“The race for the White House is too close for comfort,” write parties from around Europe, calling on Stein to throw her support behind Democrat Kamala Harris.
Green politicians from across Europe on Friday called on U.S. Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein to withdraw from the race for the White House and endorse Democrat Kamala Harris instead.
“We are clear that Kamala Harris is the only candidate who can block Donald Trump and his anti-democratic, authoritarian policies from the White House,” Green parties from countries including Germany, France, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Ireland, Estonia, Belgium, Spain, Poland and Ukraine said in a statement, which was shared with POLITICO ahead of publication
I don't have to prove anything happened. She was put at a dinner table with Putin in Moscow. Something that only happens if Putin finds you useful. He doesn't sit at random tables and strike up conversations with whoever he finds.
I did in my previous comment. You just don't like the fact that you are only put at a table with the extremely calculating dictator of Russia unless he has good reason for you to be there.
And if you expect me to prove that about Putin, you're just a troll.
Calling me a troll is an incredibly convenient way for you to get out from under the burden of proof here. Kind of hard to have a discussion with someone if they're just going to call you a troll when you ask them to provide proof of something they're claiming.
Yeah, it is hard to have a discussion with someone under those circumstances. But when you refute widely known information because they don't have an affidavit, you get called a troll.
Your evidence for Jill Stein being bribed by Putin in her sitting next to a German ambassador at a table, and Putin sitting down in a seat at the other side of the table?
The Democrat misinformation campaign is in full swing here.
Also, pretending that Putin and his cronies just sat down at a random table where Jill Stein happened to be sitting is silly and I think you know that.
Of course she says nothing happened. It's like a child getting caught with their hand in the cookie jar covered in crumbs, and they will insist they did nothing wrong. Never expect someone to be honest when it's against their interests.
That's basically what this person seems to be suggesting. Like she just happened to be sitting there and Putin and all of his closest people were like, "let's go see who this lady is and what she's up to!"
Except it's not what I'm suggesting at all. I haven't suggested anything. I've posted what Stein has said happened, which she says was a dinner at a RT anniversary gala where Putin only briefly sat at their table, no introductions were made, and no English-Russian conversations happened. If you have evidence of something else happening there, as you seem to be suggesting, then provide it.
I've read all of your replies. Why would I believe that happened without evidence? Have you proven that she's networked with Russians or Putin? Suggesting something might have happened isn't evidence of the thing happening.
Repeating things isn't providing evidence. As I've said in another comment, being at a dinner table with someone isn't evidence of collusion. Putin sitting at a table with someone, even if he's the one who chose to seat himself there, isn't evidence that that person is colluding with him. He's sat at dinner tables with Hillary Clinton. Does that mean Clinton is a Russian asset? You'd recognize that claim as absurd without evidence surely?
Ah yes the dude is such an all-knowing chessmaster chad dangerous dictator but he lets people take photoshoot of his secret election interference meeting.
Well, sure. I'm not saying that Russians didn't have a nefarious reason to invite her there. It's entirely possible and maybe even likely that they did it because they saw a third party candidate as a useful tool to sow some sort of election discord in the US. But that claim would be entirely different than the claim that Jill Stein did it because she's an asset or that this was her idea or purpose for being there. I'm disputing the latter, not the former, because her attending a gala for RT is not evidence of collusion and this was the implication being made. I can find all sorts of pictures online of Hillary Clinton and other politicians having dinners with Trump or Putin, but that doesn't mean the photos are evidence that they were in collusion with either of them.