"False allegations"!
latimes.com/politics/story…
Word to the wise: Just because a Russian says something, it doesn't mean what he's saying is "disinformation."
"Russian state media & proxy websites falsely claimed that 'ineligible voters could receive ballots due to out-of-date voter rolls, leaving a vast amount of ballots...vulnerable to tampering,' the [DHS] intelligence bulletin noted." No, it didn't say "falsely"--@latimes addition.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with George Szamuely

George Szamuely Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @GeorgeSzamuely

9 May
1. Let's not forget the sliminess of Obama. With just days to go before a new team (one promising better relations with Russia) was to take over, Obama expelled Russian diplomats. Russia was expected to retaliate, thereby rendering impossible any improvement in relations.
2. The Russians avoided the trap Obama had set for them, and refused to retaliate. Rather than see it for it was--a gesture of goodwill toward the incoming team--Obama deceitfully misinterpreted it as the product of nefarious dealings between Trump's people & the Russians.
3. Obama used it to justify going after Flynn. There had to be some sort of a quid pro quo deal between Flynn and Kislyak, even though there wasn't a scrap of evidence to suggest this. Here's the slimy Comey explaining himself.
Read 4 tweets
27 May 19
If this is the kind of pathetic crap you are going to come up with, you really should just shut up. @SenWarren
inquisitr.com/5453275/elizab…
No, @theintercept, Warren distanced herself from the Justice Department's move to curtail press freedom, but she condemned Julian Assange. Her vitriol was reserved for Assange, not for Trump's DOJ. "Held accountable" for what exactly?
The more you read her statement, the more repugnant it comes across. She sucks up to the "free press," by suggesting that it, unlike "bad actor" Assange are holding the "powerful accountable everyday." If it did, there wouldn't have been any need for Wikileaks.
Read 5 tweets
12 Apr 19
1. Let's never forget that Assange could have walked into the Russian embassy in London. The Russians would have happily granted him asylum and would have got him out of the country if Assange so wished. To be sure, he would have been accused of being a Russian agent.
2. But he was always likely to be accused of being that, Russian embassy or not. Assange chose Ecuador. He did so for idealistic reasons, a way of boosting the independence of small countries. However, small countries can withstand pressure from Great Powers only for so long.
3. Clearly, Assange should have gone to the Russian embassy. The lesson here is clear and has been so for a long time. If you want freedom, independence, national sovereignty, plurality and diversity in this world, you have to look to the Russians for that.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!