So in other words you don't have a source for the Grand Jury claim. A simple "no" would have sufficed.

fadskier said:

---

So do we only accept information from sources we like? If a foreign government has damaging information on a presidential candidate, why are we supposed to ignore it? I thought more information was better. Wikileaks releasing Hillary's emails allowed the public to learn that she had a unsecured server and that the DNC rigged the primaries for her. Ultimately, the American people learned of her dishonesty. Why was that a bad thing?

Furthermore, why is it bad if Russia releases bad stuff on a presidential candidate but we're okay with a privately taped conversation from 12 years previous being released. Double standard?

---

The reason (at least in my on mind) for the prohibiting of Foreign money and assistance in a political campaign is to limit the risk of foreign influence, and the resulting obligation a then elected President might have to a foreign power. This is clearly what the Russians were trying to do, and, according to intelligence intercepts, they were congratulating themselves on accomplishing. Opposition research is always a borderline issue. In the case of the Dossier, none of the research was ever used in the campaign, so no interference can be argued here. This is quite different from the Hacking of the DNC and Podesta, which clearly are efforts aimed at disrupting and compromising the campaign.

In my view the Donald Jr. meeting in Trump Tower was not a big deal. Stupid but not high crimes. What has always remained perplexing to me is the coverup. Why would you go to such lengths to deny even the most benign Russian conversations by Trump Staff? The fact that many of them perjured themselves is incomprehensible to me (Flynn, if he had told the truth, would never have been prosecuted by the Logan Act, no one has ever been prosecuted by the Logan Act in 220 years!). You can argue they were just plain stupid (and your head of national intelligence was dumber than most?), or they lied to hide something. What other reasons can there be?

ScottS said:

---

Hitlery paid for that dossier. Steele was foreign.

---

riflebear said:

---

cinque said:

---

I just don't think he understands or cares about the dishonorable motives of these foreign actors:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/id-exclusive-interview-trump-listen-foreigners-offered-dirt/story?id=63669304

---

He said he would 'listen'. There is nothing illegal about that.

What if a foreign govt came to him in 2015 or 2016 and told his team they were being spied on by Obama's FBI Director CIA Director State Dept and Dept of Justice. Should he ignore that? Should our country ignore that type of corruption? Lets go further, what if they told him the DNC & his opponent and the current President were in on it and were using the press to come up with a fake dossier to set him up and take him down as an insurance policy?

Imagine how much turmoil and division that would have saved our country if Trump's campaign knew this was happening back in 2016

---

Christopher Wray -Trump's choice for FBI- doesn't agree.

Neither does a lot of his biggest supporters.

Quote:

---

Soon after Donald Trump sparked his latest all-consuming controversy, Lindsey Graham spoke to the president and urged him to rethink his willingness to use foreign opposition research against his political opponents.

"The law is pretty clear. You can't take anything of value from a foreign government," Graham said he told Trump. "He says, 'I didn't say I did.' I said: 'Sitting down and talking to somebody's not a crime, but it's probably not a good idea. I don't agree with you.'"

Asked whether Graham's comment got through to the president, the South Carolina Republican replied: "He understands where I'm coming from."

As a close Trump ally, Graham's exchange punctuated the alarm that senior Republicans have with Trump's comments that he'd likely take foreign dirt if offered and would "go maybe to the FBI, if I thought there was something wrong."

Many Senate Republicans are now moving swiftly to distance themselves from Trump's willingness to use foreign opposition research against his political opponents, even as Trump dug in further on Thursday on Twitter.

Though senators said that being offered campaign fodder on opponents is simply a way of life in politics, they pointedly refused to endorse Trump's remarks.

"Accepting the work product of a foreign government or the effort of a foreign government to try and influence an election of one candidate or another? It simply strikes at the heart of our democracy," Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) said in an interview. "It's wrong. It's antithetical to our democratic principles."

"I was just surprised he wouldn't say he would immediately turn it over to FBI or DOJ," added Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), a leading proponent of election security legislation. "There are going to be international conversations all the time. There's no way to avoid that but the natural thing is to be able to turn it over"

Several senators up for reelection vowed to call the FBI immediately if they received such information.
"You have to report it to authorities. Generally speaking, it's a part of, in the case of like Russia, it's an effort to disrupt our elections," said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who is up for reelection and working to stay close to Trump amid a primary challenge. "My first call would be to the FBI, my second call would be somebody to corroborate the information."

Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), one of the most vulnerable senators in the 2020 cycle, said foreign opposition "should be turned over to the FBI, plain and simple." And Sen. Joni Ernst, another incumbent on the ballot next year, also put daylight between her and Trump.

"I would not trust information coming from another country. I wouldn't do it," the Iowa Republican said. "I can't speak for him, but I wouldn't want it. I'd definitely alert the authorities."

Still, most stopped short of calling out Trump by name despite some private anger over the president's comments. Republicans seemed to view the firestorm as a temporary one that will pass given Trump's penchant for changing the media narrative.

After a long pause, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said that "any advice I have for the president I'll give it to him in private."

"Opposition research is obviously at the root of the Russian active measures campaign," Cornyn says. "We're all concerned about the role foreign countries have in our elections both in campaigns and sowing discord and dissension among Americans on social media and otherwise. I'd rather just have Americans participate in American elections."

Democrats lit into Trump's comments on Thursday, while also offering harsh words for their GOP colleagues. The party is furious over Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's unwillingness to pass legislation intended to crack down on election interference, with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) reviving attempts on Thursday to pass the bipartisan bill.

"Let's count how many of them stand up and say he's wrong," said Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) of Trump. "You can usually do that on one hand."

Yet Republicans were clearly irked that Trump whiffed at what they saw as a softball in an interview with ABC on the very topic that fueled former special counsel Robert Mueller's report. The interview disrupted what would have been a quiet day at the Capitol as the debate over Trump's comments consumed Washington.

After Trump said "there isn't anything wrong with listening" to a foreign government that has dirt on an opponent, some Republicans said it's a slippery slope between accepting such information and doing something illegal.

"You don't ever want to take foreign money, that's illegal. And the next route to money is information," said Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.). "So if you take information from somebody that's foreign and it's involved in your campaign, you're inviting the risk of inviting foreign money into your campaign."

Some House Republicans, including Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), tried to defend Trump and accused Democrats of taking inappropriate actions.

But no senators interviewed for this story would wholeheartedly back up Trump. Senate Armed Services Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla) came closest, insisting that not only would he refuse such information, but Trump would too despite the president's comments.

Otherwise, defense was in short supply.

"I believe the appropriate response if the president or any other federal presidential candidate is approached by a hostile ... government with an offer of assistance is: Call the FBI," said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine.)

"I would not do it and I would encourage everyone else not to do it," agreed Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.).

James Arkin contributed to this report.

---

twd74 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

So do we only accept information from sources we like? If a foreign government has damaging information on a presidential candidate, why are we supposed to ignore it? I thought more information was better. Wikileaks releasing Hillary's emails allowed the public to learn that she had a unsecured server and that the DNC rigged the primaries for her. Ultimately, the American people learned of her dishonesty. Why was that a bad thing?

Furthermore, why is it bad if Russia releases bad stuff on a presidential candidate but we're okay with a privately taped conversation from 12 years previous being released. Double standard?

---

The reason (at least in my on mind) for the prohibiting of Foreign money and assistance in a political campaign is to limit the risk of foreign influence, and the resulting obligation a then elected President might have to a foreign power. This is clearly what the Russians were trying to do, and, according to intelligence intercepts, they were congratulating themselves on accomplishing. Opposition research is always a borderline issue. In the case of the Dossier, none of the research was ever used in the campaign, so no interference can be argued here. This is quite different from the Hacking of the DNC and Podesta, which clearly are efforts aimed at disrupting and compromising the campaign.

In my view the Donald Jr. meeting in Trump Tower was not a big deal. Stupid but not high crimes. What has always remained perplexing to me is the coverup. Why would you go to such lengths to deny even the most benign Russian conversations by Trump Staff? The fact that many of them perjured themselves is incomprehensible to me (Flynn, if he had told the truth, would never have been prosecuted by the Logan Act, no one has ever been prosecuted by the Logan Act in 220 years!). You can argue they were just plain stupid (and your head of national intelligence was dumber than most?), or they lied to hide something. What other reasons can there be?

---

Ok I get that BUT, if the hacking produces information that opens the public's eyes (such as it did with HIllary) then I don't see it as interference. Also, the dossier information was used during the election.

Dems manufactured and paid for theirs. Trump's just getting a better deal.

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

Not sure how you're struggling with the bolded section. SHE paid THEM. It wasn't foreign interference. She paid them. It was paid for with legal funding.

The difference between that and foreign governments is that foreign governments can't give anything of worth (which is oppo research is ABSOLUTELY worth money, Hillary paid for it as you've pointed out exhaustively).

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. And it's a pretty big difference.

Answer me this. If this is a nothing-burger, then why are Republicans running from Trump on this? They absolutely are. His biggest supporters are not backing him on this.

Why? They will back him on putting kids in cages. They will back him on stupid tariff threats that blew up in his face. But they won't back him on this.

Why?

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

Not sure how you're struggling with the bolded section. SHE paid THEM. It wasn't foreign interference. She paid them. It was paid for with legal funding.

The difference between that and foreign governments is that foreign governments can't give anything of worth (which is oppo research is ABSOLUTELY worth money, Hillary paid for it as you've pointed out exhaustively).

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. And it's a pretty big difference.

Answer me this. If this is a nothing-burger, then why are Republicans running from Trump on this? They absolutely are. His biggest supporters are not backing him on this.

Why? They will back him on putting kids in cages. They will back him on stupid tariff threats that blew up in his face. But they won't back him on this.

Why?

---

Just for clarity:

Steele was not dossier's sources.

In Steele's words, sources were:
A: senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure;
B: former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin;
C: senior Russian financial official;
D: senior Kremlin official.

Nunes, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Meadows and several other big names are not running from Trump on this. They are fighting back. Don't make up bs.

HRC paying is irrelevant for now. We're talking about how the intel community used it. Keep up.

fadskier said:

---

twd74 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

So do we only accept information from sources we like? If a foreign government has damaging information on a presidential candidate, why are we supposed to ignore it? I thought more information was better. Wikileaks releasing Hillary's emails allowed the public to learn that she had a unsecured server and that the DNC rigged the primaries for her. Ultimately, the American people learned of her dishonesty. Why was that a bad thing?

Furthermore, why is it bad if Russia releases bad stuff on a presidential candidate but we're okay with a privately taped conversation from 12 years previous being released. Double standard?

---

The reason (at least in my on mind) for the prohibiting of Foreign money and assistance in a political campaign is to limit the risk of foreign influence, and the resulting obligation a then elected President might have to a foreign power. This is clearly what the Russians were trying to do, and, according to intelligence intercepts, they were congratulating themselves on accomplishing. Opposition research is always a borderline issue. In the case of the Dossier, none of the research was ever used in the campaign, so no interference can be argued here. This is quite different from the Hacking of the DNC and Podesta, which clearly are efforts aimed at disrupting and compromising the campaign.

In my view the Donald Jr. meeting in Trump Tower was not a big deal. Stupid but not high crimes. What has always remained perplexing to me is the coverup. Why would you go to such lengths to deny even the most benign Russian conversations by Trump Staff? The fact that many of them perjured themselves is incomprehensible to me (Flynn, if he had told the truth, would never have been prosecuted by the Logan Act, no one has ever been prosecuted by the Logan Act in 220 years!). You can argue they were just plain stupid (and your head of national intelligence was dumber than most?), or they lied to hide something. What other reasons can there be?

---

Ok I get that BUT, if the hacking produces information that opens the public's eyes (such as it did with HIllary) then I don't see it as interference. Also, the dossier information was used during the election.

---

Not sure what you mean by opening public eyes. DNC hacking disclosed opposition research on Bernie, and Podesta's was not a lot of information actually. We knew about the private server well before the election. Once again the huge concern that should trouble everyone when Foreign Nations have Direct involvement in the campaign is the quid pro quo.
If a Foreign Government has the new President under their thumb, because they affected the election, and they can threaten the disclosure unless they get what they want. A lot of people are numb to the whole Russia thing because the liked the outcome--Trump winning. Problem is this; Putin having something over your guy means that at some point he is not your guy, he's Putin's. Why the Hell would you not want to know if the President is possibly being blackmailed?
Also, Steele Dossier was published Jan. 2017. I think we would remember urine soaked pillows if it was used in the campaign.

Doc Holliday said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

Not sure how you're struggling with the bolded section. SHE paid THEM. It wasn't foreign interference. She paid them. It was paid for with legal funding.

The difference between that and foreign governments is that foreign governments can't give anything of worth (which is oppo research is ABSOLUTELY worth money, Hillary paid for it as you've pointed out exhaustively).

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. And it's a pretty big difference.

Answer me this. If this is a nothing-burger, then why are Republicans running from Trump on this? They absolutely are. His biggest supporters are not backing him on this.

Why? They will back him on putting kids in cages. They will back him on stupid tariff threats that blew up in his face. But they won't back him on this.

Why?

---

Just for clarity:

Steele was not dossier's sources.

In Steele's words, sources were:
A: senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure;
B: former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin;
C: senior Russian financial official;
D: senior Kremlin official.

Nunes, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Meadows and several other big names are not running from Trump on this. They are fighting back. Don't make up bs.

HRC paying is irrelevant for now. We're talking about how the intel community used it. Keep up.

---

While we're clarifying, Steele's dossier was originally commissioned by Republicans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/us/politics/steele-dossier-trump-expained.html

Doc Holliday said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

Not sure how you're struggling with the bolded section. SHE paid THEM. It wasn't foreign interference. She paid them. It was paid for with legal funding.

The difference between that and foreign governments is that foreign governments can't give anything of worth (which is oppo research is ABSOLUTELY worth money, Hillary paid for it as you've pointed out exhaustively).

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. And it's a pretty big difference.

Answer me this. If this is a nothing-burger, then why are Republicans running from Trump on this? They absolutely are. His biggest supporters are not backing him on this.

Why? They will back him on putting kids in cages. They will back him on stupid tariff threats that blew up in his face. But they won't back him on this.

Why?

---

Just for clarity:

Steele was not dossier's sources.

In Steele's words, sources were:
A: senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure;
B: former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin;
C: senior Russian financial official;
D: senior Kremlin official.

Nunes, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Meadows and several other big names are not running from Trump on this. They are fighting back. Don't make up bs.

HRC paying is irrelevant for now. We're talking about how the intel community used it. Keep up.

---

And some of his biggest sycophants aren't. Of course not. Their fates are utterly tied to him.

But some really REALLY big names have openly run from him, including Lindsey boy, etc. Shoot, even John Cornyn, noted troll, wouldn't stand up for Trump.

So why are THEY running from him? What do they know that you don't?

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

Not sure how you're struggling with the bolded section. SHE paid THEM. It wasn't foreign interference. She paid them. It was paid for with legal funding.

The difference between that and foreign governments is that foreign governments can't give anything of worth (which is oppo research is ABSOLUTELY worth money, Hillary paid for it as you've pointed out exhaustively).

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. And it's a pretty big difference.

Answer me this. If this is a nothing-burger, then why are Republicans running from Trump on this? They absolutely are. His biggest supporters are not backing him on this.

Why? They will back him on putting kids in cages. They will back him on stupid tariff threats that blew up in his face. But they won't back him on this.

Why?

---

Just for clarity:

Steele was not dossier's sources.

In Steele's words, sources were:
A: senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure;
B: former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin;
C: senior Russian financial official;
D: senior Kremlin official.

Nunes, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Meadows and several other big names are not running from Trump on this. They are fighting back. Don't make up bs.

HRC paying is irrelevant for now. We're talking about how the intel community used it. Keep up.

---

And some of his biggest sycophants aren't. Of course not. Their fates are utterly tied to him.

But some really REALLY big names have openly run from him, including Lindsey boy, etc. Shoot, even John Cornyn, noted troll, wouldn't stand up for Trump.

So why are THEY running from him? What do they know that you don't?

---

Why do you have such elementary views of D.C and politics?

Between Democrats and Republicans, there are multitudes of players at hand:

We have the establishment which runs in lock step with whips and leaders. They are opposed to anyone outside the political elite making the calls. Of course they're against POTUS, he's screwing up their ability to lobby and get kickbacks. There are also radicals gunning for more government so they too can increase their ability to be more elite and acquire funds.

I think you need to realize that 95% of D.C. are actors looking out for thier own interests. Do you really believe politicians at face value?

The loudest complainers about Trump's comments should have very long noses by now. The stupid game playing so obviously prevalent in DC should disqualify all of Congress from commenting.

I must say that George Snuphaluphagos looked like a little boy asking Daddy Warbucks for an allowance raise.

Me too.

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

After reading above seems like a duck. Now I'm waiting for the progressive socialists to debate the color of the duck, feathers on the duck, and was the duck really a goose.

"The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham."
Flat out wrong. Flynn, Trump himself, Manafort ,

robby44 said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Hey, look everyone!

Trump has reversed himself again!

His sycophants/supporters are, once again, left with massive amounts of egg on their face.

---

Trump reverses course, says 'of course' he would report foreign interference

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-politics/trump-reverses-course-says-of-course-he-would-report-foreign-interference-idUSKCN1TF1MM

---

What a clever man, he even managed to get that part about reporting the contact to the FBI in his original answer to George "I was a Clinton flunky" Stephanopolous.

it's so hard to type with Trumps balls in my mouth... I'll get back to you guys

BrooksBearLives said:

---

FEC Chair weighs in.

"Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election," wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. "This is not a novel concept."

She also sent the statement via Twitter with the introductory line: "I would not have thought that I needed to say this."

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/13/fec-election-foreign-trump-1364598

---

This doesn't really tell us anything. She's just quoting the law without taking a position as to whether the information would be a thing of value.

twd74 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

twd74 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

So do we only accept information from sources we like? If a foreign government has damaging information on a presidential candidate, why are we supposed to ignore it? I thought more information was better. Wikileaks releasing Hillary's emails allowed the public to learn that she had a unsecured server and that the DNC rigged the primaries for her. Ultimately, the American people learned of her dishonesty. Why was that a bad thing?

Furthermore, why is it bad if Russia releases bad stuff on a presidential candidate but we're okay with a privately taped conversation from 12 years previous being released. Double standard?

---

The reason (at least in my on mind) for the prohibiting of Foreign money and assistance in a political campaign is to limit the risk of foreign influence, and the resulting obligation a then elected President might have to a foreign power. This is clearly what the Russians were trying to do, and, according to intelligence intercepts, they were congratulating themselves on accomplishing. Opposition research is always a borderline issue. In the case of the Dossier, none of the research was ever used in the campaign, so no interference can be argued here. This is quite different from the Hacking of the DNC and Podesta, which clearly are efforts aimed at disrupting and compromising the campaign.

In my view the Donald Jr. meeting in Trump Tower was not a big deal. Stupid but not high crimes. What has always remained perplexing to me is the coverup. Why would you go to such lengths to deny even the most benign Russian conversations by Trump Staff? The fact that many of them perjured themselves is incomprehensible to me (Flynn, if he had told the truth, would never have been prosecuted by the Logan Act, no one has ever been prosecuted by the Logan Act in 220 years!). You can argue they were just plain stupid (and your head of national intelligence was dumber than most?), or they lied to hide something. What other reasons can there be?

---

Ok I get that BUT, if the hacking produces information that opens the public's eyes (such as it did with HIllary) then I don't see it as interference. Also, the dossier information was used during the election.

---

Not sure what you mean by opening public eyes. DNC hacking disclosed opposition research on Bernie, and Podesta's was not a lot of information actually. We knew about the private server well before the election. Once again the huge concern that should trouble everyone when Foreign Nations have Direct involvement in the campaign is the quid pro quo.
If a Foreign Government has the new President under their thumb, because they affected the election, and they can threaten the disclosure unless they get what they want. A lot of people are numb to the whole Russia thing because the liked the outcome--Trump winning. Problem is this; Putin having something over your guy means that at some point he is not your guy, he's Putin's. Why the Hell would you not want to know if the President is possibly being blackmailed?
Also, Steele Dossier was published Jan. 2017. I think we would remember urine soaked pillows if it was used in the campaign.

---

Numb to the Russia thing because it didn't happen...except by Hillary

Sam Lowry said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

FEC Chair weighs in.

"Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election," wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. "This is not a novel concept."

She also sent the statement via Twitter with the introductory line: "I would not have thought that I needed to say this."

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/13/fec-election-foreign-trump-1364598

---

This doesn't really tell us anything. She's just quoting the law without taking a position as to whether the information would be a thing of value.

---

She's CLEARLY telling Trump he's wrong.

She expresses frustration she even has to say it.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

FEC Chair weighs in.

"Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election," wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. "This is not a novel concept."

She also sent the statement via Twitter with the introductory line: "I would not have thought that I needed to say this."

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/13/fec-election-foreign-trump-1364598

---

This doesn't really tell us anything. She's just quoting the law without taking a position as to whether the information would be a thing of value.

---

She's CLEARLY telling Trump he's wrong.

She expresses frustration she even has to say it.

---

She clearly wants to give the impression that he's wrong. That's very different from saying so.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

FEC Chair weighs in.

"Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election," wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. "This is not a novel concept."

She also sent the statement via Twitter with the introductory line: "I would not have thought that I needed to say this."

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/13/fec-election-foreign-trump-1364598

---

This doesn't really tell us anything. She's just quoting the law without taking a position as to whether the information would be a thing of value.

---

She's CLEARLY telling Trump he's wrong.

She expresses frustration she even has to say it.

---

She has marital ties to Crowdstrike who fudged the DNC hacking claim.

Trump just reveals his enemies and you're not smart enough to follow the money or patterns.

Doc Holliday said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Sam Lowry said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

FEC Chair weighs in.

"Let me make something 100% clear to the American public and anyone running for public office: It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election," wrote Ellen Weintraub, chairwoman of the FEC. "This is not a novel concept."

She also sent the statement via Twitter with the introductory line: "I would not have thought that I needed to say this."

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/13/fec-election-foreign-trump-1364598

---

This doesn't really tell us anything. She's just quoting the law without taking a position as to whether the information would be a thing of value.

---

She's CLEARLY telling Trump he's wrong.

She expresses frustration she even has to say it.

---

She has marital ties to Crowdstrike who fudged the DNC hacking claim.

Trump just reveals his enemies and you're not smart enough to follow the money or patterns.

---

Yes. It's ALL a giant conspiracy.

The greatest man on earth. Taken down by a bureaucrat at the FEC.

Are you kidding me? Listen to yourself. The second you have to invent ghosts behind the door to defend our incompetent president (he's REALLY bad at being President, you DO get that, right?), you've lost the game.

Trump reveals his enemies. Yeah. We all know a ton more about foreign interference and campaign finance law thanks to him. His enemies. Jesus.

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

Not sure how you're struggling with the bolded section. SHE paid THEM. It wasn't foreign interference. She paid them. It was paid for with legal funding.

The difference between that and foreign governments is that foreign governments can't give anything of worth (which is oppo research is ABSOLUTELY worth money, Hillary paid for it as you've pointed out exhaustively).

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. And it's a pretty big difference.

Answer me this. If this is a nothing-burger, then why are Republicans running from Trump on this? They absolutely are. His biggest supporters are not backing him on this.

Why? They will back him on putting kids in cages. They will back him on stupid tariff threats that blew up in his face. But they won't back him on this.

Why?

---

Just for clarity:

Steele was not dossier's sources.

In Steele's words, sources were:
A: senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure;
B: former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin;
C: senior Russian financial official;
D: senior Kremlin official.

Nunes, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Meadows and several other big names are not running from Trump on this. They are fighting back. Don't make up bs.

HRC paying is irrelevant for now. We're talking about how the intel community used it. Keep up.

---

While we're clarifying, Steele's dossier was originally commissioned by Republicans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/us/politics/steele-dossier-trump-expained.html

---

While we're clarifying further, the story you posted doesn't say that at all.

Republicans hired Fusion GPS, but let them go in May 2016. The Clinton campaign then hired them, and it was after this time that Fusion commissioned the Steele dossier. So no, the Republicans did not commission the Steele dossier, the Clinton campaign (indirectly) did.

From your article:

After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton's campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.

JXL said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

Not sure how you're struggling with the bolded section. SHE paid THEM. It wasn't foreign interference. She paid them. It was paid for with legal funding.

The difference between that and foreign governments is that foreign governments can't give anything of worth (which is oppo research is ABSOLUTELY worth money, Hillary paid for it as you've pointed out exhaustively).

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. And it's a pretty big difference.

Answer me this. If this is a nothing-burger, then why are Republicans running from Trump on this? They absolutely are. His biggest supporters are not backing him on this.

Why? They will back him on putting kids in cages. They will back him on stupid tariff threats that blew up in his face. But they won't back him on this.

Why?

---

Just for clarity:

Steele was not dossier's sources.

In Steele's words, sources were:
A: senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure;
B: former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin;
C: senior Russian financial official;
D: senior Kremlin official.

Nunes, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Meadows and several other big names are not running from Trump on this. They are fighting back. Don't make up bs.

HRC paying is irrelevant for now. We're talking about how the intel community used it. Keep up.

---

While we're clarifying, Steele's dossier was originally commissioned by Republicans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/us/politics/steele-dossier-trump-expained.html

---

While we're clarifying further, the story you posted doesn't say that at all.

Republicans hired Fusion GPS, but let them go in May 2016. The Clinton campaign then hired them, and it was after this time that Fusion commissioned the Steele dossier. So no, the Republicans did not commission the Steele dossier, the Clinton campaign (indirectly) did.

From your article:

After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton's campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.

---

Yeah, so what? That was paid for oppo research and not the product of an enemy government's Intel.

JXL said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

BrooksBearLives said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

Can ya'll keep up, or are you having a hard time understanding what happened with Hillary's dirt?

HRC hired Fusion GPS.

FusionGPS hired Christopher Steele.

Steele crafted the dossier without sources. Nothing in the dossier is confirmed. In fact Steele claims there is a Russian consulate in Miami in the dossier (it doesn't exist!).

The FBI only confirmed Steele as a source...not the contents of the dossier.

Legal warrants need confirmation, not just the source.

It became an illegal warrant.

FISA warrant judges didn't royally screwed up. They were lied to.

The FISA courts received falsified intel on the dossier (parallel construction through media leaks). The FBI used an article from Yahoo News as independent corroboration for the Steele dossier when, in fact, Steele had talked to the news outlet. If the FBI knew Steele had that media contact before it submitted the article, it likely would be guilty of circular intelligence reporting, a forbidden tactic in which two pieces of evidence are portrayed as independent corroboration when, in fact, they originated from the same source.

The Special counsel was created on behalf of this illegal sham.

On top of that there were spies sent to create the appearance of collusion. (Planting money on Trump campaign members, setting up discussions with Russians and much more). There was also texts uncovered about setting up an insurance policy in case Trump was elected. Mueller's entire staff was anti Trump lawyers. and Hillary's personal infamous lawyer with a shady and corrupt background - Andrew Weissman).

The SC report relied on more bull**** media 130 times in the report. That's 130 cases of public opinion!

You have to be a complete moron to not even question this operation.

Wake up guys!

---

Not sure how you're struggling with the bolded section. SHE paid THEM. It wasn't foreign interference. She paid them. It was paid for with legal funding.

The difference between that and foreign governments is that foreign governments can't give anything of worth (which is oppo research is ABSOLUTELY worth money, Hillary paid for it as you've pointed out exhaustively).

THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. And it's a pretty big difference.

Answer me this. If this is a nothing-burger, then why are Republicans running from Trump on this? They absolutely are. His biggest supporters are not backing him on this.

Why? They will back him on putting kids in cages. They will back him on stupid tariff threats that blew up in his face. But they won't back him on this.

Why?

---

Just for clarity:

Steele was not dossier's sources.

In Steele's words, sources were:
A: senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure;
B: former top level Russian intelligence officer still active inside the Kremlin;
C: senior Russian financial official;
D: senior Kremlin official.

Nunes, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Meadows and several other big names are not running from Trump on this. They are fighting back. Don't make up bs.

HRC paying is irrelevant for now. We're talking about how the intel community used it. Keep up.

---

While we're clarifying, Steele's dossier was originally commissioned by Republicans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/us/politics/steele-dossier-trump-expained.html

---

While we're clarifying further, the story you posted doesn't say that at all.

Republicans hired Fusion GPS, but let them go in May 2016. The Clinton campaign then hired them, and it was after this time that Fusion commissioned the Steele dossier. So no, the Republicans did not commission the Steele dossier, the Clinton campaign (indirectly) did.

From your article:

After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton's campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.

---

The work was started before Steele was engaged, in October of 2015. He wasn't the only author.

In October 2015, Fusion GPS was contracted by conservative political website The Washington Free Beacon to provide general opposition research on Trump and other Republican presidential candidates.

In June 2016, Fusion GPS subcontracted Steele's firm to compile the dossier. Clinton campaign officials were reportedly unaware that Fusion GPS had subcontracted Steele, and he was not told that Clinton's campaign was the recipient.

Following Trump's election as president, funding from Clinton and the DNC ceased, but Steele continued his research and was reportedly paid directly by Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn R. Simpson.

Here's what makes no sense: if Hillary was trying to sink Trump with this oppo research, she showed NO signs of it. She did NOTHING with it during the election.