Your "overwhelming evidence" is what the FBI decided safe enough for the public to know, lol.

i've never cared much for what i sound like to other people.

i've looked into what redacted evidence they released, taken her confession into account, bounced that off of previous case context with the FBI, and then bounced that off of knowledge about espionage activities ive learned.

then i formed an opinion.

if u want to paint that as "lol u just believe the FBI" because that's near the top of your NPC response list be my guess, i dont care about that either.



they went all in, i said it was dumb. they likely gave deals for cooperation to drastically lessen sentences, also dumb. and it didnt lead anywhere other than Flynn and Manafort being punished, what i predicted all along, and dumb. a massive waste of US taxpayer money.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Aug 18 2022 11:46am

I am not saying they can't redact stuff, but have you asked yourself how good or reliable the evidence if it has been redacted?

And this is assuming the evidence is obtained using legal means. Or it's competely legit.



And you know for sure her confession wasn't obtained under duress because...?



How is that an NPC response? You indeed should not just believe the FBI's word. And I don't care that you don't care, I will still continue to make you realize you are naive enough to believe things people tell you without question.

This post was edited by JessiWan on Aug 18 2022 11:56am

what?! that doesn't even begin to make sense. the "overwhelming evidence" is what prosecutors presented to her and her expensive lawyers, which made them realise that pleading guilty to felony conspiracy charges, acting as an unregistered foreign agent for russia, was her best option.

she's not some poor black person, allegedly selling single cigarettes. they weren't gonna murder her or lock her away for eternity, based on made up charges and an overworked public defender. she's a well-connected (both within the GQP and the russian government) white woman with significant influence and financial means, and her trial had a lot of public attention.

the whole "b-b-but i'm just saying it COULD have been coerced - because FBI bad" narrative is absurd, conspiratorial, and defies common sense. it's shill-"logic".

Evidence can be obtained using illegal means. It can also be faked (to some extent).

Doubting the FBI isn't an unreasonable thing to do.

This post was edited by JessiWan on Aug 18 2022 12:00pm

not very reliable, which is why its only a fraction of what i based my opinion on.



i didnt say i know that, nor that i discount it lol.



well. u said i just believe, i broke down for you how my thought process goes, and u reverted back to "you just believe".

this is the definition of NPC behavior, not listening and just repeating a script. i explained exactly just how im not plainly taking the FBIs word, and u circled back. u actually proved my point brilliantly so thanks.

you're doing your thing there: making some meaningless general statement that has very little to do with the specific topic we're talking about.

in this context, it IS unreasonable to spin your moronic conspiracies, especially as neither SHE nor her LAWYERS ever even suggested her confession was "coerced" - not even when she was back home in russia, where she was pretty much celebrated as a successful "spy", and is bathing in that image rather shamelessly, loyally serving pootin's "united russia" party these days.

how ignorant or dishonest would you have to be to simply dismiss all that context and rather resort to idiotic commonplaces like "it's not unreasonable to doubt the FBI"? geez...

This post was edited by fender on Aug 18 2022 12:09pm

I am not saying you cannot base your opinion on things you have heard and known. I am just trying to make you see that almost all of it, the evidence and confession, etc came from one side only. The FBI. And doubting them is not unreasonable. Furthermore, there is no way for us regular people to corroborate any of it. I am not saying you must be wrong, I am just trying to make you see that there might be more to it than what we are allowed to know.

I never said she was definitely coerced. I am just trying to say that there exists the possibility that the FBI might do something like that. And yes, it's a general statement. However, stating general statements is not agaisnt the rules, so live with it.

"there exists the possibility" Thanks for contributing!