Re:The Second Half of Watergate Was Bigger, Worse, and Forgo...
by shaki-dora on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @02:28PM
(#18505303)
Dude... stop digging you (metaphorical) grave. You lost this argument five levels up. Pretending not to understand why someone could be compromised by a cool million and change for a few interviews makes it terribly difficult not to assume bad faith on your part.
It is, however, the sort of public humiliation one might be willing to accept as an employee of Completely Ordinary People for the Advancement of Motivated Reasoning and Large Paychecks.
It was a non-profit. He got paid. That's it. There's nothing to bring up. So why would you otherwise?
----
" but that you are beating a strawman because literally no one anywhere has made that claim."
Really?
"This is intellectually lazy its a clear case of corruption" ... is what someone wrote just above - and is the general implication of those commenting here.
The entire thread is devoted to insinuating that this guy has some kind of major conflict of interest due to his shady involvement with this non-profit.
So, no, it's not a 'straw man' - I'm responding directly to the assertion.
There is nothing here.
A curious but otherwise normal non-profit, in operation long before anything relevant.
There's probably no fire, there's not even any smoke.