This Newsweek article simply presents her official campaign statement, of giving a speech about peace, to a country run by a dictator that was already helping Assad massacre his own people in Syria. It also mentions a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation, but neglects to mention she never cooperated with that investigation.
Correct. Similarly, being an intelligence asset does not necessarily imply someone is taking orders or being paid. Asset is not an employee-employer relationship. It’s a tool, and the quid pro quo can take many forms.
Asset is not an employee-employer relationship. It’s a tool, and the quid pro quo can take many forms.
So just maybe it’s possible Putin would invite someone to come insult him in his own country for “Excessive militarism” and not have them thrown out of a window if that person was zero threat and could possibly cause chaos for an opponent?
Nope. https://www.newsweek.com/jill-stein-ties-vladimir-putin-explained-1842620
This Newsweek article simply presents her official campaign statement, of giving a speech about peace, to a country run by a dictator that was already helping Assad massacre his own people in Syria. It also mentions a Senate Intelligence Committee investigation, but neglects to mention she never cooperated with that investigation.
Wait - so her saying she’s not a Russian asset doesn’t mean she’s not a Russian asset?
Correct. Similarly, being an intelligence asset does not necessarily imply someone is taking orders or being paid. Asset is not an employee-employer relationship. It’s a tool, and the quid pro quo can take many forms.
So just maybe it’s possible Putin would invite someone to come insult him in his own country for “Excessive militarism” and not have them thrown out of a window if that person was zero threat and could possibly cause chaos for an opponent?
Quite. He might even go so far as to help that person, if said help furthered his goals.
It means as much as trump saying he’s not familiar with Project 2025.
After all, what candidate would lie repeatedly to their constituents about something that would make them look bad?