Its Official: Clinton Campaign Tied to Russian "Dossier"

[finnbow]

Meanwhile:

In an email sent in late July 2016 and recently reviewed by the person, Cambridge Analytica CEO Alexander Nix told other employees at the firm and Rebekah Mercer, a top Republican donor, that he had recently reached out to Mr. Assange to offer help better indexing the messages WikiLeaks was releasing to make them more easily searchable. Those emails included a trove of messages stolen from Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta’s account and from the Democratic National Committee.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/wikilea...oup-1508961298

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by finnbow

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

You mean Newsweek is disappointed that enough people are not buying its one sided propaganda. It tried to promote General Breedlove and Obama would not bite.

What is now painfully obvious is that the massive amount of money that has left Russia has corrupted all and sundry. Even ex British Prime David Cameron got touched.

Do the powers that be intend to shut down this inflow? I very much doubt that. Russian billions will always be welcome and money launders from whatever political connections are creative.

Russian money has been buttressing the economies of major cities in the West. Putin and his gang are complicit in this.

Newsweek is angry because its clique has been kicked out/dismantled--notable member Mikheil Khodorkovsky. It was weeping and wailing when he was busted.

Oh shit! Half million dollars for a twenty minutes speech.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

You mean Newsweek is disappointed that enough people are not buying its one sided propaganda. It tried to promote General Breedlove and Obama would not bite...

Newsweek is "disappointed" when it reports the results of a Politico/Morning Consult poll?

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by Dondilion

You mean Newsweek is disappointed that enough people are not buying its one sided propaganda. It tried to promote General Breedlove and Obama would not bite.

What is now painfully obvious is that the massive amount of money that has left Russia has corrupted all and sundry. Even ex British Prime David Cameron got touched.

Do the powers that be intend to shut down this inflow? I very much doubt that. Russian billions will always be welcome and money launders from whatever political connections are creative.

Russian money has been buttressing the economies of major cities in the West. Putin and his gang are complicit in this.

Newsweek is angry because its clique has been kicked out/dismantled--notable member Mikheil Khodorkovsky. It was weeping and wailing when he was busted.

Oh shit! Half million dollars for a twenty minutes speech.

Oh puhleeze, half of a mil ain't shit for a former POTUS' speech. Your exalted St. Ronnie the Drooling Snitch of RKO Pictures got double that in the 80's.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

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).

No. I believe that any evidence against Trump personally is manufactured or, at the most, highly speculative and circumstantial. The evidence against Clinton, not so much.

For example, remember the media (and you) hyperventilating about this meeting:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.4763ccbd2bf4

By God, you folks fully believed that that this was silver bullet proof that Trump was "colluding" with the Russians.

Yet, here we have a "dossier" that was bought and paid for by the DNC and the Clinton campaign, and was sourced by an individual with access to contacts within the Russian government. The Clinton team's legal counsel lied about paying for it for a year. The document was "opposition research", but that didn't stop the Swamp - Dems and Repubs alike - from shopping it around to to law enforcement and at least one (and probably more) of those agencies used that document as a basis for their investigations into "collusion" (including a Special Counsel ordered raid on the home of the private citizen). Yet, the media - nor any here - doesn't seem to find any issues with that.

Not surprising.

[Chicks]

Not surprising that you’re simply repeating the Rush narrative. Sigh. Idiot.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

No. I believe that any evidence against Trump personally is manufactured or, at the most, highly speculative and circumstantial...

I'd say that at this point, criminal charges (and/or a plea deal) against Manafort and Flynn are virtually a slam-dunk. Charges against Kushner, Junior and Cohen are also a solid 50-50% proposition IMO. As for Trump himself, I'm uncertain as to the level of proof needed for obstruction of justice, but it's pretty clear he fired Comey to curtail the Russia investigation.

As for Hillary, I'm totally OK with a real investigation into her actions, though I'm quite certain that any Congressional investigations would simply be an attempt to obfuscate and provide cover for your Dear Leader.

In any event, I bet Mueller is neither impressed nor influenced by GOP obfuscation going on with all this breathlessness about Hillary. I'm quite sure he'll find your silly argument non-persuasive that any criminal activity by Trump and/or his campaign first brought to light by the dossier is off-limits for further investigation.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Newsweek is "disappointed" when it reports the results of a Politico/Morning Consult poll?

As an early anti Russian driver it would be delighted if more of of the population swallow its line.

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by bobabode

Oh puhleeze, half of a mil ain't shit for a former POTUS' speech. Your exalted St. Ronnie the Drooling Snitch of RKO Pictures got double that in the 80's.

The amount and timing surprised the FBI.

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

I'd say that at this point, criminal charges (and/or a plea deal) against Manafort and Flynn are virtually a slam-dunk. Charges against Kushner, Junior and Cohen are also a solid 50-50% proposition IMO. As for Trump himself, I'm uncertain as to the level of proof needed for obstruction of justice, but it's pretty clear he fired Comey to curtail the Russia investigation.

You could be right. As we learned with Scooter Libby, a Special Prosecutor will validate their existence by bringing charges, even if those charges are unrelated to the initial allegation.

Originally Posted by finnbow

As for Hillary, I'm totally OK with a real investigation into her actions, though I'm quite certain that any Congressional investigations would simply be an attempt to obfuscate and provide cover for your Dear Leader.

There you go again.

Originally Posted by finnbow

In any event, I bet Mueller is neither impressed nor influenced by GOP obfuscation going on with all this breathlessness about Hillary. I'm quite sure he'll find your silly argument non-persuasive that any criminal activity by Trump and/or his campaign first brought to light by the dossier is off-limits for further investigation.

We'll see. Frankly, if there's any evidence to suggest that this "dossier" had a role in the decision to appoint Mueller in the first place, it puts the entire investigation on shaky ground.