Its Official: Clinton Campaign Tied to Russian "Dossier"

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by whell

Except they didn't pay Steele to "keep looking". They never reached an agreement. They never could verify his sourcing or his claims, which is the likely reason that the FBI backed off. By then, however, multiple "investigations" were underway elsewhere.

What is apparent is that Steele has deep intent. However he now has the word "FAKE" attached to him.

The BBC article notes:

1) The out sourcing of an investigation of this nature could give legs to the charge that the FBI has become too politicized.

2) The BBC itself did not report the dossier because details in it could not be substantiated

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41752908

[Oerets]

Details "could not be substantiated" never stopped the GOP or Trump now has it?



Barney

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

Ouch!!

pfffffttt.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The FBI had been looking at Manafort, the Kushner companies, Magnitsky-related money-laundering, etc. long before they received the dossier. Somehow, it seems you're upset that a bunch of unsavory behavior involving Russians and the Trump campaign came to light. Why is it that every single Trump administration or campaign member, when questioned about Russian connections, invariably lied? Every single one. Coincidence?

...and the dossier has nothing to do with any of that, and the dossier was still a politically motivated document, not legitimate intel.

Why is it that the Clinton Administration / campaign member, when questioned about Russian connections, invariably lied? Why is it that the evidence about collusion between the Clintons, the Clinton campaign and Russian interests is far more tangible, yet no one wants to talk about it? Coincidence?

They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.

The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later.

Who knew that the idiotic Russian reset button cost so much?

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

pfffffttt.

I notice he didn’t deny he’s a f’ing dittohead. He did entirely miss the point about not engaging. Idiot.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by whell

...and the dossier has nothing to do with any of that, and the dossier was still a politically motivated document, not legitimate intel.

Why is it that the Clinton Administration / campaign member, when questioned about Russian connections, invariably lied? Why is it that the evidence about collusion between the Clintons, the Clinton campaign and Russian interests is far more tangible, yet no one wants to talk about it? Coincidence?

They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.

The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later.

Who knew that the idiotic Russian reset button cost so much?

The Hill article is one of the rarest in present time.
The DOJ (Eric Holder) and law enforcers knew about the Russian bribery, yet the Rosatom Uranium deals went through.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

...and the dossier has nothing to do with any of that, and the dossier was still a politically motivated document, not legitimate intel.

Why is it that the Clinton Administration / campaign member, when questioned about Russian connections, invariably lied? Why is it that the evidence about collusion between the Clintons, the Clinton campaign and Russian interests is far more tangible, yet no one wants to talk about it? ...

It seems you somehow believe that Trump's and Hillary's sleaziness are mutually exclusive (i.e., if one is proven sleazy, it conveys righteousness/innocence on the other). I, on the other hand, believe that both are sleazy and unethical (for the record, I didn't vote for either of them for this very reason).

Meanwhile, it appears that Trump's personal lawyer is also under investigation for money laundering.

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/poli...180701541.html

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

The Hill article is one of the rarest in present time.
The DOJ (Eric Holder) and law enforcers knew about the Russian bribery, yet the Rosatom Uranium deals went through.

You and Whell demonstrate the new dynamic in the GOP - supporting Trump correlates with praising/excusing Putin's Russia.

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump...nd-poll-510728

[Oerets]

Lying about sex warrants impeachment, where lying about collusion with a hostile foreign government gets a pass. Understand the GOP core or soul yet?

Sex bad, Democrats bad! Winning is all that matters, do whatever it takes. GOP's mindset.


Barney

[Chicks]

Originally Posted by Oerets

Lying about sex warrants impeachment, where lying about collusion with a hostile foreign government gets a pass. Understand the GOP core or soul yet?

Sex bad, Democrats bad! Winning is all that matters, do whatever it takes. GOP's mindset.


Barney

Yes, lying about consensual sex is bad, apparently. Lying about sexual assault by their Dear Leader is A-OK!