Manafort didn’t try to pass election polling data to the Russians after all, but to the Ukrainians. OOPS.
Legal Insurrection:
The NY Times broke a story asserting that Paul Manafort passed secret polling data to a Russian Oligarch with close ties to Russian intelligence:
Both Mr. Manafort and Rick Gates, the deputy campaign manager, transferred the data to Mr. Kilimnik in the spring of 2016 as Mr. Trump clinched the Republican presidential nomination, according to a person knowledgeable about the situation. Most of the data was public, but some of it was developed by a private polling firm working for the campaign, according to the person.
Mr. Manafort asked Mr. Gates to tell Mr. Kilimnik to pass the data to Oleg V. Deripaska, a Russian oligarch who is close to the Kremlin and who has claimed that Mr. Manafort owed him money from a failed business venture, the person said. It is unclear whether Mr. Manafort was acting at the campaign’s behest or independently, trying to gain favor with someone to whom he was deeply in debt.
FINALLY, THE MISSING LINK!
The seedy slimy usual suspects were ecstatic, they finally had Trump right where they wanted him. This was the proof they all had been waiting for. The walls were closing in on Trump.
Josh Marshall called it “The Big Boom“:
The Wiley Coyote of the press lights another exploding cigar.
NYT opens umbrella to protect themselves from the falling anvil.
Doesn’t matter. First stories out there and already gotten traction. Remember hands up don’t shoot?
Yeah, dem’s some TOP reporters dey gots dere….
So all of the journos stepped on their dicks–or tits, as the case may be–due to a botched redaction by the Manafort team? Doesn’t sound very “botched”, to me. Sounds more Ike a laser pointer.
I’m sorry, but the linked article fails one of the first tenants of “Elements of Style”: Write to one who has too much to read. Twelve paragraphs in and they still haven’t made their point. Make the point in the first two paragraphs, then spend twelve paragraphs supporting it, followed by two paragraphs rephrasing and summarizing the original thesis. English Comp 101?
The comment thread following the original article is interesting. The correction to Ukrainian contacts does not move the collusion theorists off their idea that Trump was elected by a criminal conspiracy involving Russian hackers stealing DNC data and then using Trump’s data to subtly target voters in a few key states. Mueller may not have anything, but the conspiracy-minded peanut gallery have it all figured out.
From above: “…Paul Manafort passed secret polling data…”
What US federal agency classified this data? Did the people being polled know that their opinions would end up being classified secret? Did those people have the proper clearances to give classified opinions? /sarc
Why didn’t these morons use the word ‘confidential’ or ‘proprietary’ instead of sexing it up with the word “secret”?
Besides all that, every single person I know that bothers to talk to a pollster does so only to give them false information. Might be why polls are just about worthless today.
I’m with you Lowell. I don’t even know what info is contained in said polling data. Chances are neither do the chatterboxes or gen public.
But hey, Facebook, Google, YouTube etc collects pretty much your private thoughts and sells your data, no biggie…GET TRUMP!