Clinton and DNC Paid For Research That Led To Russian Dossier

a reply to: Grambler

McCain wasn't a candidate this time though. I've seen sources saying it was one of the GOP Presidential candidates. Of course that could be inaccurate.

a reply to: Grambler

OK thanks. I was wondering if it had leaked today. I say Mr. Low Energy? If it was McCain I would think he would simply own up to it, right? What this is showing is that there are some very large players in this chess match.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Yes Irony for sure. Just Like David Brock used to be one of the Clintons worst nightmares and look what happened with him.

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: face23785

That’s absolutely dishonest. Who did Trump Jr and Manafort meet with for “dirt” then? Who was Manafort working for before during and after the Campaign? Who was Flynn working for? Who did Sessions consult with?

The only true answer is Russian agents.

The fact you're bringing up Sessions shows how grossly uninformed you are.

A Senator met people from another country? Say it isn't so.

A Senator working with a Presidential Campaign that was then rewarded with becoming Attorney General?

I do say it is so.

You know really, your snide remarks do nothing for your arguments. You're just not very good at it. You may not agree with my conclusions here, but to suggest that I'm not aware of the facts, that I have cited direct and primary sources for my contentions just makes you look petty if not stupid.

You seem intelligent ... you can argue with logic and facts ... being an ass while doing so is the advanced course.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
One of the ironies in all of this is that some time back, Glenn Simpson wrote a book about opposition research and its role in politics:

Twenty-one years ago, a Wall Street Journal reporter and a popular academic pundit issued a stark warning: The proliferation of opposition research in U.S. political campaigns was debasing American elections.

The alarm came in the form of a 339-page book, “Dirty Little Secrets: The Persistence of Corruption in American Politics.” The journalist was Glenn R. Simpson, a respected investigative reporter; the professor was University of Virginia political scientist Larry J. Sabato. Their book detailed the “dirty tricks” that, in the two decades since, have put America’s two major political parties at each other’s throats and led to widespread disillusionment among voters.

Railing against “sleaze” in campaigns, political consultancies, and Washington journalism, the authors deplored opposition research as a “gateway to acts that are not just offensive but duplicitous and sometimes illegal.” The proliferation of mud-slinging, they wrote, had turned campaigns once fought over real issues into a “debate over irrelevancies” -- and led to blackmail and other crimes.

'Dirty Little Secrets' of a Fusion GPS Sleaze Slinger

Guess he figured if he couldn't beat them he'd join them?

Dig. Brotha!

originally posted by: matafuchs
Who is the GOP candidate who originally called for this research? Has that been released yet?

This is all that's known:

The story began in September 2015, when a wealthy Republican donor who strongly opposed Mr. Trump put up the money to hire a Washington research firm run by former journalists, Fusion GPS, to compile a dossier about the real estate magnate’s past scandals and weaknesses, according to a person familiar with the effort. The person described the opposition research work on condition of anonymity, citing the volatile nature of the story and the likelihood of future legal disputes. The identity of the donor is unclear.

NYT

Whether or not the donor themselves is a republican remains to be seen. There are wealthy individuals on the democrat side who have donated to republicans after all:

MILLS, CHERYL A. MS.
RALEIGH, NC
27614 Self-Employed/Small Business Consultant $2,700 06/23/2015 P JEB 2016, INC. - Republican

MILLS, CHERYL
WASHINGTON, DC
20012 Self-Employed/Attorney $1,000 05/22/2015 P GLENN IVEY FOR CONGRESS - Democrat

MILLS, CHERYL
WASHINGTON, DC
20012 Self-Employed/Attorney $250 04/25/2015 P JOSH GOTTHEIMER FOR CONGRESS - Democrat

MILLS, CHERYL
WASHINGTON, DC
20012 Self-Employed/Attorney/Advisor $2,700 04/14/2015 P HILLARY FOR AMERICA - Democrat

2016 elections cycle



Wrong Cheryl Mills above.

I made a mistake.

a reply to: pavil

Don't you have to actually look at what we know at some point?

The meeting with Donny Jr. is press fodder. There's no crime there. There might be an ethical question, but in this context, that's a joke.

Bob Mueller is no one's fool. He has had a staff of highly qualified attorneys working for months. Now I know that the media tells us that we haven't seen anything from that so there's nothing there ... but come on. They aren't looking at Donny Jr., unless he's done something behind the scenes. They are looking at Manafort and Kushner and probably (guessing here) tie backs to the Trump Organization corporate.

What law did the Democrats/Clinton Campaign break then in your analysis?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Grab the popcorn. The next couple of weeks should be pretty interesting.

These revelations could be the ace in the hole our new order needs to cement itself in power, for many generations to come.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: face23785

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: face23785

That’s absolutely dishonest. Who did Trump Jr and Manafort meet with for “dirt” then? Who was Manafort working for before during and after the Campaign? Who was Flynn working for? Who did Sessions consult with?

The only true answer is Russian agents.

The fact you're bringing up Sessions shows how grossly uninformed you are.

A Senator met people from another country? Say it isn't so.

A Senator working with a Presidential Campaign that was then rewarded with becoming Attorney General?

I do say it is so.

You know really, your snide remarks do nothing for your arguments. You're just not very good at it. You may not agree with my conclusions here, but to suggest that I'm not aware of the facts, that I have cited direct and primary sources for my contentions just makes you look petty if not stupid.

You seem intelligent ... you can argue with logic and facts ... being an ass while doing so is the advanced course.

Yeah except there was nothing unusual about his meetings with Russians and everyone in the Senate hearing knew that. In fact, literally everyone in the room was aware when he said "I didn't meet Russians" he didn't literally mean he had NEVER been face to face with a Russian, because they had been in meetings with Russians with him. None of them found that answer unusual at the time, because they knew what he meant. They just chose to politicize it after the fact once they realized the way it would look as a soundbite and they could take advantage of it. It was extremely dishonest, since we know for a fact they knew he'd met Russians before, as had all of them, as part of their job. That's the kind of crap you're falling for and bringing up here. Jesus Christ, one of the big "gotcha" points was that Sessions had once been in the same building as the Russian ambassador, at a huge event that there were thousands of people at.

Get real man. Do you still believe he's a racist too? I've got some beachfront property to sell you if you're interested.

originally posted by: burntheships
So breaking news that The Clinton Campaign Is directly behind the Russian Dossier!

Directly?
FIRST it was commissioned by a Republican Presidential Contender.
Up until April (Coincidentally when Cruz dropped out)
It was then shopped around and picked up by the DNC and Hillary Campaign.
The DNC/Hillary never used it and it isn't clear if the actual Dossier ever made it to Hillary's campaign.

Open questions are:
1) Who was the Republican that commissioned the report?
2) Did it get handed off from the DNC attorney to the DNC/HRC Campaign
3) If so, why was it not used?

a reply to: face23785

If there was nothing unusual why did they pressure him to recuse himself? Why did he recuse himself at the expense of drawing President Trump's ire? Your presentation doesn't add up to explain all the facts.

You're spouting knowledge you don't have. You don't know what each individual Senator though about Jeff Sessions.

Get real yourself "man" ... I look forward to something worthy of the intellect I think you have, not this tripe.

Back on topic, since Sessions "colluding" with Russia is decidedly off-topic in that it's a baseless fairy tale, my favorite part of this debacle so far has been the DNC response:

"Tom Perez and the new leadership of the DNC were not involved in any decision-making regarding Fusion GPS, nor were they aware that Perkins Coie was working with the organization," DNC Communications Director Xochitl Hinojosa said in a statement provided to CBS News.

Yeah, none of the new leadership was involved, because the leadership that was in place at the time was forced to resign for being corrupt. Great point DNC. Great point.

a reply to: Gryphon66

He recused himself because responsible government officials are required to go out of their way to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. It's in the ethics training Clinton obviously ignored.

It's a red herring and you know it.

Edit: Plus it'll make it all the harder for the Democrats to cry foul when the investigation turns up nothing against Trump. It was the smart move, regardless of whether Trump understood that or not.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

That's the 'source' of the claim that it was started by a Republican?

Wouldn't surprise me actually, but still, we're supposed to just take NYT's word for it?

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Gryphon66

Grab the popcorn. The next couple of weeks should be pretty interesting.

These revelations could be the ace in the hole our new order needs to cement itself in power, for many generations to come.

That's an interesting vague but grandiose statement there friend. If you care to tie it back to our discussion, I'll be glad to respond, as it is ...

a reply to: Gryphon66


They have been attempting (through anecdotal and unsubstantial evidence) to overthrow the lawful President of the United States. At a bare minimum, this should be prosecuted as treason and sedition and collusion with a foreign power.

- Hyperventilates w/ wide eyes - TWENTY-FIFTH-AMENDMENT!! MISDEEEMENORSS AND HEIGHT CRIMEZ! NEEOW!

Do I really believe that? No.

But, after the hysterical, overly emotional hissy fits you all threw for the last 1+ year, we won't be satisfied until all responsible are thoroughly discredited/tarred and feathered

Can you see how the grandiose claims made by the left over the last year have been absolutely hysterical and frankly insane? DemUnderground, for example, was throwing the words treason/sedition/collusion around on a daily basis until it came out that Mueller was investigating the Podesta Group. It has now become a cricket-fest over there, but their silly posts will remain for all to see.

I should know, I ""joined"" that site almost two years ago.

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Gryphon66

He recused himself because responsible government officials are required to go out of their way to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. It's in the ethics training Clinton obviously ignored.

It's a red herring and you know it.

Edit: Plus it'll make it all the harder for the Democrats to cry foul when the investigation turns up nothing against Trump. It was the smart move, regardless of whether Trump understood that or not.

That's your opinion. I'd be glad to believe that anyone in politics still gives a damn about propriety.

Sessions is the least of your worries though, I'll grant you that. Unless it comes out he conspired with Trump to undermine the FBI's investigation, he's mostly a useful idiot.

originally posted by: matafuchs
Who is the GOP candidate who originally called for this research? Has that been released yet?

The way this rolled:

A) Senate Investigative Committee asked Fusion GPS to tell them who their client was when they contracted Steele.
B) Fusion GPS refused to give up their client
C) Senate investigative committee threatened (or did-not sure) to subpoena Fusion GPS's bank records.
D) Lawyer for DNC/HRC Campaign sent a letter releasing Fusion GPS from their client confidentiality agreement, freeing them to disclose that they were one of the clients that paid for the work.

Open questions:
Who was the original GOP bankroller of the dossier before it was shopped around.
Will the Senate Committee continue to pursue THAT question?
Did the report ever make it to DNC HQ or HRC Campaign?
If so, then what was the decision process not to use it?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yeah it could come out that Clinton serial murders kids and drinks their blood. Hey as long as we're just making # up, why not?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Gryphon66

Grab the popcorn. The next couple of weeks should be pretty interesting.

These revelations could be the ace in the hole our new order needs to cement itself in power, for many generations to come.

That's an interesting vague but grandiose statement there friend. If you care to tie it back to our discussion, I'll be glad to respond, as it is ...

Parscale and Cohen were both scheduled to testify earlier this summer to the Senate Committee in private.
Both were cancelled without explanation by the committee, which means that Mueller was still digging deep and wanted to be able to vet their statements against what he knew already.

Both are now scheduled to testify, I believe this week.

When Manafort testified, his house got raided by the FBI the next morning.

The next couple weeks should be interesting.