• Carrolade@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    4 months ago

    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.

    • ccunning@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      4 months ago

      Wait - so her saying she’s not a Russian asset doesn’t mean she’s not a Russian asset?

      • Carrolade@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        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.

        • ccunning@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          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?

          • Carrolade@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Quite. He might even go so far as to help that person, if said help furthered his goals.

      • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 months ago

        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?