No conspiracy

[timelets]

It turns out that to advance a preferred candidate, a foreign power can manipulate our election process even without insider assistance. Traitors need not apply.

I'd be really curious to read the entire Mueller report and see how the whole affair transpired.

upd: it would be useful to know during the election process that a foreign power, rather than anonymous hackers, is behind the manipulation efforts.

Comments

Patiently

[malobukov]

If you replace “Russian” with “British” in your statement, would it still be true?

If yes, you should be outraged about Christopher Steele and call for sanctions on UK for interfering in US elections. Even more so because his dossier is mostly fake, while stuff leaked through Wikileaks was all true.

If no, then what’s the difference? Both UK and Russia were US allies or foes at some point, never friends.

Re: Patiently

[timelets]

Yes if the "British" violated American laws.

Re: Patiently

[malobukov]

American laws do not apply outside of the US. I’m breaking Russian laws, specifically articles 222 and 223 of their Penal Code, and Pakistani apostacy law (the latter punishable by death). Luckily for me, those laws do not apply outside of Russia and Pakistan either.

Re: Patiently

[timelets]

Guess what? They do!

Wow

[malobukov]

Who would have thought it. From now on I’ll be hiding in Appalachian mountains from russian OMON and pakistani police. Surely neither they nor the US know about sovereignity and jurisdiction.

Re: Wow

[timelets]

I'm talking about American laws. Check with your lawyer before you do something stupid.

Ok

[malobukov]

I follow the law of whatever jurisdiction I’m in. So did the GRU and MI5 agents. They were not in the US, so it is irrelevant whether they broke any American laws, just like it is irrelevant if I break any Pakistani laws while I’m in the US.

Even if those agents were in the US at the time, it still has nothing to do with the law. All intelligence agencies routinely break the laws of countries they operate in, including the CIA.

Re: Ok

[timelets]

I'm not going to argue with you here because it's not my job to give free advice to random people who consider themselves legal experts.

Sure

[malobukov]

I wasn't asking for advice, just pointing out that your position is not internally consistent.

Re: Sure

[timelets]

We reached a stable equilibrium: you are not asking for advice and I'm not giving advice.: