Matt Taibbi

Rank 22 of 47
|
Score 46
2/17/2024, 2:35:30 AM
X
In reply to:
Elizabeth Quinn-nolistsplease
@julepandme
·
599d
@AdiscoOn @mtaibbi He ignores the fact people pay $1000s for this type data, which isn't just names & addresses but includes personal details including race, past voting (or not) patterns, how religious someone is, how persuadable they are, what kind of vehicle they drive, etc etc.
adiscoOnTime
@AdiscoOn
·
599d
@mtaibbi They can afford to do their polls so they don't need polling data?? That's your rebuttal? Dude, you're on expired fentanyl. "They" never mention he's Ukrainian?? You sound like one those people waiting for the Kraken 🙄🙄🤡
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
599d
For the millionth time: Treasury neither has evidence Kilimnik was a spy nor evidence that “polling data” was passed to the FSB (who needed it why exactly? Because they can’t afford polls?). Also I love how they never mention Kilimnik is as Ukrainian as he is Russian.
Wyle E Coyote, Super Genius
@5150merica
·
599d
@mtaibbi There appears to be evidence. We get it, you have been trying to disprove Russian collusion from day 1, but the fact is there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

The statement in question is part of a complex and multi-layered conversation regarding the sharing of polling data by Paul Manafort with Konstantin Kilimnik, and the implications of this action. The tone of the statement is corrective, aiming to clarify what the author perceives as a misrepresentation of the type of data shared. The intent is to contribute to the conversation by providing what the author believes is a more accurate account of the data involved. The content of the statement challenges the narrative presented in the preceding messages, suggesting that the data shared was not as sensitive or exclusive as implied by others in the conversation.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aims to correct misinformation and does not appear to cause harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by focusing on the nature of the data rather than personal details. [+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement contributes to a dialogue with those in disagreement by providing a different perspective on the data shared. [+1]
  4. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    The author acknowledges a different viewpoint on the data's sensitivity, which could be seen as an attempt to correct what they see as a mistake in the narrative. [+1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses the author's influence to clarify details in a public discourse, which could be seen as contributing to the betterment of society by aiming for accuracy in reporting. [+1]