive $500 billion sovereign-wealth fund and other potential investors in his new venture capital gig that he calls Affinity Partners.

then later

In typical fashion, the selling of the U.S. ex-presidency is not completely new, and yet Trump is quickly taking his transactional style of politics to crass new depths. That said, the would-be dangers of POTUS 45 and his potential quid-pro-quos with the murderous Saudis seemed to take on new risks this month with a third significant disclosure: Trump’s mishandling of presidential secrets, including classified documents amid some 15 boxes of paperwork that belong to the American people but were instead spirited away to Mar-a-Lago.

Suddenly, two questions that were whispered by some experts in the waning days of Trump’s presidency held greater significance: Could an ex-POTUS who bitterly believes (with zero evidence) that his re-election was stolen from him — a man who is also in hundreds of millions of dollars in debt — trade on his knowledge of America’s deepest secrets for an infusion of cash? And some 13 months later, are the Saudis really interested in Trump’s world-class golf courses, or in what the 45th president knows?

and later

Then, the news about presidential record keeping got even worse with the disclosure that 15 boxes of Trump’s presidential records were neither destroyed nor delivered where they are supposed to go, to the National Archives, but shipped down to Trump’s primary hangout of Mar-a-Lago. Not surprisingly, when archivists finally did get hold of these records, they contained some top-secret classified documents.

Some analysts immediately questioned whether any of the mishandled documents had to do with the January 6 insurrection on Capitol Hill that’s now being probed by a House committee and which could be of interest to the U.S. Justice Department. That’s a logical assumption, but my first thoughts went toward Trump’s unorthodox dealings with foreign powers like the Saudis, their wealthy friends in the United Arab Emirates, and of course Vladimir Putin’s Russia — a topic of renewed interest now that Putin has elected to risk World War III by invading Ukraine.

Then the last 3 paragraphs (only part of the antepenultimate)

Now that he’s in Mar-a-Lago and we know what we now know, it’s important to ask whether any of the documents that might answer those questions were flushed down the toilets, or stolen away to Florida for safe keeping. And if so, how much money would keeping Team Trump’s top secrets be worth to the Saudi royals?

As I noted early, Trump didn’t invent eyebrow-raising post-presidential maneuvers. Ronald Reagan arguably got the ball rolling when he took $2 million to address the Japanese, and others from both parties, including Bill Clinton, pocketed even more from foreign sources. But no one mixes tangled business dealings and cheesy ethical standards like The Former Guy. That’s why it’s imperative that the Justice Department treat the referral from the National Archives about the possible mishandling of classified documents by Trump and his aides with the utmost seriousness. Because who knows where else an investigation might lead?

There’s a lot going on the world this week, and with the unspeakable carnage in Ukraine at the moment it’s reasonable to ask about the relative importance of an ex-president’s business dealings, or his document handling. The thing is, when foreign actors invest in the 45th president they’re also investing in a possible 47th, with Trump currently leading for the GOP nomination in 2024. Before America puts Trump in charge in dealing with MBS and Putin a second time, the public has to learn what he’s trying to hide.

Note that the first of those is referring to the possibility of being paid to keep official documents hidden, not of being paid for revealing secrets.

[SteveWhite]

@Indy

Or does their speculation just become “fact” from constant repetition, even if it never proves out?

Case in point. The Big Lie. Much of which has been stated as fact, not even called speculation by the speakers.

[Dara]

I was just watching the Today show and right after mentioning the Espionage Act the reporter emphatically noted that none of this means that DJT is thought to be a spy. Acting like the idea that DJT is a spy is anywhere close to mainstream at this point in time is a joke.

[Indy]

@SteveWhite

antepenultimate

This forum is good for my vocabulary.

[magillaG]

From what i have read, legally “espionage” has a much broader meaning than the everyday meaning.

Kind of the opposite of “collude.”

So trump may have committed espionage without being a spy. And he can collude with russia in the common meaning of the word without doing so criminally.

[Cooke]

@Indy

This forum is good for my vocabulary.

Preantepenultimate is also a word FWIW.

[twig93]

Thanks for sharing. Sounds like speculation rather than accusation. And obviously prior to the FBI raid.

[twig93]

I had a boss look at me like I was from Mars when I used the word “penultimate” in conversation. Or rather, he looked at me like I was from Mars when I realized that he had been assuming that it meant “last” and I pointed out that it actually meant “second to last”. He didn’t believe me and had to look it up.