Just like the Trump kid's meeting with the Kremlin-connected lawyer during the campaign - opposition research, and anybody would go after it, right? Big nothing burger, IMHO. Move along.
4
Hillary's dysfunctional campaign strikes again. But it is not her fault.
Republicans will use this to flip the script and distract the short attention span media while they continue to sell the China, Crystal and generally loot the Treasury for the 1%.
9
Again, in the never-ending battle between Trump and Hillary, there is always a false equivalency being posited. Trump and fam's collusion with a foreign power is not equivalent of Hillary's campaign continuing to fund a opposition research project initiated by a Republican opponent. Hiring a former MI6 operative's firm is not the same as dealing with agents of a foreign power who also happens to be an adversary of the United States.
Only the most incompetent gullible American would think this. Yes, in case anyone is left in doubt, we're talking about an ardent viewer of the FOX "news" propaganda network, and other assorted right-wing bullhorns. Fans of those outlets are fans in the truest sense of the word, and an abbreviated form of the term fanatic. In the Republican party they are now the patients let loose to run the asylum.
DD
Manhattan
15
My, this story is dropping rapidly beneath the fold. As if they could make it didn't happen.
10
What's the big deal? Even if the Dem's were involved in chasing down leads on The Russian Connection, is there a crime in doing so? Meanwhile, back at the loony bin masquerading as good governance DT and his cronies continue to dismantle national civility one outrageous pronouncement at a time.
8
So the DNC and Clinton campaign officials have been lying for months about their role in this sordid affair. I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
27
It doesn't matter if it's Russia or the UK, it is messed up for a candidate for political office in the US to tap into the espionage services of a foreign nation to help their political campaign. Imagine if a presidential candidate used the CIA to help their political campaign.
11
The main point of all this seems to be missed by many. Grump has been charged with collusion with Russia but no evidence has been produced in almost a year to support the suspicion. The DNC and Clinton campaign, we now know, did collude with a foreign agent with sources in Russia. They paid money, got a product, handed it to the FBI which could not confirm its accuracy. The DNC and Clinton campaign's use of a cut-out in this collusion does not mean it is not collusion. It plainly is and the evidence is there for all to see who wish to see.
19
Not good for the numerous Democrats who took the Fifth.
Republican prosecutors are going to be vying for judgeships.
They are going to make them take the Fifth in front of juries.
8
All the posters justify it because they say .. well everybody does it. Except .... I'm not seeing any truth to the allegations.
So .....the Russians went on Facebook and twitter .. Obama was on TV speaking out against the UK's vote on leaving the EU ... out in the open!
The most recent poll has almost 40% of registered Dem's believing that the Russians manipulated the actual vote tallies .. how is this any less crazy or dangerous than the same number of Republicans believing Obama was muslim.
15
If you have to resort to taking the low road, then perhaps the problem is either with your message or with the messenger.
Who knows who is funding who these days thanks to Citizens United and dark money super PACs. This is why I place a high value and support a free press. I rely on reporters, journalists, and if laws are broken, I rely on our justice system, to find the skeletons in the closet, not the candidates.
5
So what? Big deal... Let's see Trump is attempting to either destroy or dismantle all of the institutions that would hold him and his entourage accountable. The free press, judiciary and legal systems and that's just the beginning. The only fault of the DNC was not having the courage to make its information available. Dictatorship, kleptocracy... it all seems so cliche!
3
This action is illegal. Period. You pay the Russians for the information and then deduct it as an attorney expenses. Sorry you are guilty. People will go to jail.
The democrats lack integrity, then they point their finger at President Trump.
Thank you nyt for printing this article.
32
Even if Democrats paid for the dossier it doesn't mean its contents aren't true. That's the real story. If the contents are true -- and the allegations certainly fit Trump's own admitted behavior -- they are the far greater risk to national security and Trump's will be the far bigger lie.
7
Maybe, but funneling the money through the law firm, which ensured that it would not show up on disclosures, leaves them with some 'splaining to do.
24
NY Times readers (at least, the majority of you, judging by your comments)- You are a sorry bunch if you can't understand why this action of Clinton campaign is so troubling and sleazy.
As a Trump supporter, I was furious when I heard about Donald Jr's interest in obtaining dirt on the Clintons from the Russians. Why can't you NY Times readers be angry at Hillary for actually PAYING the Russians to do the same? The fact that Hillary was shrewder, and worked through intermediaries to hide her involvement, makes this even worse than Donald Jr's actions.
37
Who cares? (Besides Trump cultists?) ALL campaigns fund oppo research. The only pertinent issue isn’t even what that research uncovers, but rather how the campaign uses the findings. Did the Clinton campaign knowingly promulgate information they knew to be false or even questionable? Unless they did, like most every other attack on Hillary Clinton the past quarter century, there’s nothing to see here. So why are congressional Republicans doing this? Simple: they need Hillary Clinton to run against in 2018, as a distraction and deflection from Trump.
6
Everyone on the Left cared when the collusion accusations were raised against Trump. Though now that it turns out the collusion was in fact of their own doing now it's a non-issue and we're supposed to move along because "nothing to see here"?
I'm a Libertarian and not a Trump-Pette but ya, that's pretty weak.
26
The one who’s colluded wiry Russia was Hillary, not Trump ?
The republicans who possibly had their hands in the dossier jar were anti-Trumpers, Jeb and McCain ?
The liberal commenters think the dossier content is more important than who paid for it ? And they thought the WikiLeaks email contents were less important than who was behind it ?
He he he .. I could continue, if only I could stop laughing.
20
What is going to kill the Dems is running the money through the law firm and reporting it on Hillary's campaign disclosures as legal expenses. That proves intent right there. I'm guessing IRS investigations, indictments, the works.
22
Around the same time that the Democrats had hired a PI to look into Russian collusion, the Trump campaign was already hitting up Wikileaks for dirt on Clinton, dirt that Russians were using Assange as an intermediary to disseminate.
4
The bad guys here are not the Republicans or Democrats. The bad guys are the Russians, and they are winning. Their goal has been to turn Americans against each other, to break up the EU and to dilute Western democratic influence around the world. Someone, a real leader, must bring the free world together and focus on this very formidable threat.
Just read the comments below. We are no longer listening to each other, which is the beginning of the end for a democracy. It's us or them, but both sides are the same American side.
6
This dossier issue, Russian related contributions to the Clinton Foundation, Bill Clinton receiving $500,000 for a speech in Moscow paid for by Renaissance Capital, an investment bank with ties to the Kremlin, Russians and the Obama administration via Secretary Clinton turning over control of 20% of US uranium reserves to the Russians, missing emails on the Clinton server: what on earth were the Clintons and the Democratic Party thinking? I simply cannot imagine why they were so cozy with the Russians. On a composite basis it does not look good.
23
So tired of this alt right narrative. Show us the proof or shut up.
5
KDolan, if you go to the Washington Post comment boards, you'll find the same posts, almost word for word. The posters have this whole convoluted conspiracy theory that makes no sense at all, they connect the Clinton Foundation, the uranium deal, the Steele dossier, Hillary's emails, and something about a DNC operative who gave all of Hillary's emails to Putin -or something like that. Its really bizarre.
5
Be patient.
2
There is considerable distance between the dossier story and
the organized disinformation and fake ads campaigns on
social media. People should keep in mind the distinction between the two.
Collusion with (veiled) Russian interests is most naturally detected
within the email trails preceding the various fake stories
postings on Facebook et al.
It is beyond unacceptable for the information within Facebook, in particular, about such matters, be they payments, IP addresses, or email server trails,
to be rendered unavailable to investigators.
2
The dems would never stoop to what the Trumps did.
Actually Consorting with the Russians to get DIRT on Hillary.
Yet Trump blasts his bull horn and bellows FOUL !
3
Good. They did this country a great service.
6
Election law experts said candidates and their committees are required to report expenses accurately and in detail, and that civil or criminal penalties can be imposed for failing to do so.
The National Committee and Clinton's campaign funded some of the research by the firm Fusion GPS, but routed the monies through a law firm. Their campaign reports listed no payments to Fusion GPS and the expenses attributed to the law firm Perkins Coie are described as legal work, not opposition research, the paper noted.
This appears to be a crime notwithstanding all of the excuses in these comments. The law allows for civil penalties if an expenditure is misreported unintentionally, but a criminal case could be brought if the misrepresentation is shown to be willful and knowing. If you think this was innocent I have a brige to sel lyou/ http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/357213-clinton-dnc-connections-to-t...
18
For many years, Trump and his associates have interacted with the Russians..case in point, the Miss Universe Contest in St Pet, Russia.
It is alleged some 50% or more of Trump Tower Soho is owned by Russians...many overpaying on what was advertised.
Manaford part of the Russian-Ukranian controversy..with million paid to Manaford, the former campaign manager for Trump.
When all the facts are validated and presented..during the indictments...the nation will be transfixed on this issue..and will be the most prominent story of this decade...
5
Looks to me that the Dems have been well and truly caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
25
So Democrats hired a DC based firm to do opposition research, something done all the time, and this firm sub-contracted
someone British who does not work for our closest ally. His work has turned out to be helpful in the Russia investigation as a number of things in the dossier have turned out to be true. It doesn’t seem that the Dems ever used anything from the research and highly unlikely that they even knew that the DC Firm had sub-contracted to a British National, not that it would have mattered.
7
six million dollar report paid by DNC. Come on!
16
Poor Trump, he'll wait 5 years to see anything come of this , and since Hillary wasn't filing anything herself, it won't be she who takes the heat. Long after Meuller has used the info in the dossier to indict Trump, and Donald Jr, and Kushner, and Manafort and Flynn, and who knows how many others, a minor judge will issue some finding that no one will care about.
Might be more useful to study up on the criminal penalties for money laundering and violations of the emoluments clause, cause thats what's going to be a lot more relevant than a camapaign finance violation.
2
The trial lawyers mantra: When the facts are in your favor, you must argue the facts. When the facts are against you, you must change the subject.
10
I applaud all who funded this investigation of Trump. He is a despicable fraud unleashed on the American public. Also New York times, publish the name of the Republican who originally funded this investigation. Thank you DNC for exposing treason. Trump was under investigation by counter intelligence and FINCEN way before the dossier was released. The fact the dossier is in the Presidents Brief means that it has been corroborated with intelligence collection.
11
Now that we know everyone has colluded with Russia EXCEPT for Trump, I expect a BIG apology to Trump and America for the lies that you all have been spreading for about a year. Everything leads to and from Hillary and always has and many reporters, the FBI, and Democrats knew this. Finally it comes out and I expect an apology. And don't give me the opposition research garbage. Hillary has denied knowing a thing about it for a year. Lies lies and more lies. It was a fictitious story from the get go and that is not opposition research.
26
Really? So Donald Jr did not meet with the Russians, along with the top two campaign managers, knowing full well that the subject was "dirt on Hillary?"
4
Why lie about it Hillary? Comey wrote her exoneration 2 months before she and her 20 staff members were interviews or the laptops were even looked at.
The FBI under Mueller is investigating a Russian bribery scheme and specific people involved in the purchase of a Uranium company in the USA. The FBI apparnetly tells none of the cabinet membersthat are to sign off on the deal or the AG? In the meantime the state dept renews the VISA of one of the surveiled suspects. The FBI refuses to hand over documents to a subpoened by congress.
During this time the head of the State Dept. Hilary Clinton's foundation received 145 million dollars in Russian money. Her husband received half a million dollars for a speech in Russia. Oh....and it turns out the DNC and Hillary Campaign were paying for a DOSSIER on Trump. But yeah...this is just a ruse by the GOP to distract from Trumps tweets. Come on man.
22
Every politician in America can do oppo research except HIllary Clinton.
If Hillary does it it’s a felony.
This is absolutely ridiculous.
8
When Trump Jr. had a meeting with the Russians...the media and commentors on this board basically accussed him of treason. For a meeting mind you...
But when Hilary campaign hires a company to employ a foreign spy....its nothing to see here. Got it. Ever wonder why if the DNC and Hilary were so concerned about the Russians interfering in our elections, why they refused to turn their servers over to the FBI, and NSA for investigation, forensics?
16
Fake research is shady. This will be known as Dossiergate.
SO all of the micro-focused poll taking and personal interviews are somehow different?
ANd let's not start about what some of the corralled [since there WERE NOT FREE] media said about Hillary or President Obama or President Clinton or ..... ignore about President Trump.
Hillary & DNC paid Fusion (via their General Counsel); Fusion paid Steele; Steele got his 'info' (golden showers) directly from the Russians. FBI used dossier to get wire taps on Trump associates. Trump associates were monitored talking to Trump. This story is not going to work out well for Hillary and the Dems.
21
For America to stay independent, it’s Citizens need to think Independent and vote Independent. We no longer have parties, we have gangs. Gangs of racketeers.
11
Independents don't win elections.
1
Call me when evidence emerges that the Clinton campaign worked with a foreign adversary on amassing damaging information about Trump.
3
The difference between today's GOP and those people who created the GOP is night and day. The 'moderns' will be fast to tell you they are merely anti-tax and anti-social services and anti-government but you are a fool if you believe that. They are bereft of those interests, unmoored from them. How or why is this?
It is because the modern GOPers have adopted, simply, a maximum relationship to The-Ends-Justify-Means. It is the final resting place of the far right, before it implodes due to the fact it is empty of any actual value to anyone. The GOP drifted into this state of mind as it listened more and more to its own lies, the ones launched to get uninformed people to support it.
8
Your last sentence applies to the Democrats as well.
8
Worse. Modern day Repubs preach policies that are anti American, anti consumer anti environment. They strictly favor pro big business and lobbyists. They use the cover of anti tax pro self determination but these are lies and deceptions to fool Americans unwilling to look closely at the facts
2
Has Donald J. Trump released his 2016 tax returns to the American public? Has Donald J. Trump made public his financial ties to a particular Iranian Company? Why aren't the Saudis on the U.S. travel restriction list?
This dossier is what it is and Trump needs to level with the American public and not lying. He's hiding something quite important. And it should be exposed.
Until then the Trump supporters and the Trump critics are talking pass each other. Let's talk about Trump's finances.
10
How many times have the republicans admitted they would do what they had to do to destroy HRC? Chaffeetz, Gowdy and McCarthy are all on record in those rare moments of honesty .
And even some on the left live in delusion land that Bernie would have been elected by voters who voted for misogynistic Trump. we didn't get Bernie opposition because he didn't win the nomination.
6
Oh my gosh. Looks like the only person in Washington that didn’t collude with the Russians was....Trump. Right now this is mildly embarrassing for democrats. But when Mueller reports that the Democratic Party was more guilty of malfeasance than Trump was, that will set back the Democratic Party 50 years. And they’re not starting from a good place to begin with.
27
No its not. I am happy and applaud the DNC for supporting this investigation after Republicans dropped the ball. Great job DNC! Trump Treason was exposed.
4
And once again we see the soulless hypocrisy of the Democrats on full display. Presenting themselves as being above those awful mean-spirited Republicans only to fight just as dirty. The reality is the Russia story is just a created fiction Democrats, wanting to ignore their party's real problems of disconnect from many real problems Americans face, blew out of proportion because their identity politics addiction couldn't allow them to hold a woman accountable for a lazy, uninspired campaign that disqualified her from the presidency. It was just easier to blame Russia then show character and blame themselves.
25
Muckraking. This is Political Campaigns 101 and standard practice by both parties for as long as there have been political parties. The feigned ignorance and feigned outrage is nauseating. The self-serving motivation is indistinguishable from one party to the other. Not surprising but still disappointing. And disappointing that each time I vote, to some degree, I support this behavior. I really need to rethink things.
3
It is worth noting that our own intelligence agencies have corroborated much of what was in the dossier. For instance, the dossier documented any number of meetings between the Trump team and the Russians. Our own intelligence has confirmed that those meetings did occur.
11
Meetings are not illegal.....
THose same intelligence agencies have found no collusion between the Russians and the President. Nice try
7
James Clapper said several months ago when he was in Australia that what happened during 2016 election was 1000 times worse than Watergate scandal. This guy who was the head of a national security agency should know something to make such an assertion. Now, it is becoming clear. It appears that Obama's Attorney General told FBI head, Mr. Comey, not to go too far with the Clinton investigation. He Obliged. They used FBI to investigate Trump and his campaign based on orchestrated Russian collusion charges resulted from Russian dossier funded by Hillary. There appears to be a collusion between Hillary campaign and FBI of James Comey. It appears also that Russia duped all these people using fake information. Trump appears to be a victim of conspiracy at the highest level of American government. No wonder why Clapper said what happened in 2016 was 1000 times worse than Watergate.
20
"They used FBI to investigate Trump and his campaign based on orchestrated Russian collusion charges resulted from Russian dossier funded by Hillary."
This is incorrect.
3
why? Otherwise, how they got approval of the court to "wire tap" Trump?
4
Good for them. Hope they got the goods.
1
For all of you questioning what is the big deal, apparently the Democrats effectively hid the payments from public scrutiny, contrary to the requirements of federal law. By law, campaign and party committees must disclose the reason money is spent and its recipient.
The nonprofit Campaign Legal Center alleges this in a lawsuit.
If true, it is a clear violation of the law. How hypocritical is it to excuse this sort of illegal behavior from your dog in the fight while claiming that anything and everything the other dog does is illegal and therefore justifies impeachment? Quick answer - Very hypocritical.
Face it, Hillary was a grifter through and through. That is why she lost.
26
Our politicians sound and act like children. They get caught doing something and the first thing out of the PR machine is that they knew nothing about it and we accept it based upon our party alignment. Are we really that stupid as Americans? Then the spin starts and both sides do it so that is justification. It's just politics.What it really is, is typical childish behavior mastered by all 5 year olds. Unfortunately we the American people accept it and do not hold our politicians to higher standards. The result is the mess we are in today. Perhaps the responders in the comment section should step back and understand we are behaving as pons in the Washington Game of Thrones and expect more from our leaders rather letting them act like the spoiled brats they are. We deserve better from our political leaders in both parties. If not throw them all out!
9
So Manafort and the meeting with the russians at Trump tower and
the intercession of all kinds in the campaign of 2016 were just
not there?
And all the money laundering for all those years, and the Russian ambasaders and all the meetings and stuff with the e-mails were
something else? What else? Like the plans for a Trump tower in
Moscow? All things well known and proven.
And still we have to pretend dear Donald is jest a pure , good unselfish
american? Right?
How stupid can you be?
7
When all else fails--as complicit Republicans derail the congressional investigations but Mr. Mueller's investigation forges steadily ahead--when all else fails, Mr. Trump and his complicit Republicans go back to same old racist and sexist falsehoods and conspiracy theories. Trump's raging mob will never get over the excellence and accomplishments of President Obama and Secretary Clinton.
7
For Republicans there are no rules. Lie, cheat, steal, even bend over backwards for a bozo on steroids, do anything it takes, as long as you win.
The Trump team is very good at playing the press.
5
Opposition research is paid for, not offered as a favor by a foreign government. If anything, this is yet further illustration of how one candidate did not behave legally.
10
The hiker should go on one....maybe to Wisconsin to watch the leaves fall.
1
Nothing with the name "Clinton" in it helps the Democrat's cause. As an independent voter who sometimes voted Republican (but Never Trump) and despises what's happening in Washington, I sincerely hope Clinton will quit making news. She needs to disappear. Her time is over. The Democrats need to find someone else, someone closer to center, so all those folks like me have a reasonable choice to make come election time.
20
Much has been made and will be made of the decision by the Clinton campaign to hire the Perkins Coie law firm to do opposition research on Donald Trump and the decision by the law firm to hire Fusion GPS to manage the investigation.
This ultimately resulted in retaining former British spy, Christopher Steele, to continue digging which he apparently had begun earlier on behalf of a Republican vying against Trump for the nomination.
There is absolutely nothing unseemly, let alone illegal, about any of this. The problem arises from how Hillary Clinton and the Democrats have reacted, since their involvement in the “Steele Dossier” began to be rumored or leaked.
The proper reaction should have been to acknowledge what the campaign lawyers had done and to say that, messy though opposition research can be, the facts uncovered appear to be true.
Instead, there was a lot of hedging. As a result, Donald Trump – whose inappropriate connections with the Russians were revealed – is claiming to be the innocent victim and claiming that the Steele Dossier has been proven false.
One of the things this demonstrates is that Hillary Clinton, usually following the advice of her husband, is an inept politician. She is a bright woman, probably a very good woman and impressive on policy matters. She is also lousy at politicking.
6
For those questioning why it matters who paid for the dossier, do you think that the coal industry or the NRA is going to pay for research that doesn’t support its side of the story? Seriously?
5
That's not the way it works, Midwest Josh. You pay for the research first. Then, if the conclusions don't support your position, they never see the light of day. Only the so-called think tanks set out to find some specific thing to support their views. The researchers doing the actual digging are employees, and they know that their jobs depend upon coming up with the right "facts".
What matters, Midwest Josh, is whether or not the conclusions are true. Here the contractor was a group formerly with the Wall Street Journal (not exactly a left-wing outfit), and the Steele Dossier was actually begun on behalf of a Republican politician. So far, on behalf of the Republican and then the Democrats, the dossier has checked out.
2
I really don't understand what all the fuss is about this "startling revelation". Is anyone really so naive as to believe that digging for dirt on political opponents is not standard-issue politics? I mean sure, it's dirty and underhanded and all, but ALL politicians do it. It's SOP for politicos, especially at the Presidential level. Anyone who thinks their side doesn't engage in this sort of thing is deluding themselves.
This is just another in a long line of so-called "bombshells" about HRC that really aren't bombshells at all. Of course, that will not stop Trump Repugnantkins from taking full advantage of the story to bolster their false claims to the moral high ground. And, of course, his supporters will eat it up like hotcakes, chanting "Lock 'er up!" all the while.
The circus continues.
8
Judging by what we're hearing, there may be some basis to do just that.
2
Every FEW WEEKS there is some revelation, statement or action that is embarrassing for the Democrats.
Every DAY OR TWO, there is some revelation, statement or action that should be embarrassing for the Republicans.
However, apparently, Republicans are not so easily embarrassed.
8
The investigation into Russian attempts to influence our election is beyond any reasonable doubt. Julian Assange TODAY said that the Trump campaign, via Bannon's Cambridge Analytica, reached out to him to hack the eMails, a truly criminal act. There's no equivalence with a campaign doing negative research on the opposition candidate, which is what the Dossier is, nothing more.
10
But the DNC and HRC-2016 Campaign paid for this opposition research the usual way. Cash. The Trumps are obviously still paying Putin with favors for their opposition research and influence.
9
Of course this a big story, and the American people lose regardless of the outcome. A major party and campaign colluded and paid $12 million plus for the Russian dossier. Now our government will spend untold tens of millions to investigate. And our fourth estate will report on this, at the expense of getting ahead of other critical stories, like the dismantling of consumer protection banking laws.
11
The dossier didn't cost $12 million dollars. That was the amount the campaign and the DNC paid to Perkins Coie, the campaigns and the DNC's lawyers. The amount paid to Fusion was far less.
3
This is not going to end well for the Democrats.
They don't control the government.
No favors to give out or punishment to hand out.
AND
The Republicans can convene grand juries and prosecute.
And, they will.
12
Thank you for allowing comments on this article. It took a good amount of courage.
11
I so agree. It isn't like the Times reported about the meaningless emails ad nauseum
4
Newsflash! Presidential campaigns do negative research and employ professionals to do it!
The fact that Republicans were the original clients for this research means it was standard research. The Clinton and DNC money picked it up later which was perfectly normal.
What was abnormal is that a man who is now president had multiple ties to Russians during the campaign at the same time that Russians were engaged in the largest ever cyberattack of US elections to help Trump. All of the 20 or so meetings between his staff and Russians were covered up. There were constant lies about every single meeting until the Trump people were forced by evidence or witnesses to admit to them.
The dossier is only part of the investigation which is much more extensive. All U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Russia interfered to help Trump.
7
The really bad part is once asked whether they were involved, they lied about it.
27
Progress. Donald Trump touts something first reported by the Washington Post. The President of the United States can finally tell the difference berween an apple and a banana.
3
What he's saying is that a broken clock is right twice a day.
**The president and his allies have argued for months that the investigations are politically motivated.**
SO, who wins this round?
8
I'm guessing Mueller. More evidence. Time will tell.
3
The New York Times already reported this on January 11, 2017.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-intel...
This is not news. Why is it being recycled?
5
Your links points to PAGE NOT FOUND.
3
I share Brian Fallon’s opinion 100%. This isn’t a big “nothing burger.” They’ll be worse. The delusional republicans who steadfastly support Trumplandia morals live on denial island. It is a cold and cynical place which erodes the United States standing in world politics.
6
The bigger issue is that the creators of the dossier pled the fifth.
So much for standing by your product.
13
Nobody "pled the fifth" and there was no crime. The issue to disclose was a matter of attorney client privilege.
7
What difference does it make whether HC or DNC partially paid for the dossier? Would it be more credible if the dossier was free? It makes no difference if the Dems said they paid for it earlier this year or yesterday. The real story is whether the stuff in the dossier is true or not. Let's find out and see who's fake. Don't be fooled by yet another misdirection play by the man Trump.
17
I will never get over the delusions of partisans who believe that the party they most agree with is more moral than the other. Both parties show over and over that they are rotten to the core, though there are good people in them. Politics and power just corrupts people.
I didn't vote for either of the two unsuitable candidates, and I wouldn't be surprised at anything either Trump or Clinton did.
18
If you voted for a third party candidate or did not vote, then every single action and policy of the Trump administration is on your hands and those others who helped elect this unstable unfit man.
5
What Clinton did was typical opposition research. They did nothing wrong. Strange basis to chastise someone as "rotten to the core." So long as voters accept vague innuendo over facts we will continue to make bad choices.
3
Yesssss! Also didn't vote for either and also disgusted with the political parties addiction to unethical behavior.
Of course, Hillary and the DNC supported and financed the "Russian Dossier " thing that is a part of the political "hit job" that is now going on with the "hearings". If they could have paid to have the guy "taken out" physically, they would have done that too. But unless planeloads of "Russians" landed on my block and helped me elect Chuck Schumer, who cares?
We know the political parties are sleaze, we know our media picks favorites. All I want is for the corrupt political parties to bow out after the votes are counted and let the representatives they helped elect do the job we pay them for.
3
I can't believe how many readers are dismissing this as no big deal. It is a big deal and I wish the Times made the piece even more prominent on the front page. If it wasn't a big deal, the Clinton folks would have acknowledged their role much sooner. 12.5 million dollars. So much money. Spent on this. I'm disgusted by this in the same manner I'm disgusted by Trump.
23
Would you be more content if it had been free? All that matters is what's in it and whether it's true.
4
So the dossier that in part led to the FBI bugging Trump's people was paid for by Clinton's people? Now if Steele was knowingly passing on information some of which was provided by Russia sources will Hillary be investigated for collusion with Russia?
26
According to that story there is no collusion. That's called opposition research, which was paid for, not a conspiracy or quid pro quo.
Collusion by the Trump campaign was a conspiracy to work with the Russians to change the outcome of our presidential election.
6
So, someone had to pay for it. What's important is whether or not the information is factual and revealing.
10
Even if the information came from Russians??? If so, what's the big deal with the Trump campaign doing the same? After all what was revealed supposedly through the Russians against Clinton that might have influenced voters was her emails, which she never said were false.
5
This is another episode in which we witness the manipulation of Trump voters. It is absurd to suggest there is anything nefarious about opposition research in which a former British spy who is knowledgeable about Russia is hired to look for evidence of the Trump campaign colluding with the Russian government or being blackmailed by it.
Unfortunately, that logical explanation is too complex for the simplistic thinking of Trump voters. Say what you will about the incompetence of Republican politicians. They are MASTERS of controlling the narrative because they understand the limited intelligence of the Republican voter.
The great divide that is more evident every day is the bell-shaped curve of intelligence at work. We saw it play out in the red herring of Hillary’s emails. We are apparently going to witness another similar episode
11
So? Nixon hired people to sneak around Watergate and get evidence against his political opponents, Republicans have done it too
3
Nixon's people broke the law. BIG difference.
5
This is not a story. 1. David Corn revealed it in 2016. 2. It doesn't matter who paid for dossier. The only question is what is true and what is false? It appears that the part that says Trump is Putin's puppet is true and that, consciously or not, Trump is committing treason. There is no story.
13
are you really that clueless... Trump has been accuse of colluding with the Russians but it turns out Hillary was..... John Podesta ( hillary chairman ) even hired paul Manufort to do some research for them using his Russian contacts.... you remember paul , the guy the dems are accusing of colluding with RUSSIA.. ..
6
This is old news this came out last summer, the problem was the news media was so rapped around following Trump, that you guys missed it. Like you missed the whole Russia interference that came out early April or May time frame.
11
The problem is how it was managed by Clinton. Who cares if NY Times readers already knew the history? This will be seen by most people as new and discrediting information. Trump will now be able to blow enough smoke to reduce everything to he said / she said. The congressional investigations are already splintering over this. People say she was so qualified. Really? What situation did she ever manage that ended well? I can't think of one.
11
What situation did she ever manage that turned out well?
To refresh your memory, Hillary Clinton got healthcare for millions of indigent children, initiated the cessation of the Iranian nuclear program, and assisted in the capture and murder of Osama bin Laden.
8
I don't care who funded it. I want to know if what's in it is true.
16
The DNC better get it's act together. They slimed Senator Sanders, and anointed HRC, because "It was her turn". Get back to the financial inequality, in this country, put forth a plan to finance infrastructure, stop the neoliberal agenda of taking money from Wall Street, the Industrial Military Complex, Big Pharm, and the rest of the monied interests. Get back to your roots. Try the Republican Eisenhower's platform from the 1950's,better yet the agenda of FDR, then our country may have a chance to escape the head sewer rat, and his sycophants.Yes I voted for HRC.
17
This piece is proof of objective journalism. Most articles are about Trump, which are mostly negative (and truthful). This shows the rats are on both sides.
11
Who paid for it has nothing to do with whether or not it's true. Personally, I wold like to know more about The President of the United States and Russian hookers. I have an inquiring mind.
13
Yo Democrats!If you had the dossier prior to election day,why oh why didn't you release it???
7
Because we have integrity? Tough concept, I know.
2
So? Are you implying that this fact negates all of the information that was uncovered? Are you implying that they are breaking barriers here that should be left to stand? Are you implying that it is none of our business how involved our President, his family, and his aides are with a hostile foreign government?
7
It's called protecting yourself. It's ironic that they didn't do a much better job of protecting the atmosphere around the campaign by sending a larger contingent [if one could be found] down to Trump's level & fighting back.
Yes, we know that the Clinton people never thought they needed to do that. But we also know from the dastardly 2004 'Swift Boat' attacks on John Kerry's war activity that if you don't counter vicious rightwing slander, too many Americans will believe it. We (Americans) are hardly awash in critical thinking. Look at the way they gobble up shock radio.
6
The Left is desperate to tie some anonymous GOP client of Fusion GPS to the the Steele dossier. Not gonna wash.
A simple examination of the timeline shows that Steele was not hired by Fusion until Marc Elias engaged the firm to establish a tie between Trump and Russia and plant the story with MSM. Whatever work they might have done for another client prior to the hiring of Steele is unrelated to the production and use of the dossier.
The fact remains that Steele openly admits that his sources were Russian intelligence agents. Are we supposed to believe that none of those Russian agents had ties to the Kremlin and were not providing disinformation?
Putin's government was using Steele and the Clinton campaign to affect the US election.
That is the real "collusion" with Russia - by the Clinton campaign.
The Steele dossier has been used to undermine trust in the integrity of the US election system, obtain FISA warrants for surveillance of political opponents, and to trigger Congressional investigations and an appointed special counsel.
Putin is creating chaos and undermining our democracy thanks to Hillary Clinton, the MSM, and the Resistance who are unable to accept an election loss.
21
Bingo; someone speaking the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
W/that said; good luck trying to get most of those on this comment site to understand such a clear explanation of this issue; most of them are so blindly partisan to be completely detached from reality..........
8
Why is it surprising that the Clinton campaign paid for opposition research, a standard practice of all campaigns. The only question should be whether or not the information in the dossier is factual. I have read nothing that disputes the factual veracity of anything in the dossier.
4
You haven't read anything because you didn't want to read anything.
8
Many commenters seem to miss the central irony: Clinton and the DNC went abroad and hired a Brit to tap into Russian networks to compile information that could be used to influence an American election. This is not the same as the alleged collusion with the Russian government, which has not yet been even slightly proven, but it's not that different, either. Democrats should no longer act like some red line is crossed if you recruit foreign aid to undercut an American candidate.
22
That sums it up!
4
Hiring a foreigner and acting on behalf of a foreign government are completely different things.
3
I wonder out loud, and contemplate the fallout thereof, if Mr. Mueller’s inquiry into Russian interference with the the 2016 presidential election ends up pointing to the Clinton campaign instead of the Trump campaign.
16
It won't. Don't mistake smokescreens for fire.
4
I may be missing something here, but if the Dossier is accurate, does it matter who funded it?
9
If it was accurate, why did Hillary and the Democrats take such pains to conceal their involvement?
9
This makes for some fun debating and talking points, but it won't save Donald's career once Mueller comes knocking.
8
The biggest problem in the election is that we had two terrible candidates to choose between. Most voters held their noses when they voted.
8
This was the easiest choice in 40 years, and the country blew it due to the electoral college and a misinformed electorate.
6
The Russia investigation will not produce any results. Congress will release partisan reports and Mueller will conclude that there is no evidence of collusion. This is all very predictable. Liberals need to forget about this investigation now. The era of labeling political opponents criminals needs to end anyway. Trump may be guilty but that does not even matter because 40% of the country will never believe it and will forever think that their president was wronged. Trump was elected and the only way to get rid of him now is to vote for somebody else next time. Anything else is a distraction that has the potential to produce big disappointments for liberals in 2018. The campaign for the mid-terms needs to start now, on policy and not by trading accusations of treason. Liberals should start by asking themselves why they are neck and neck in the Virginia governor race against Gillespie. If you listen to certain liberal fantasies that should not be the case because Trump and by association the GOP are so unpopular. Sounds familiar? Well, we have heard it before. I mean there is no way that Trump can win, right?
9
Before I opened the comments I k ew the hillarybashing would be extreme. And of course the false equivalencies are rampant. Trying to find info that trump collided with the Russians is very different from colliding with the Russians
And the new investigations opened up by republicans into obama and Clinton are just distractions.
To republicans who voted for trump how again are these distractions making your life better?
5
The Clinton campaign would have been negligent if it had not done opposition research on Trump. I think so much scandalous material being dug up by the media on Trump there was no real reason to publish the report. The Clinton team didn't realize the damage that had been done to their candidate by the right wing hate machine. I'm sure our own intelligence agencies have a lot more dirt on Trump than the Democrats ever had. It is their job to keep track of Russian agents here after all.
6
This is not a story. All you got is one lawyer said he didn’t have the dossier and yet he facilitated paying for it. That’s not a story. There is no “shady behavior by democrats” here. If you mean to imply that the Democrats shouldn’t have funded this project, consider the fact that the FBI thought it was worth paying for and are using as the basis of their investigation into Trump.
7
This looks like yet another faux "scandal" with overly salacious headlines by the media, including the Times, to make it look like Hillary did something nefarious. She didn't. She hired a DOMESTIC firm to do research for her, and that's how they came across this. Also, they didn't publish it. Buzzfeed did. Meanwhile, the guy who is actually in office colluded with a foreign nation to usurp our democracy at every turn. THAT'S what should be the focus of everyone from Congress to the media to the FBI to American citizens. I don't care that Hillary did what normal people campaigning do. Not only did she want to win the election, she wanted to protect our nation from foreign influence which was so obviously taking place. There is no controversy here.
9
In your face and you still deny.
8
@Cummings. The difference is right and wrong. Legal and illegal.
3
About all those of us who are sane can do is to point out that oppo research is a legal, regular part of political campaigns, that the Republicans started this particular ball rolling, that Clinton's campaign picked up the ball after Trump got nominated, that it would be unusual for a Presidential candidate to take time and check into who was researching what.
Yes, the campaign sure seems to've lied, in saying, "Nope, not us." Whoop-de-do. Not illegal, just politically stupid, and Clinton ain't President, so who cares?
And none of the whoop-de-do addresses what ought to concern the whoopers: is Donald Trump in Putin's pocket? Did he collude with Russia to warp the election? Did Trump employ people who colluded with Russia, and took money for it?
I think the answer to all that is mostly yes, but I do not know. And neither do you.
Oh, by the way: any of you whoopers and bellowers complain when gambling tycoons and wealthy businessmen comissioned books and movies spraying lies about John Kerry? About Hillary Clinton?
Didn't think so.
7
$12.5mn paid to create a document that has no stuff in it?
If, after paying this obscene sum, the dirt they sought really was dirty, does anyone think that Hillary would have taken a rain check on it?
Looks like the only entity that bought that nonsense was FBI under Comey, and it is evident that this investigation by Muller should focus on FBI's role in lending credence to this worthless dossier and in perpetuating the myth about Russian influence.
Haul up Hillary before the Congressional committees and have her explain her thinking and role in all this mess.
12
Great idea ! Let's " Haul up Hillary..." because this is so much more important than healthcare, infrastructure, tax reform, Iraq, Afghanistan......
4
Psst..........nice deflection there........keep it up............
The mystery man, big GOP donor was Jeb Bush, many sources are releasing. Thus the preemptive attack on Trump from GW and Obama at the Houston event. The Trump loyal alliance is attempting to take out the GHW Bush crime family (Clinton/Obama included) and its a treat to watch. Additionally, Thursday's JFK file release will expand on the JE Hoover docs showing Bush lied to congress when being interviewed for CIA chief in 1976 that he was just an oil man, saying there must have been another George Bush Texas oil man at the CIA in 63. Docs say he was in CIA since 1961 and doc shows he was in Dallas calling Hoover on Nov 22 1963. Hope it gets some traction in the awakening but still censored US press. Here is the article from the NYT in 1988 detailing it:
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/11/us/63-fbi-memo-ties-bush-to-intelligen...
Its time to promote country over party and drop the DNC/GOP and any idea of only two parties. The spirit of goodness is overtaking the evil crime syndicate that has run the world since 1947 (Fed, CIA, Bush/Clintons, etc.). The clearing is now unstoppable and the bounty of this great country will now return to its people. Thanks to the guy everyone loves to hate thanks to the press...Donald Trump.
3
Why is this news now? I recall when the dossier was released that reporters mentioned it had been funded first by GOP rivals and then taken over by Dems.
And does anyone still doubt the validity of the dossier? This guy Steele was not a political hack- he had bonafide insider connections and the assertions fit entirely well with what we now know: Trump collusion was real and so was the Golden Shower with Russian hookers.
8
What is the point of this story? We found out that someone close to the Clinton campaign paid for Oppo? So? A Republican operative paid for it first, right? Again, SO?
Why is the NYTimes dredging this up again? Why won't the NYTimes focus on the fact that the dossier is ringing more clearly true as each blindingly perverse day of this administration passes by?
The administration has done their Oppo on the NYTimes, and apparently it's working.
Easy distraction for the 36% of the country who will believe anything Hannity and Alex Jones will say.
Egregious and irresponsible.
14
"Nothing to see hear folks. Fake news. Move along"
3
There's nothing wrong with opposition research. The only thing wrong in the last election was the constant hammering of Republican committees on a set of Clinton emails because she used a private server—just like practically the whole Trump cabinet used private email accounts for government business. But no Republican committees have raised a hue and cry about that, of course.
There are only four important questions: is any part of the "dossier" in question true? If so, do the Russians have leverage on Donald Trump & Co. And did Donald Trump & Co. collude with the Russians in influencing the election? If so, was that collusion illegal?
7
And you don't know the difference between a private server and a private email account?
2
There is nothing new in this. This has been reported for months, indeed the first reports about the Steele Dossier mentioned this.
There is also nothing wrong with this.
Finally, you left out the part were the FBI paid Steele after the election.
3
this is really scary; it means the US government and its intelligence agencies used a fabricated report, paid for by a government candidate (clinton), to justify eavesdropping and spying on the opposition. What is to keep trump from using the same strategy to justify spying on his opponents in 2020? We are now going down the path to dictatorship begun by the democrats no less.
21
Well Said..
4
The problem is that it is true with most of the dossier having been confirmed by intelligence agencies.
True, as opposed to the 1,300 lies documented by Trump since his inauguration alone.
The main person contributing was the top expert on Russia in Britain's MI6 intelligence agency, someone who is highly credible.
Trump conspired with Russians to win the election. His people met almost 20 times with Russians and lied about it.
Trump people though will support him if he shoots someone on Fifth Ave., and enjoy paying their life savings for a degree from fraudulent Trump U.
1
Wherever you fall on the politics of this, please be precise on timing. According to the Washington Post which broke the story yesterday, an unnamed Republican initially retained Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research during the primaries. After the Republican stopped paying, Marc Elias retained Fusion GPS on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC in April 2016 to continue its work and it was only then that Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele.
5
Who paid for the dossier is not nearly as important as (a) the veracity of its contents, but more importantly (b) what our government is now doing to prevent further Russian interference in our 2018 and 2020 elections. "There's no fuzz on this. They'll be back," Jim Comey warned. The complete inaction from the federal government on this unprecedented attack on our democracy is the real story.
5
How did I already know that Democrats had funded the opposition research for the dossier?
Perhaps because that highly likely fact was disclosed when the dossier first appeared in the press?
This is not "news." It is a diversion from Trump Republicans' open and notorious treason against the United States, which includes Trump's public request that the Russians spy on Clinton.
Why are the media pretending we did not already know all this? To sell papers the same way the sold papers by publishing Trump's outrageous campaign lies?
This nation is hopeless.
46
I, as well, have been aware that the Democrats took over payment for this dossier for quite some time. I support an investigation; I'm more than ready to be done with the whole sordid mess.
This is not news. This is distraction.
So after almost one year reading about this Trump Russia dossier brohahua turned out it was all a Clinton/democrat campaign implant?! Gesszas Christ I’m glad i didn’t spend more time reading about this stupidity.
10
Lies of omission and commission by HC that paid for agitprop from Russia...tsk..tsk..tsk..The Democrats really need to get their act together. The GOP hired this firm too, but did not get the Russkies involved, but please keep deluding yourselves that they did...C'mon people, let's support politicians that are not so corrupt, like Bernie...
8
Why is this news? Isn't this right out of Campaigning and Politics 101?
6
Ha, ha, ha, ha.......who colluded?
12
am I sure I'm not reading FOX? what is it with the NYT?? why have you joined those GOP losers always looking to incriminate Hillary?? she lost, remember - Donald won, end of story - right?? enough already ...
3
David Corn broke this story a year ago in Mother Jones. Why is the NYT (AND Wapo) lying and acting like this is some sort of revelation? Have you no pride whatsoever?
Further, opposition research is legal, and what the original GOP donor and then DNC/HRC campaign funders found makes it clear that the Trump campaign, in collusion with Putin and GOP leadership willing to hide any crime, indiscretion, and act of moral depravity if they could just coup all three branches of the federal government, was/is - in fact - both corrupt and criminal.
So, why are you going on about the DNC's role beyond thanking them for bringing this info to the attention of the FBI?
There is no conspiracy against Dolt45 and the fascist wing of the GOP. There are law abiding, decent people desperately trying to save us from full on authoritarian fascism.
Pick a team, NYT.
9
You seem to have an astute understanding of good journalism.
1
I'm shocked that this story is basically buried 10 deep in all the mainstream media. If the Clintons were GOP this would've been front page news, blown up as the biggest political scandal in US history. The NYT's bias is so blatant it's getting to be shameful, are you still the top newspaper in the country? Where is your objectivity?
The WSJ had an editorial yesterday that basically laid out clearly the role that Robert Mueller, James Comey and the FBI played in the Clinton-Uranium One scandal. This dossier even involved Obama, who used it as fodder to launch an investigation into the bogus Russian collusion story on Trump, to save his own legacy. This whole thing stinks to high heaven and needs to be busted wide open.
If Jeff Sessions were a real attorney general he would step up now and fire Robert Mueller and his enabler, deputy AG Rosenstein, who were both involved in the cover up. This whole Trump-Russia collusion fairy tale needs to end. The focus must now turn to Mueller himself, as well as Comey, their boss Loretta Lynch, Susan Rice, Obama and Clintons themselves. They are the vampire squids of the DC swamp.
The Obama admin is easily one of the most corrupt of all time, and it happened under the watch of a fawning mainstream media, who instead of being the government watchdog became the government propaganda machine. Shame on you NYT, you allowed this to happen by turning a blind eye, just like the whole Weinstein scandal. NYT has zero credibility left.
21
Come on New York Times. Spin this story. Tell us how you were only reporting the "facts", and not part of this unimaginable lie for the past year. Tell us how great, how deeply insightful and probing your reporters are. Tell us how you aren't in bed with the lying team of Comey, Mueller, the megalomaniac, forever lying Clinton crime family and that phony, money laundering Clinton Family Trust. Tell us how the mud you have been slinging at Donald Trump for two years now was totally appropriate and certainly impartial and not personal. Tell us how it feels to even have to write this story with a straight face and how you people are not even remotely derelict in your duty. It's pathetic how your editors and reporters can sit behind the protection of the 1st Amendment and not be thrown in jail for fostering an attempted coup d'etat of this President, but I guess that's the price we honest folks have to pay for the 2nd Amendment. Ironic, isn't it. Oh, I'm not a political reporter, just a poor country doctor. But let me give you a prediction. This story you just published will only be the tip of the iceberg. This is one festering abscess that has just erupted, and you will have plenty of really, really ugly stories to report during the upcoming months. Making America Great Again, one disproved lie after another after another after another! It's only the beginning.
17
God bless you sir; we need more men such as yourself in this country; from your lips to God's ears as regards your comments........
3
Karma's a b....
12
This is not breaking news! The Guardian broke the story in January! The question should be how much of the dossier is true!
10
Oh, good, now we know what we already knew: Republican dark money got the research going and handed it over to the Dems when trump's nomination was a foregone conclusion.
This is only one of Nunes, Gowdy's tactics to muddy the fact that many claims in the dossier have already been proved.
The bigger story is the announcement of their investigation into the Uranium One deal and trying to tie it to the FBI investigation into Russian fraud in the industry....because, at the time of this investigation and conclusion of the case: Mueller was the FBI Director; McCabe was Asst. Director, FBI and Rosenstein was the US AG in charge of the fraud case. This is the real target.
A pre-emptive strike in an attempt to discredit Mueller's investigation in the event it goes bad for trump. If Mueller's investigation clears trump, the Republican efforts will still have left a bucketful of slime on the Dems...they and trump will be screaming Clinton, Obama, Russia, Mueller, uranium forever and well into 2018 and 2020.
Republicans are masters at this type of scheming. Wake up, Dems, you always under-estimate just what republicans are prepared to do to keep power. If Republicans had had such a "dossier" on Clinton during the campaign they'd have ensured every soul in the world had a personal copy: until there's a different explanation, I will assume that the Clinton campaign did not release the dossier on Trump because they hadn't verified its contents...ah, Dems are just too nice!
7
The fact that Democrats had funded the gathering of this information is irrelevant. All political campaigns conduct opposition research. This is a non-story, but the Times has now given right-wingers a chance to say "Aha" and muddy the waters. The Times should be better than this, but then again, I've waited all year for them to acknowledge that they overhyped the issue of Hillary's emails.
7
We owe all of those who funded this research for warning us that we were preparing to put a traitor in the White House. Unfortunately, Trump's base doesn't mind if the Kremlin runs our government. Sad!
3
... meanwhile the DNC and HRC campaign was colluding with Russian operatives in an attempt to rig the election in HRCs favor. Oh, and they were colluding with the US media to rig the debates in favor of HRC. And the lefties actually expect sane people to sign up for their brand of crazy?
14
I think it was Megan Kelly who admitted in her book, long after the fact, that Fox News fed answers to Trump? It was for some reason a non-story.
Let me break this down for all the outraged Fox viewers in terms you can understand.
Some of this is speculative - but if confirmed would justify the anger and frustration on the Left. Now remember the information isn’t simple, so try to get through this and remember the main points. Ready?
Trump Facts:
-Lied repeatedly about contact with Russian government or her proxies (suspicious but normally not criminal except for here, where it was done on clearance forms)
-Sought secret backchannel communications with Moscow before taking office (suspicious but not necessarily criminal, unless...)
-MAY have coordinated (colluded) directly with Russian government to:
a) steal information from DNC servers (which is a crime, btw)
b) release information stolen by Russia to influence the election (another crime, ahem treason)
c) cover-up financial ties to Russian government, whether covering past money-laundering through real estate transactions or future deals steered to Trump once president (both crimes).
The argument out of Fox is apparently “But Hillary did it, too!” Except she didn’t.
Hillary hasn’t lied about Fusion GPS, did not steal information or solicit it from a foreign government, and has no undisclosed financial ties to a hostile power. Period. Yes, the argument on the left mostly rests on the speculative being true on at least one count. But this false equivalency being sold to you is for low-information voters, and you should stop being one. There’s no excuse.
4
WASHINGTON — The presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee paid for research that was included in a dossier made public in January that contained salacious claims about connections between Donald J. Trump, his associates and Russia.
Salacious, UNPROVEN claims. This is why many readers consider your political coverage to be highly partisan.
8
The dossier was just the Executive Summary.
1
Oh, trump now says that he is a "victim"?!?!?! Please, give us a break!
But it was fine and dandy when the Russians called Don, Jr. to tell him that they had dirt on Hillary, and they wanted to come and see him about it! He replied: "I LOVE IT!"
They all try to dig up dirt on each other, the only difference is that the trumps were colluding with a hostile power, and Secretary Clinton and the DNC (and whichever republican hired Fusion GPS to begin with) were dealing with Britain, a friendly nation. It is only a crime when you conspire with a power that is hostile to the interests of the United States of America.
4
Send the Clinton Cabal to jail. Hillary is toxic to the USA and to the Democratic Party. If Hillary had not been the nominee, Trump would not be president. She was an accomplishment-less flawed candidate, who despite all of her conniving (getting the DNC to actively work against Bernie, using The Clinton Foundation to sell influence, her Russian dealings, etc.) and record campaign spending still lost to Trump. That's saying a lot.
10
This headlines is misleading - the Republicans initially funded it? Why not say so? This is where Trump gets an idge about his Fake Press Mantra
3
A number of right wing news sites seem to be going ballistic today over this story in the NYT. (I admit that I cannot understand why the Times felt this story was newsworthy.) And there's heavy promoting of the old uranium deal story on FOX. Trump was talking about both of them this morning. Odd, two old stories, and nothing newsworthy about either of them, all of a sudden dominating the coversation on TV and social media.
So I think this means that an indictment is coming very soon. Its it Flynn or Manafort?
3
You are truly an optimist!
1
For those too lazy to read the entire article and related news stories, this group was a GOP hire. Apparently the RNC loathed Trump and his henchmen too.
Imagine that.
4
Nice try...The Dems brought the Russians in when the GOP walked away...but keep thinking you know the 'real' story....
3
The Russia conspiracy is and always was a plant by the DNC and HRC campaign to deflect attention from the undisputed fact that they were colluding with the media to rig the election in favor of HRC. The DNC is riddled with corruption. But please lefties, continue the denial and conspiracy theories.
12
The DNC is officially the most rotten, backwards, and corrupt political institution in the modern era.
12
This should have been the full, front page headline of the NYT today. Specially when this ludicrous Russia-Trump collusion investigation was propelled by allegations made in this fabricated dossier.
So Mueller as the then head of the FBI helped pay for the creation of this fake dossier, and now Mueller himself is heading the investigation of the Russia collusion brought up by this fake dossier that Mueller helped pay for. I don't think SNL is gonna take this one up.
11
Try rereading for detail this time.
Who cares who paid for it! Is it true? C'mon, Mueller! Tick tock.
2
This has gotta be the biggest non-story. Of course Clinton and the Democrats paid for it. And there's nothing wrong with that. As they say, all's fair...
Move along folks. This time, really, there's nothing to see here.
30
Really and truly!
"Move along folks"
The mantra of the left.
Sorry, with all of the corruption and criminal stunts Hillary and her "Foundation" are involved with, we will NOT move along.
4
This issue in not only who paid for it but who did they pay, what did they pay for and how was it used........
Try a little critical thinking when reading the article again.......
4
Why is Trump upset about this story? It was first reported in the Washington Post, which Trump has dubbed "Fake News".
So by his standards, this story is untrue; Hillary and the DMC had nothing to do with it.
No!!! Don't tell me Trump has a double standard. I can't bear it!
6
How quick they are to open investigations into Clinton possible payment and how slow they are to investigate their own candidate's possible collusion. How thorough and constant they were on Benghazi investigation and supposed cover-up but until a reporter brought it up two weeks later were they even asking why four of our soldiers died in Niger?
Until I see the same enthusiasm for investigating potential problems it's just more partisan self-protection and division. Even worse, they accomplish nothing. The Republican congress is a bunch of losers, terrified of losing such a cushy gig.
It is very unfortunate that “opponent research “ has become THE standard operating procedure for any office higher than council in a village so small that everyone knows all the gossip without hiring a team of legal hitmen.
The only difference between this campaign and any other in investigation terms is that one bunch of freelancers took money from BOTH sides, apparently without revealing a, to ne polite, major conflict of interest.
That’s a surprise for two reasons - a violation of ethics on the PI’s part, and, most of all the truth that these guys generally work for a single party’s candidates.
I mean I wad shocked after the first Bill Clinton campaign that James ‘the Ragin’ Cajun’ representative of any Democrat who could afford his team married Mary Matlin who felt the same about the GOP.
I knew James from his work for the late Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D (of course) NJ, and to be quite honest, found h a better story than the candidate.
The strongest “bad word” im his vocabulary was ‘Republican ‘ and I was shocked, to say the least when, job done, he married the woman holding the same post on the Bush camp, (and am happy for them that they remain in wedded bliss).
Hiring investigators is a political fact of life. The shocker here is not mentioned in the unfair headline implying the DNC dod something dishonest or unethical - it’s that Trump paid for the report too!
Stop burying your ledes, folks.
Will someone explain what is scandalous about this? Fox News is calling for Hillary's head on a plate over this.
2
Why are you publishing only part of the story (which, by the way, is not new)? Why don't you say that Republicans initially hired Fusion as opposition research on Trump while he was still one of the GOP candidates, then dropped it when it became apparent he'd be the candidate? At that point, the Democrats picked it up, but THEY DID NOT INITIATE IT!! Nor do you say that the FBI picked it up, indicating that it had legitimacy! The ``news'' article you published could have originated in its entirety on Fox news, a Sinclair outlet or Breitbart. I am mystified by this shoddy reporting, but it isn't the first example from the Times. I regard you less and less as a reputable source. I won't believe anything you print unless I can verify it with another source. (I also know, regrettably, that your ombudsman won't have any problems with it.)
3
A two second Google search shows reporting from at least January 2017 that as yet un-named Republicans started this oppo research that was then taken over by Democrats. Why is there such shock now that political parties do - gasp -politics??
How this was framed conflates typical politics with the information uncovered that Russia was attacking during the campaign. The Obama administration should have made this much more clear to voters. This attack is still being investigated We need to understand this to protect our democracy. How is that a partisan idea?
No one is well served by continuing to willfully confuse these two points. And certainly the NYT should stop being a party to this nonsense. The giant baby has already proclaimed his victimhood and will no doubt next be explaining how Hillary forced him to hire men who should have registered as foreign agents and how she forced all those staffers to lie repeated about meeting with Russians.
4
The real crime is that most people who worked for the Clintons, were involved in Hillary's campaign and who were supoened, have all pleaded "the fifth." Hillary's meeting with the DOJ was not even recorded, nor did she have to swear under oath when testifying. . Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin also got a free pass. Hillary calls the Russian uranium story "baloney...has been around for years, and no credible evidence has been found..." Correct, because the Obama administration, the DOJ, the FBI, and the Treasury department all looked the other way and protected the Clintons. The MSM and the entire democrat party are also bad actors in this entire saga.
15
Ironic that the lefts hopeful savior Mueller may turn around and smack the democrats after he reveals what everyone knows, even if they are not willing/able to admit, that Trump did nothing wrong.
Karma is a beach.
8
On one side of the political divide, you have the Trump apologists, on the other you have the Clinton faithful and in the middle you have 40% of the country, contemplating a move to Canada.
5
And imagine - we were thisclose to having this fraudulent woman as our President.
15
So we know who the Dem operative is. All that's left is to find out who started the ball rolling from the Repub side. I suspect Cruz but praying it was Mike Huckabee. Love to see Sarah defend that from the podium.
37
I think it's Cruz too.
That will be interesting to know but fairly unimportant now.
1
So the tell-all book of “what happened” really wasn’t what happened, huh, Hillary?
8
The Dossier was fabricated, the DNC knew this, then they peddled it as truth and denied they had any connection. Today we learn differently. It further's the fact that Mrs. Clinton is a corrupt, power hungry individual who would stoop to doing just about anything to have sat in the oval office. Disgusting.
5
Full blown Clinton boggyman deflection tactic is in play. Wow! Meanwhile as the GOP lawmakers dismantle all consumer protections next door.
2
I have said all along that the Russia collusion story about the elections was made up. In essence, sour grapes. Now you have proof. The reason it was not published: they did not find anything. Trump was brilliant when he asked about who funded this dossier. End this waste-of-time Russia investigation.
Now, the real Russian collusion involves the Clintons, Russia, and uranium one. This is going to prove to be a real travesty.
11
Amazing how all of you liberals now are making excuses for this behavior after shouting about this dossier at the top of your lungs for a year. It was the Clinton Campaign, the DNC and the FBI that directly paid for information from Russian informants and intelligence officials. Your party and your candidate are the ones that made up this whole thing. And now there's multiple investigations with no boundaries going on and an even more deeply divided country. This is all extremely shady. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. You're no American, you're traitors.
8
Is it time to start chanting once again those three words that begin with "Lock Her?"
6
The Democrats are going down.
6
What about the fact that ALL of this was public information, and known to the FBI before the election, but not publicized? Read this: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/whats-up-with-the-times-piece-on-eli...
The NY Times left out some very important, damning information.
Or no one can confirm point 1 in the talking points memo.
Isn't this old news? First Repub primary candidates paid for the oppo research, then the Dems picked it up. What's new here?
2
Well, well, well. So which one is the pot and which one is the kettle? Sounds like there's more than enough shame, embarrassment and foolish waste of money to go around on something that amounted to nothing.
5
It would be refreshing if just one of the the experts who contribute to this column actually had something to contribute instead of just rehashing the same hearsay over and over. Objectivity has been replaced with mind numbing partisanship. Take the blinders off.
3
So Ms. Clinton and the Democratic Party funded the dossier and complained about the press not covering it but didn't release it themselves? Why, didn't they believe it was all true? What a pile of liars.
6
HubaHubaHuba, oppo research paid by the opposition. Stop the presses. If it was determined that the research was paid by some wackado with a personal grudge against the gran L'Orange, then we got a story!
2
What about the millions of dollars the Russians have paid BILL CLINTON and THE CLINTON FOUNDATION ????
12
I can’t wait for Charles Blow and Paul Krugman to emphatically condemn the actions of the Clinton campaign! HA!
13
You may be interested in Josh Marshall's column about what this NYT article failed to mention:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/whats-up-with-the-times-piece-on-eli...
2
The people who think they learned something earth-shaking from the NYT today are not going to read Marshall, because they don't want their balloons to land.
1
It seems nobody knows what anyone else is doing and even if they did they would not say. Aside from that it should be obvious what's going on here. Why waste the paper even printing this stuff?
1
How is this different from opposition research? RNC did same thing and I see nothing wrong with it. What matters is how you use the results.
5
A political party funding an investigation for the FBI is a BIT problematic in my opinion.
The DNC meeting with Russian agents is eyebrow raising as well seeing as Trump associates have been accused by the DNC ad nauseam of...meeting with Russian agents. Lol
6
Same old story! They are dirtier than we are. How could ANY tactic( information gatherings, lies, hypocrisy,nuances,deal making,etc.) could be as bad as what we have seen from Trump,his family, associates,cabinet, GOP strongmen and his avid supporters.It is the pot calling the kettle black. Politics is a savage game and will continue to be until the voters decide enough is enough. We can't have a clean game without non-partisan referees in all agencies, courts and any political dealing.
5
So Perkins Coie charged $12.5 million to the Clinton campaign and the DNC and as part of that fee it bought the report from Fusion GPS but Clinton had no idea? I'm a Democrat and I'm finding this totally unbelievable.
11
Turns out it was the Clintons and DNC who were in bed with the Russians. Useful idiots are astounded. Or in denial. Or excuse-making.
25
The GOP hired the spy. You know that, right?
The GOP hired the spy. You know that, right?
==================
Nope, read the article. Steele wasn't hired until months after the DNC took over
5
Opposition research is always messy. It is neither unusual, illegal or unethical. Big, grown up politicians learn to live with this fact. Obviously the Toddler in the White House is unable to come to terms with reality in this, as in many other areas. Clearly, the frantic efforts on the part of the Toddler's 'allies' to define oppo as sinister and untoward are coming as a consequence of feeling the hot breath of Mr. Mueller on their delicate little necks. There is no amount of cover for them tho - the kitchen is already pretty damned hot.
3
Opposition research is always messy. It is neither unusual, illegal or unethical.
=================
Except of course, when you enlist foreign (Russian) intelligence services in it like Steele did.
3
And once again The NY Times deserve censure for hyping what is basically a non story. Email anyone? Benghazi anyone?
5
All this demonstrates that all sides- Democrats, Republican, liberal, conservative doesn't matter- willingly resort to the lowest form of tactic in order to manipulate the outcome of an election. Given the same opportunity, each would gleefully exploit it.
Had the Clinton campaign been approached by Russian intermediary with supposedly salacious information about Trump, they surely would have met with them. Just as Donald Trump Jr. may have tried to do.
Anyone who really believes that any side occupies a moral high ground is delusional. They all stoop to the least common denominator.
9
It's sad how the Trump supporters are taking this reporting and jumping to the conclusion that the Clinton campaign did something out of the ordinary in paying for opposition research.
45's supporters fail to realize what's unusual about the resulting dossier is that there was a connection between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Evidenced by Don Jrs agreeing to meet with Russian operatives to obtain information damaging to Clinton. Or Flynn, Manafort and Sessions meeting with Kisslyak at the Republican Convention. Or Flynn calling the Russian ambassador to assure him sanctions would be lifted once Trump took office. It was considered remarkable that Russian didn't retaliate against the US. That retaliation came once Congress made it impossible for Trump to lift sanctions.
5
The election was over in November 2016. Their investigative efforts should have ended then. Instead, they have decided to follow a scorched earth policy that does the country no good going forward, and which has turned up nothing in one year.
6
Not only does it the country no good but the entire planet. The "investigative" efforts forced President Trump to pursue a policy of confrontation with Russia to confirm that there was no truth in the rumours that he was bought by them.
1
Not to mention that the GOP hired these guys first. Perhaps they should be careful what they wish for.
Amazing the number of comments essentially saying "this is politics" or "facts are facts" (even though much of this dossier has already been disproved such as key figures who never visited the places they were reported to).
When the hacked DNC emails were released by Wikileaks (not Russia) there was an avalanche of supposedly high-minded condemnation. Also, unlike the DNC and Clinton campaign emails which were never disputed as factual (even by the DNC and Clinton campaigns) the salacious details of the Steele dossier have already been proven to be more than false, in fact farcical.
"Needy latinos", calling Bernie Sanders a "doofus" (then begging for his help), and giving HRC questions beforehand from a CNN town hall are just a few of the factual items revealed (and later confirmed) by the email hacks.
In the nearly year since it was revealed, the Steele dossier looks like just another clumsy DNC/Clinton campaign tactic with comically false results that wasted both time and donor money. No wonder she lost.
17
Unbelievable, making a fuss about this given who's running the country.
Hillary buying the dossier and not releasing it shows her integrity, not anything negative.
Hillary certainly must have known long before the election that the Russians were trying to change the election to Trump's benefit.
After all, President Obama had learned what was happening and was so concerned that he distributed the report about what they were doing widely, and reduced its associated security clearance.
And I understand the FBI was already investigating the issue on their own from separate evidence.
But she just held on to it and said nothing. The GOP had brutalized her for years, I'm sure she also knew that she would not be able to release this information. I suspect they mainly wanted to understand how the election was being undermined.
5
Your dismissive attitude toward this issue explains why politicians stoop to such low levels in conducting their business.
4
Dismissive? What on earth did Hillary do?
I hope you're not another robot. Hillary was well aware that the Russians were trying to swing the election against her, as was recognized by President Obama (with great concern) and the FBI.
Hillary knew the Russians were trying to steal the election well before the Dossier. Obama knew about it, which led him to oust Russian Spies. The FBI knew about it before the Dossier.
So what did she do other than pay for the Dossier? She didn't reveal its contents. Compare that to Trump 's meeting with the Russians to seek dirt on Hillary. Hillary is too classy to stop to his level.
I have legitimately tried to understand why this is supposedly a big news story, but I can't. Responses (including by many people here) simply just seem to be saying "This is big, because Clinton is bad; here are five unrelated things she did that were bad." What am I missing?
6
And Watergate, according to Nizon, was a third rate burglary.
8
"The law firm spokesperson, who spoke on condition of anonymity."
Boy, that's a good one!
And seems to reflect the overall quality of this report and Aaron Blake's one in WaPo.
Once the press actually gives all this a good weeding I will be interested to read an article my tenth grade english teacher would not have ridiculed. What comes through loud and clear is that the reporters know nothing.
1
Nothing wrong here; it's not even "news." However, it again shows that looking for the real Clinton is like looking through 20 feet of cement. Why can't Democrats admit when they try to play hardball? That is why the Reps seem to be tough.
You don't go into battle without arming yourself. OK , its fine for the Liar In Charge to for how many years do sneaky ,underhanded "backroom deals" in many countries around the world. This all in the name of profit for his companies, his family. What about pretend hotel in Azerbaijan? there are many more crooked deals. Its called "Laundering money." Not particularly legal. And doing this is not a "victimless crime." So do I try to find out exactly what I am up against? Or do I hide my head in the sand and play nice? He ,and his family have colluded what matters is what is happening , not who said it first. The validity is what matters . He has made a full newspaper page full of lies. That should be the concern. Whats the most egregious scenario - Having a company see what Trumps' ties to Russia? or DNC trying to find the information out? Someone should have done that before they made him their Commander in Chief, wouldn't think? Or do they not want the truth? They investigate Supreme Court Candidates, don't they? And cabinet candidates? or do they? Maybe just rubber stamp them. Probably.
1
Many of the readers have short-circuited the information by saying that a Republican first funded the Trump dossier. However, as I read this report and others it looks as if a Republican paid for the initial opposition research, but the dossier was not created until after the DNC and the Clinton campaign got involved and Steele was hired. It's important to remember where Steele got his information, still unverified after so many months. He obtained it from Russians. Now, collusion is a legal term and is actually not against the law except where it concerns antitrust law--so let's use the word cooperation, which can be tied to crimes, but not necessarily so. As of yet there is no evidence that Trump or his campaign cooperated with Russians in a way that obtained anything of value in turning the election towards him and away from Clinton. However, there is evidence now that the Clinton campaign and the DNC's funding of the Fusion GPS effort did end up involving Russian players. And it certainly has caused trouble for the Trump campaign and his presidency, no matter whether parts of it are proven true or false. I think it odd, then, how so many of those commenting here are now yawning upon hearing this latest news after wringing their hands and worse during the last 11 months over possible cooperation between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
19
Exactly right. And also troubling that the information was fed to the FBI.
10
two quick points:
1) The article says the dems hired Fusion in April, 2016. Steele wasn't hired until June, 2016 per Rolling Stone. Therefore, the dossier he authored was in its totality, produced for the democrats & Clinton's campaign.
2) The article states that the DNC and Clinton campaign claim they had no knowledge that Fusion had been hired by their attorneys. Really? They may not have known specifically it was Fusion, that doesn't mean they didn't know someone had been hired to dig up dirt on Trump. And of course they would claim they knew nothing.
17
Where is the rest of the article? It is public knowledge but perhaps not widely known that unknown Republican partisans started this dossier. And the title of the article is misleading, again it is public knowledge that the Clinton campaign was not aware of this information. In any event, we should congratulate Mr. Podesta for pushing along this information, otherwise the Grand Bargain of lifiting Russian sanctions and returning embassy space would have occurred in January.
Cheers,
SSG
2
Can't wait til it finally comes out that DWS. I.T guy was the one who gave the DNC emails to wIkileaks ...
13
Will they be punished? Probably not. It is amazing what our country has come to...
3
Donald Trump Jr answered an e-mail saying the Russians had information on Hilary ..... enough information right there for an investigation .... and then there is Flynn, and Manafort, and the skeletal looking guy, and ....... What other President has been so effusive of his praise of Putin?? Something is up and there is enough information to launch a probe - let Mueller get to the bottom of this morass.
2
Liberal HYPOCRISY x 1000. Meanwhile the comical Clinton "Foundation" was raking in millions from Russia in exchange for favors. But thats okay in liberal land.
14
The GOP hired these guys to rid themselves of Trump. Read beyond the headlines.
I can hear the heads exploding all over NYC reading the NYT this morning. Cognitive Dissonance knows ya...
7
What the headline does not say is that Republicans originated the research. Very dishonest one sided reporting.
4
Rob -- Steele -- who put together the dossier -- wasn't hired by Fusion until June of 2016. Dems hired fusion in April. Thus -- the Dems own the dossier.
3
Is the NYT so homesick for 2016 that it it feels compelled to report another "we can't prove anything but we know something's there" story about Clinton and the DNC? A Republican (I'm guessing Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio, but who cares?) hired Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Trump. Once he crapped out the Democrats picked up the option. What's appalling is that they didn't use anything to help them win the election. Were they so convinced they had it in the bag that they didn't want to besmirch themselves? Memo to Democrats: find a brawler to lead your party, preferably someone who isn't pushing 80.
1
There should be no place for this 'story' in the NYT. Does this even qualify as news, let along news that's fit to print? Stories planted for political purposes straining to suggest there's really something where there really isn't, are an insult to the NYT subscriber and worse that that, a complete waste of everyone's time.
4
Since this information as to who was paying for the research was made public months ago when the dossier first appeared (initially Republicans against Trump and then the Dems when the Republicans saw that Trump was going to be their candidate), why is this newsworthy at this point? Your headline is misleading and contributes to #fakenews and more distrust of the media. The truth would be "RNC donors initiated and funded Steele dossier. Clinton/DNC picked up tab after primary results." Yes, long but at least truthful. I feel like the NYT is offering up click bait like this as "real news". Surely, FOX will be happy to run with YOUR headline and imply that Clinton and the DNC were solely responsible for the dossier, assailing its credibility and casting a shadow on Mueller's investigation of the dossier's contents. Was this your intent? If so, for what purpose? I am sorely disappointed lately with the NYT reporting.
3
claire -- you are factually wrong. According to this article, the dems hired Fusion in April, 2016. According to Rolling Stone, Steele was hired by fusion in June of 2016. The repubs had nothing to do with the dossier.
3
Tell me - Would Bernie have done the same as the Hilary Gang?
6
I would like to thank whoever paid for the dossier. Without it, Trump would have gotten away with it. THANK YOU
42
Gotten away with what? The info contained in it is fabricated.
5
Thanks for what? What exactly did Trump get away with?
3
So what's the big deal? What's the message? That just because a Trump opponent (first Republican, then Democrat once he won the nomination) wouldn't do research?
NOT doing research on an opponent is political suicide. I hope they can name the original Republican who ordered this report, and I hope Mueller investigates every single allegation.
Not to do so would be dereliction of duty on his part, given the enormity of the accusations and the conclusions he will draw.
5
What's the big deal? How about the fact the the DNC and the Clinton campaign denied funding the report for a year?
Did you miss New York Times senior White House correspondent Maggie Haberman's tweet: "Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year". Lying makes this a big deal to some people.
As for "NOT doing research on an opponent is political suicide." when the NYT reported that Jared Kushner met with the Russian lawyer when attempting to do "research on an opponent"? Or was that "different"?
6
In a nest of vipers it's irrevant if they are red or blue.
2
Perhaps I'm being paranoid but the coordination between this non-story and Trump's current meme that Clinton's 'collusion' with Russia is the real story. (He made a big deal at the mini-presser he just had on the WH lawn is extremely suspicious. Having written many comments to the NYT over the last few months I know there's something fishy when comments two hours into the opening of comments the anti-Hillary comments get an average of 15-30 recommendations and the other side's comments only have an average of 2-3. Check it out for yourself. There's one NYT 'trusted commentator' with a dozen anti-Hillary screeds all of which have dozens of 'likes'. Check it out for yourselves if you have the time. The NYT comments appear to be being played by Mr. Trump.
6
I must say that this news is quite entertaining. Hillary Clinton likes us to believe the election was stolen from her by Trump colluding with the Russians. Now it turns out she was up to her old dirty tricks. Get Bernie out of the race by fixing the system, attacking Trump for womanizing while ignoring her own role in covering up for her husband's documented activities, and funding opposition research while denying it. Next we will learn more about the Clinton Foundation as those around her realize she can not longer protect them or give them benefits. Best of all we have the Washington Post and the NYT revealing it - hardly enemies of Hillary.
22
First the DNC and the Clinton Campaign colluded to destroy poor Bernie Sanders and then invested millions on oppo research with a foreign national so could take out Trump. The dodgy dossier lead to 11 months, thus far, of hearings and investigations based on no evidence (paid for by tax payers). What a rotten, stinking, corrupt organization the DNC has become. I expected more from Democrats. The best (worst) part...even when the fix was in, they still lost the election! Great job Swampocrats!
24
Why is this such why is this such big news now when this has been around for months and months! Republicans funded the dossier first and passed it on to the Democrats basically. I would like to know what Republican got the ball rolling and how did they know to look into Russia/Trump dealings.
4
"The spokesperson said that neither the Clinton campaign, nor the D.N.C., was aware that Fusion GPS had been hired to conduct the research."
Another case of "we have no idea who doped our dogs"
12
Trump is having a field day with this, lieing and exaggerating as usual, and he has the Fox spin machine all over it. It was ALWAYS said that the contents of the dossier needed to be VERIFIED. It matters not who paid who. It isn't evidence until it is verified. There is a full court press now directed by the Whitehouse to reopen the Clinton email investigations, and to relitigate the Uranium deal story in an attempt to smear Clinton because she still powerfully hated in this country and pumps up his base like no one else. Trump is becoming more dangerous every day. Mueller must be getting very close because he is working overtime to discredit everything he can. Nixon looks like a prince next to this. This is abuse of power in the crudest form.
3
So both parties had a hand in the dossier.
No - it was compiled AFTER the DNC starting funding it
3
Elanor -- no. Fusion was hired by the dems in April, 2016. Steele was hired in June 2016. Thus, whatever info the Repubs had paid for wasn't the Russian dossier.
4
WaPo reported that the dossier DID NOT exist before the Democrats hired Fusion GPS.
16
So you're telling me both parties are corrupt and vile? I'm utterly shocked.
Still happy I voted 3rd party.
1
Nunes has two goals:
1. Give Trump all the information ;
2. Deflecting from Mueller’s investigation.
He is all party. A textbook example of a self-centered
non-patriot.
Nunes is a national disgrace.
1
Since liberal commenters are in a circular death spiral of cognitive dissonance about this bombshell, let me help:
Hillary Clinton paid a foreign agent to create a phony dossier on Donald Trump (that has since been debunked) and then the Obama administration used it illegally to obtain FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign.
In a nutshell, a sitting administration abused its power and used US government security agencies (FBI) and its own members (Samantha Powers, Susan Rice) to illegally spy on and illegally "unmask" a political opponent based on a phony document - paid for by Hilary Clinton.
Someone will be going to jail. This is worse than Watergate.
17
Hillary Clinton paid a foreign agent to create a phony dossier on Donald Trump
====================
And don't forget that foreign agent worked with Russian intelligence assets to create it
2
Why now? Do the Dems want to finally rid themselves of the Clintons? (Thanks Rush) Any one see her on book TV over the weekend? It would be no wonder if they want to be rid of her and her blame game.
2
So they weren't conducting research, just inventing dirty stories with a superficial ring of probability.
5
All that matters is what's contained in the dossier. Is it true or not?
3
"The spokesperson said that neither the Clinton campaign, nor the D.N.C., was aware that Fusion GPS had been hired to conduct the research." If that is true, then the title "Clinton Campaign and Democratic Party Helped Pay for Russia Trump Dossier" is rather misleading.
2
it's not misleading... the recently put in place DNC leadership is saying they are not aware of this...
Clinton campaign manager Brian Fallon had the best response to this non-story. "I regret I didnt know about Christopher Steele's hiring pre-election. If I had, I would have volunteered to go to Europe and try to help him."
4
What the Clinton campaign and the DNC should be ashamed of is not funding opposition research (doh!) but rather having been taken to the cleaners by a slick ex-MI-6 operative. Anyone who reads the dossier can't help but see that what Steele was peddling (and no doubt getting well paid for...) was just a summary of whatever gossip was making the rounds of the Moscow rumor mill. The joke is clearly on those who shelled out all that money for it...
4
This isn’t news. The Dossier is the real news and contains information that the public needs to know. It is at the heart of the Russia investigation, and it should be published in every newspaper in America.
Identifying which items in the Dossier are considered accurate by the US Intelligence Community would be far more valuable to the public than running after every red herring uttered by our unhinged president or GOP toady intent on covering up the investigation into the cyber attack that skewed our 2016 election toward Donald Trump.
And continually covering the patently false GOP attacks on political rivals – whether the endless and absurd Benghazi nonsense or the concocted email investigation – is part of the reason we now have this dangerously unstable fraud in the White House.
Donald Trump received almost daily live coverage of his every rally and his demented Twitter declarations. This coverage was worth over a billion dollars in free Trump Campaign advertising by mainstream media outlets. His constant drone of race baiting, misogyny, and political anarchy made for historic profits for all media outlets as Americans were transfixed by the Trump Campaign reality show. It drowned out any coverage of the policy issues that distinguished the political parties.
This coverage was nothing, if not vulgar and, yes, salacious. Publish the Dossier so we can understand what happened and why we have this dangerously unqualified loose cannon in the White House.
3
This report omits the vital information that the Obama administration opened an FBI investigation against the Trump campaign due mainly to the “dossier" prepared by the British intelligence agent.
For a Democratic President to use the power of government to spy on a Republican Presidential campaign based on Democrat-Party funded “research” strikes at the heart of our democracy — a much discussed phenomenon when Mr. Trump is accused of threatening democracy and glossed over when Obama is the guilty party.
15
That research such as this is passed off as "intelligence" by one campaign to the heads of the CIA, FBI, and the Executive Branch and then used as the basis to open investigations into the other campaign is untenable and violiates the constitution. The Clinton's, the DNC and their enablers in the media (including you NYT's) have hit a new low. This goes far beyond "normal politics" considering that their is demonstrated cooperation between elements within the Russian government and representative of the DNC and the Clinton campaign. All involved need to be put under oath in public hearings and as appropriate punished for their crimes.
10
A GOP surrogate said yesterday on CNN this shows that HRC and the Democrats were caught working with a foreign agent. I'd take over working with a foreign government.
1
Who are you going to believe, the news media or Trump’s sycophants? The dossier was written with letters from the Roman alphabet and the Carl Marx’s Das Capital was written with the same letters from the same alphabet. And they say there is no Deep State Conspiracy? Do they think we were born yesterday?
1
Trump’s sycophants
1
July 9, 2017, New York Times Article Headline:
Trump’s Son Met With Russian Lawyer After Being Promised Damaging Information on Clinton
Number of Comments: 4524, most of which were hysterical screaming rants about how our democracy was being existentially threatened by Vladimir Putin and his hand-picked puppet, Donald Trump!
This article today? a puny 463 comments, 90% of which have this theme: "Yeah? So? This is just standard politics as usual opposition research. What's the big deal?"
Ah, yes, there's nothing like having your confirmation bias shaken to the core every once in a while.
11
"So what?" "And?" "What's the fuss"?
The justifications in these comments are laughable. If the shoe was on the other foot, the vitriol would be flowing like the Mississippi after a bout of heavy rains!
9
This is not new, heard about it months ago.
2
Where was the media in all of this? Why wasn't the NYTimes actively investigating Trump's Russia connections? On the campaign trail he seemed to hate everyone and everything except Russia and Putin. Shouldn't that have been a big tip-off that the connection should be investigated? Why is it so important that the DNC helped pay for an investigation that major news sources should have been doing if they were doing their job properly?
2
TRump's Swamp ...
“We have met the enemy and he is us.”
1
President Trump shouldn't feel bad, for heavens sake look how Hillary's people and the DNC stuck a knife in Bernie's back?
15
At one point I stopped watching "House of Cards" because it was like watching scorpions fighting each other. It made me feel awful. And yet here I am following all things dossier, and feeling the same way. Until Mueller presents his findings, which I suspect will be partially damning for the Trump administration but not entirely so, I will just crawl back in my cozy cave and try to survive. Thanks for the report, I guess.
$12.4 million from the DNC/Hillary to compile British fictional dirt on Trump. $100 million in desperate, last-minute flooding of the air-waves with anti-Trump ads. A rushed CIA report written in clumsy Clancy-like style that said little else than “because I say so”, ordered by a president in his last month of failed office, as first land mine out of many more he laid for the incoming administration, to explain a loss that he probably secretly wished-for until his late reluctant foot-dragging endorsement. Blaming Russians, North Koreans, Chinese, Libyans. Purging illegally set-up offsite email servers so they don’t spill details of soliciting funds from foreign governments in exchange for governmental contracts and favors.
The good news is this hole doesn’t need more digging. The Democratic Party is over, finito. The real question is when will Muller pull curtains down on his “Russian” investigation? Until his pension is fat enough, that’s when and anytime now, that is. After he’s done penning a sincere thank you to Hillary & co., for giving him the most fun job he’s ever had.
We don’t need no investigation. Memories from Muller, most certainly. I say minimum $75 million from Random House. Comey will hate that. Who cares. Bah.
13
Thank you New York Times for publishing this news. It's about time that the media sheds a light on the most corrupt candidate in American political history. But don't stop, there is more. The Russia uranium deal, all the cash that flowed into the foundation and the clintons, all the pay for play.
We can only change the country if respectable news outlets like the New York Times begin reporting this stuff honestly.
With the Russian dossier story, keep reporting on it. I believe that we will find that this dossier was used to obtain search warrants from a secret FISA court to conduct surveillance on an incoming president.
This is really serious stuff, keep up the good work New York Times!
17
Experts note that the credibility of the sources in these reports is that Steele actually shared them with the FBI. Regardless of "who paid."
In August 2017, CNN noted “intercepted communications that US intelligence agencies collected among suspected Russian operatives discussing their efforts to work with Manafort…to coordinate information that could damage Hillary Clinton’s election prospects” including “conversations with Manafort, encouraging help from the Russians.”
https://www.justsecurity.org/44697/steele-dossier-knowing/
5
Yawn.
Of course the Clinton campaign financed opposition research (duh!).
Every campaign does this.
The difference here is that the research uncovered possible treasonous collusion with Russia by the Trump campaign.
Thankfully, Mueller will follow the money and leave no stone unturned.
The partisan political antics and gamesmanship surrounding this "news" is irrelevant.
God speed Mueller!
6
The DNC and Hillary still can't wrap their heads around how they lost to Trump..... because the institutional corruption that is so codified now in each party -Democratic and Republican- blinds them to the reality of the outside looking in.... in other words.... they have no clue.
10
Wait...I thought she said she lost because of Brexit...
2
These revelations have put Special Prosecutor Robert Meuller in a very difficult position.
He's been a director of the FBI under both President George W. Bush and Barack Obama. At the FBI, he had a close, trusting relationship with James Comey - and the FBI, at one point at least, credited these putative revelations sourced from a foreign agent (Christopher Steele) as valid.
Mr. Mueller must now somehow convincingly demonstrate his impartiality in an investigation that has seemed from the start to been aimed primarily at Donald Trump - quite possibly the most dangerously erratic person to have ever served as president of the United States - and several of Mr. Trump's
henchmen - and turn his attention to the serious implications of Hillary Clinton's campaign's and the DNC's funding of a damaging document used to compromise Donald Trump - a document whose ultimate source is, as of this date, as yet to be publicly revealed, but which may have involved, on the part of Fusion GPS, contact with Russian informants.
7
Revelations on Clinton may delight Republicans and Trump fans, but I don't see how picking a fight with a defeated candidate will help further their mission.
Post 2012, Democratic Party had little use for Mitt Romney.
2
Revelations on Clinton may delight Republicans and Trump fans, but I don't see how picking a fight with a defeated candidate will help further their mission.
==============
You have it exactly backwards.
Clinton has been picking a fight with Trump ever since she lost.
These revelations show that her campaign was actually doing what she accused Trump of doing - colluding with operatives of the Russian government. She just outsourced the effort through Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS and Steele so she would have plausible deniability.
10
That Republican opponents of Trump financed part of this work prior to Trump taking the nomination is well known. So too, we have known for months that the DNC and the Clinton campaign paid for Steel's work. Old news.
What we still do not know is which Republican Presidential candidates campaign first hired Fusion. Nor do we know just how much of what is the report has been solidly confirmed.
Deflection may satisfy the Trump base, but it will be meaningless to Mueller and his team of experts. If the facts reveal collusion, indictments are likely. And that is the way that any loyal American should want this to be.
4
Much ado about nothing. The crux of the matter is not who paid for the secret report.
The question is whether any innuendo or accusation in that report is true or false. For example, any smoking gun in that report that Trump's camp has colluded with Russian nationals to defeat Hillary Clinton?
The only impact of these latest revelations is to strength Trump's camp that such report was a character assassination attempt of then then-candidate Trump.
The only way to defeat Trump now is to choose an electable Democrat candidate in 2020.
3
The question is whether any innuendo or accusation in that report is true or false. For example, any smoking gun in that report that Trump's camp has colluded with Russian nationals to defeat Hillary Clinton?
===================
No, the fact is that the Clinton Campaign colluded with Russian nationals to get the report to defeat Trump
2
This has been known for several months. The GOP is throwing everything at the wall non stop, The press dutifully repeats.
5
The problem isn't the dossier and who paid for it, the problem is how it was used ; the amount of lying that went on to cover it up. Firstly and most egregiously it apparently was used to obtain FISA warrants. Was the judge informed this was opposition research paid for by a candidate? Secondly, what was the role of the FBI , Comey in particular, in vetting the document? If they, the FBI, knew iit's genesis, would they have relied on it. Thirdly, Congress used it as thee basis of a witch hunt and the predicate for collusion. Those who wrote defenses comments are acting like this is a high school essay. Finally,why didn't Clinton and the DNC admit early on they were the sponsors. It certainly would have saved even Democrats a lot of time and money.
17
If the facts are correct then it is time for two things to occur simultaneously: Attorney General Sessions should recuse his recusal and take the led on the Russia investigation(s) and President Trump's should fire Mr. Muller as he is now tainted by the Uranium 1 investigation.
13
OK so the Democratic candidate did opposition research on Republican candidate just like the Republican candidate did opposition on the Democratic candidate. Is this really something new? I would be surprised if the Clinton campaign didn't fund part of this opposition research. It would have meant that they unilaterally disarmed. The real question is whether the research yielded any truth or not. That's the question and still the real story here.
6
I'm disappointed that Hilary's campaign would pay for this research. I guess I'm too naive about the integrity of our elections. Nonetheless, this should NOT be used as an excuse by Republicans to distract or distrust the Mueller or congressional investigations into Russian meddling. The dossier has always been a sleazy sideshow to the real threat.
1
why do you think it's used as a distraction? just because they are investigating Trump campaign , does that mean all other inquiry must stop ?
3
Clinton, and any number of her supporters and Never Trumpers, should have announced Steele's findings and any and all of the other dirt on Trump from the highest mountaintop. We now reap the rewards of their hesitancy. Originally funded by unknown, supposed Republican source, this dossier will be instrumental in bringing this Trump thuggery to its end.
2
Like others have observed, there is no new news in this story or in the Washington Post's report. I guess at best these stories solidify or validate the reporting from a year ago or so. However, it is interesting that it comes out at a time when there is welter of news about Trump missteps and Republican chaos. I hope this isn't just some way to provide the appearance of balance on the front page.
4
"I hope this isn't just some way to provide the appearance of balance on the front page."
What it is...is a way for the republicans to obfuscate, divert, and distract from all trump's lunacy and foul behaviors, and the fact that Corker, McCain, and Flake have said that trump is reckless, untruthful, etc. Yes, it is FAR too late that they made these announcements, and it is easy to talk when you have nothing to lose, but what they said about trump is all horrifyingly true...and he continues to be president, and each day that he is, the country, and the citizens suffer more and more harm and abuse. So! The solution! Bring up the Fusion GPS/Christopher Steele stuff again, and malign Hillary and the DNC some more. Go ahead. It will not take away from whatever high crimes Robert Mueller has unearthed regarding trump and his minions, and their play dates with the Russians.
The entire Steele dossier is apt to be truthful. I hope that the Justice Department will reveal it.
2
The FBI found details of the dossier reliable enough that they paid Steele for additional work, too.
3
So ,how did dossier originate ? Which Republicans requested it originally? At this point ,why does it matter to Trump? Is it truth a president fears?
3
Could someone, please, explain to me just what exactly the problem is? Mr. Steele is a private citizen, not a foreign government agent, albeit a UK subject. What law was alleged to be violated by paying him to do research on Donald Trump? He was a contractor doing a job.
This is drastically different than agents of the hostile Russian government shopping damaging information on Clinton to the Trump Campaign.
But, of course, the ReTrumplicans need a "But what about...?" distraction and false equivalence. And Trey Gowdy and the other one have a vendetta where they really want to put Clinton and every other Democrat in jail. Why? Because they want one-party rule in our 2-party nation.
69
so all other inquiries of possible collusion by other groups must stop because people can't multitask? ... not sure about you , but I can handle more than one topic at a time....
2
Could someone, please, explain to me just what exactly the problem is? Mr. Steele is a private citizen, not a foreign government agent, albeit a UK subject. What law was alleged to be violated by paying him to do research on Donald Trump? He was a contractor doing a job.
===================
Steele contacted agents of the Russian government to try to get information on Trump on behalf on the DNC. He actually did what Trump has only been accused on doing
5
Steele may have been a private citizen, but his sources sure weren't. Source A was "a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure.” Source B was “a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.”
We can't be sure that Steele wasn't being used by the Russians to plant false news and to disrupt the US election.
1
Would the NYT and Mr Vogel in particular enlighten us on who exactly was supposed to pay for opposition research on the Republican Party's nominee for president in last year's election. The tooth fairy? Who do you think paid for the opposition research on the Democratic Party's nominee for president? I would bet a similar document exists on Mrs. Clinton, and it was most certainly paid for by the Trump campaign, the RNC, supporters of Mr. Trump's campaign or some combination thereof. And that would be perfectly fine.
5
What is exactly the point of this article? I'm just a reading citizen, but I've known for many months almost everything said here, except for the names of this or that person..
On the other hand, one of the things that were known was that the oppo research had been started by some Republicans opposing then candidate Trump. Only later did the Democrats replace the Republicans in funding it. Why isn't this mentioned? And if it was not the case, why doesn't the article say this?
And wasn't the FBI seriously interested in that Steel report? Wasn't this part of what Comey spoke to Trump about in their first meeting after the inauguration? Why is this not mentioned in this article?
Strange omissions, I'd say.
5
It has been reported literally for months now that Devin Nunes and Chuck Grassley have been working at fever pitch to elevate this story, to try and use it as an obstruction of the legitimate investigations into Russian interference. All the candidates do opposition research of their opponents, many do opposition research on their nominees to make sure they have no skeletons. There is nothing abnormal or unusual here, except how desperate Nunes is to derail the investigations into Russia's cyber war against the United States.
4
are you serious..... if it isn't a big deal , why did the Clinton campaign and DNC deny they paid for the dossier.....
6
Hillary’s campaign was involved in a shady off shore snooping operation. Should we be surprised? What Happened? It is just a continuation of her poor judgement. From email usage that violates government policies to quarter of a million-dollar Wall Street speaking fees, her ethical lapses provided Trump with cover during the campaign from all the probing questions about his lack of ethics. Hillary has once again given Trump the smokescreen to dodge the hard questions about his involvement with Russia. Hillary would do the nation and the Democratic party a favor by taking the train home to Chappaqua, where she can take up some new activities besides politics
8
Seriously curious, how hard are you pushing Republicans to fix everything you are complaining about? Because they are engaging in these exact behaviors (private emails, speaking engagements, etc) and show zero interest in self-moderating or preventing others from doing it in the future, no matter how much they crucified Hillary. I haven't seen anyone who is disgusted by her doing it have any issue with the RNC doing the same thing and still can't figure out why.
1
So long as the investigation into Russia's interference and determining the truth/falsehood the related allegations about the Trump campaign's involvement continues, I do not care whatever sub-investigations crop up. Ditto for obstruction of justice or any tax dodging.
I only say this because Congress has enough members to do more than one thing at a time. I voted for Clinton, but if the investigation into Trump happens to uncover wrongdoing in her own camp, so be it. But to the extent the GOP or any Trump supporters thinks pointing at Clinton, Obama, Weinstein, Comey, Wilson, the NFL, the NBA or anyone else is going to excuse any illicit activities on the part of candidate/President Trump, they are wasting their breath. I don't care if Mueller, in the course of his investigation, finds out that Ted Cruz's father was the second gunman on the grassy knoll.
Trump, as President of the United States, must be held to the highest standards. If his campaign colluded in any way... if he has tried to obstruct the investigation in any way... if he has suborned (i.e., in any way encouraged/coerced) perjury in ANY WAY... he must, for the first time in his life, be held truly accountable and devil take whatever his base might be willing to overlook. That's really all there is to it.
2
it's starting to look more and more like it was actually the Democrats who collude with the Russians.. Especially when its proven DWS I.T guy was the one who release all those emails to wIkileaks......
7
The key here, as others correctly annotate, is to let Mueller complete his task. Let's hope he does an impregnable job: Christopher Steele, by terrible implication, has uncovered a Russian plot designed to destabilise, possibly dismantle, western democracy, aided and abetted by internal forces mired in complicity. This is no overstatement: Russia has a post Soviet notion of oligarchical governance which massively benefits individuals, trickles down to the masses in a carefully stemmed flow, and cements perennial power into the hands of the people least qualified to wield it. Trump et al seized lasciviously upon this mantra, coaxed by a grinning Putin. This is high treachery regardless of who paid for the dossier. Would Christopher Steele crucify his own reputation by falsely reporting? He has gone to ground, moved out of his last known address, and with good reason. His testimony is of the highest value to anyone who wants to hear it or to shut him up.
3
One question comes to mind. Why didn't Clinton and or the DNC come out and say this before the investigation began, or at least, at the very beginning of the investigation? Both parties have very despicable elements from the top on down.
The DNC and The RNC are slimy power brokers. Trump is only a manifestation of the creatures in the swamp.
3
Thank you DNC for continuing the Republican investigation into Trump and the Kremlin gang. Thank you for exposing Treason. Trump and members of the GOP collaborated with Russian extensively during and after the Presidential campaign. The Dossier is just the tip of the iceberg. This is just another attempt by supporters of Trump and perhaps Russia to obfuscate the Mueller investigation. I hope our European allies release all of their corroborating data on the Dossier real soon.
3
bahahahahaha.. .. it's starting to look like it was the DNC who collude with RUSSIA... MSM made a big issue of Trump Jr wanting to meet with some Russians to get some dirt on Hillary but have no problem with the DNC meeting with Russians to get dirt on Trump... hypocrisy is unreal.....
4
This is not news. The fact that the Clinton campaign picked up the payments has been on the Wikipedia page for the Steele Dossier for months.
I don't even understand what the premise of this supposed "scandal" is supposed to be.
Oppo research is perfectly legal and the Clinton campaign kept the unverified findings confidential, as they should have.
???
3
I just I’ve just assumed the DNC paid for the Steele dossier. Want that obvious all along"
2
Who funded the"dossier" doesn't change what is true about it and what is suspect about it. GOP and Fox will try to morph this into everything relating to Russia's involvement in the election, including the meeting Donald Jr. attennded in June 2016 that everyone, including the president himself, has been lying about.
3
ALWAYS follow the money and you will find the slant. There is NOTHING true about it, and everything is false. Trump yells, "fake news" and everyone at first said, "HUH?" Then the story is fake or the facts are actually different, the sources end up being "TWITTER" (does she has a double or not). Hillary wanted information on Trump so she hires lawyers and some British dude who gives it a cool name which grabs attention of millennial's everywhere. Trump's group wants information on Hillary and they have a meeting directly with the Russians -- who needs a lawyer? THIS is why Trump is the best because he's real. He wouldn't know how to keep a meeting with the Russians a secret if he wanted to.
I don't get it. So Clinton campaign hired an investigator to see whether her opponent had any inappropriate or illegal ties to Russia during the campaign. Why is this controversial?
4
Because it shows that the investigator that Clinton hired used his inappropriate or illegal ties to Russia to try to get the information. The Clinton campaign was actually colluding with Russian agents - something it has accused Trump of doing.
7
It's one thing to fund oppo research. It's another to obtain it from a foreign government. We all know this.
NYT, I'm disappointed in your headline and framing.
104
The KGB was the source of the most salacious details in the dossier assembled by Mr. Steele, a former British agent.
5
Yea I guess if the funding eventually goes towards finding research from a foreign government it's OK? It's like saying, if you want to do something wrong, pay someone to do it for you, and you aren't guilty.
4
You mean how Trump Jr and Kushner met with Russians to talk about hacked Clinton emails? Good thing there actually were none, eh? I want to know why Devin Nunes is so desperate to obstruct the Russia investigations. He was on the Trump transition team, I bet Nunes has some skeletons in his own closet that he is terrified of.
1
Let me get this straight; the Steele report was a legitimate campaign gambit when, as oppo research, it was paid for (and initiated ) by Republicans, but not when subsequently paid for by Democrats. Additionally, opposition research instigated by team Trump involving meetings with Russians is ok (and yielded zero), but the Steele dossier, generated by a reputable British firm, is discredited, not because its contents are not credible, but because HRC partially funded it.
Sure.
This contorted double standard is so stupid as to be laughable, if the consequences were not potentially so dire.
20
How's this; the oppo research was initially funded by "a" republican (not the RNC) most likely a primary opponent of Trump.
The DNC/Clinton campaign then engaged Fusion GPS as regards the "dossier" w/possible collusion w/Russians all the while smearing Trump of collusion.
Just hang tight; we are still digging and the truth will eventually come out.
Oh and a little advice; in the future be careful what you wish for.........
2
Nixon erred- he should have contracted out the spying to remove himself from culpability. Rookie mistake- the DNC know better.
8
I've heard that the Republican candidates were the first to hire this law firm to get dirt on Trump. I'm guessing Bush and McCain were possibly involved. But when Trump won the nomination, they decided to drop it because they didn't want to hurt their party. That is when the DNC came on board. What I don't get is since the DNC did hire the law firm, why can't they publish what they found?
2
The thing that disturbs me about this is the Clinton did not use this info during the election. Democrats are far, far too nice to Republicans.
10
The dossier had lousy sourcing. That is why most news organizations rarely mention it. It is not the information that the investigation of trump is based on anyway.
2
The Clintons are the rot at the heart of the Democratic party.
Time to face facts.
So the Clinton campaign funded a fake dossier that the Obama administration then used to get a FISA warrant to wiretap the Trump campaign?
None of which would ever be public knowledge had Trump not been elected...
I can’t wait until we learn how and when the Obama administration was working with the DNC/Clinton to engage in wiretapping and spying on a political opponent.
The evidence of Russian interference in the election has largely been kept from public scrutiny, leaving us to rely upon the unreliable statements from "intelligence" agencies, the same agencies that are responsible for the WMD, Gulf of Tonkin etc.
No question Trump is a cancer on this nation. But I also believe we all lose when we simply choose to believe unsubstantiated accusations simply because they fit our political point of view.
Between this and the Uranium One deal it's becoming clearer by the day why the Clintonistas have been pointing fingers at Trump's Russian connections - the Clinton's corrupt connections apparently run far deeper than anything Trump's crowd may have done.
Dems need to move on and end this foul era. They need to stand for something, not against something. No more Russia, no more cheap political bickering.
This post Obama saga has been a farce. The sooner the ties are cut to toxic Hillary the better.
If not the Dems and the media are handing 2020 to the Republicans.
23
Trump was not the target of wiretapping, he was incidental, which means their was a wiretap against a target of an investigation and Trump talked to that target. Hopefully someday we will know the details.
I'd be happy to see both the Trump's sands the Clinton's go to prison. That is probably the best thing that could happen for our republic, but there has to be an investigation. Hopefully Mueller will be able to find and release the truth without interference.
@ McGloin
You are missing the point. Even if Trump wasn't a target, they would have still produced a fabricated dossier, then handed it to the FBI in order to damage their opposition. And after their election loss drum up Russia hysteria to deflect from their own Russia corruption vulnerabilities.
I agree that putting both the Trump and Clinton clans in jail would give me great pleasure.
However, the evidence clearly points towards greater and more systemic corruption on part of the Clintons.
And I wouldn't pin my hopes on Mueller.
He's not going to move on the Clintons and he'll let Trump off the hook even if there was something, which I don't think there is.
2
It is almost over for the national Democratic Party. All that is left for Trump to do is fire Robert Mueller and sick the AG on him and Comey. Next they will be disbarred.
Thanks Hillary for ensuring that Trump is reelected.
21
Haven't we known this for months and months? The funding by political opposition?
Ever since the existence of the dossier was known, before the inauguration?
This article lacks that information.
Someone please explain this to me.
9
Conspiring with American attorneys and our British allies for opposition research: fine. Conspiring with a hostile foreign power for opposition research: not fine. Why do Trump supporters find this difficult to understand?
When the Gore campaign was contacted by Russia with offers to "help" them win against Bush, they called the FBI. They did not go meet with them to get the goods. Why?? Because only political amateurs ignorant of democratic norms and geopolitics would be stupid enough to do that, i.e. the Trump campaign. I'm sure Russia was beaming with delight that some idiot finally took the bait.
11
Hiring a British spy to pay off the Russians is what this it; creating one step removed and flushing it through the client privilege of your law firms is conspiracy.
8
Conspiring with American attorneys and our British allies for opposition research: fine. Conspiring with a hostile foreign power for opposition research: not fine. Why do Trump supporters find this difficult to understand?
=======================
The only difference is that the Clinton Campaign hired American attorneys who hired Fusion GPS who hired a retired British spy to conspire with the hostile foreign power for opposition research. Not fine.
Clinton/DNC/Perkins Coie have been denying involvement for months. Fusion GPS leaders took the Fifth to keep from talking about it.
Clinton/DNC thought that if they built enough cut-outs in the loop they would have plausible deniability on being involved with Russian intelligence. Then they forked the results over into the Intelligence Community so that the Obama Administration IC and DOJ would have an excuse to spy on the Trump Campaign.
Why do you find this difficult to understand?
3
The Clinton campaign conspired with Russians to provide dirt on Trump. Not ok.
5
Yet another example of the sort of sensationalism that got us to where we are, even from respected news sources. The headline implies some sort of conspiracy between the Clinton campaign and the DNC, but buried midway through: "The [law firm] spokesperson said that neither the Clinton campaign, nor the D.N.C., was aware that Fusion GPS had been hired to conduct the research."
10
What is it you New yawwkers say....."if you believe that, I've got a bridge to sell you," or something similar to that. There was nothing that the Clinton's did not know when it came to her campaign. Period.
3
The real issue is not who commissioned and paid for this piece of opposition research. Opposition research is part of every political campaign.
The real issue is factually documenting what parts of the dossier are true and what parts are not. That is Bob Mueller's job. And, to use Lincoln's words about Grant, "my trust in him is marrow deep."
8
Others will full document the media collusion here. New York Times, the world has changed. If you think you're somehow off the hook, better think again.
22
The Democratic Party, the Obama faction, the Clinton faction, the American liberal-left, and their supporters in Hollywood and the media have made a huge strategic error in putting all their political energy and capital into this campaign to show that the Trump campaign "colluded" with agents of the Russian government.
It increasingly appears that this is a folly, a product of wishful thinking that is a complete fabrication which took on its own life, but has no foundation in fact.
Even in the best of situations, with evidence, this would be an extremely difficult case to prosecute and prove. Now it appears that this is a very tangled mess. No evidence at all has emerged of any "crimes" by the Trump campaign. The torrent of leaks has dried up because there is no "there" there.
Unfortunately for them, the Democrats and their allies, having gone all in on this unfounded smear campaign, have dragged their well-meaning supporters into this delusional state of mind. Precious time and political capital have been wasted on this folly, and it is going to be very difficult to back out now.
15
Mueller will investigate, and hopefully tell us what he finds.
There is plenty of circumstantial evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians, not from the dossier, starting with him publicly asking Putin to hack Clinton. If it was a joke, it was not funny, kind of like yelling fire in a crowded theatre.
1
I don't see how you can say that it's folly when Mueller still hasn't released his report. Until then, the rest of it is partisan finger pointing and premature proclamations of the case being closed.
1
This is stupid. This has all been known for a year, so is NOT NEWS. Also, the GOP funded this research first, then dropped it when Trump became the nominee. Dems picked it up, which is perfectly sensible (that's politics, and not funding opposition research would have been political malpractice). What is even more important, however, is that when the Dems stopped funded it the day before the election THE FBI DECIDED TO FUND IT because they found the work credible and alarming. All this context is missing from this sorry excuse for a news article. Shameful, NYT, shameful. And of course, much of what is in the Steele memo has now been confirmed, so whoever funded that research should get a medal. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/whats-up-with-the-times-piece-on-eli...
4
What parts have been confirmed?
3
Hi--yes, all of this is out there now but it seems this story fails to mention a lot of the finer points regarding this whole deal--
see here---http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/whats-up-with-the-times-piece-on-eli...
Why is this even a story? It would be a story if the funding wasn't DNC. The issue isn't who paid for it, but whether the content is accurate and factual.
Did the GOP fund Wikileaks? Or any of the bots that attacked HRC? Or the ad content on Google or Facebook? None of that would be surprising or newsworthy.
4
Why is this even a story? It would be a story if the funding wasn't DNC. The issue isn't who paid for it, but whether the content is accurate and factual.
=========================
The DNC paid people to collude with a foreign government to influence an election. You guys have been telling us for nearly a year that that is treason
2
Getting dirt on an opponent is not new. McCain's involvement must be identified. Use by DOJ and Obama administration needs to be confirmed and if misused for FISA warrants. The completely compromised and politicized DOJ and the antics of Obama and his staff will need deep scrutiny. Good time to call for Special Counsel.
7
Trump was incidental. That means that he talked to someone that was the target of a wire tap. It's not the same.
1
Let me get this straight: so, according to Trump, it was okay for Trump Jr. to meet with Russian spies to dig up dirt on Clinton, but it is suddenly a scandal that the Clinton campaign paid an American firm, Fusion GPS, to get opposition research on Trump?
Honestly, why is this even a front page story?
5
I find it disturbing that the dossier had to be compiled and verified by external foreign contractors. Where were the US intelligence services? Why weren't the CIA and FBI on top of it and the discoveries revealed prior to the election? Perhaps Trump would be appropriately locked away right now, wearing a color-coordinated XXXL orange jumpsuit, instead of occupying the White House.
1
Let's not forget when Donald Trump, Jr. had that Trump Tower meeting last summer with Russians, President Trump said:
“Most people would have taken that meeting. It’s called ‘opposition research’ or even research into your opponent. And honestly, I think the press made a very big deal out of something that really a lot of people would do.”
Big difference.
Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort met with a Kremlin-linked lawyer to get incriminating information on Clinton, and those emails from Russia were offers to assist and influence the Trump election. Most of us believe Trump himself was there.
That's collusion with a foreign government.
6
Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort met with a Kremlin-linked lawyer to get incriminating information on Clinton, and those emails from Russia were offers to assist and influence the Trump election. Most of us believe Trump himself was there.
That's collusion with a foreign government.
==================
Clinton/DNC paid Perkins Coie that paid Fusion GPS that paid Steele to talk to Kremlin-linked Russian operatives to try to find incriminating information on Trump.
That's collusion with a foreign government.
Trump Jr and associates were lied to by Russians so they would schedule a meeting on Russian adoptions. They got no information on Clinton
2
It's called opposition research, all campaigns do it, certainly at the presidential level.
3
The question is whether people took things of value from a foreign government to influence the campaign.
3
Corrected: This isn't exactly news. But it serves to highlight that the people of the United States owe the Democratic Party a debt of thanks for uncovering the Trump campaign's treasonous conspiracy.
3
Unless something turns up that discredits the report on a factual basis, what difference does it make who initially paid for it?
4
So the Clinton campaign colluded with an agent of a foreign government to influence the election. I demand a special prosecutor.
24
We already have one who is already investigating it.
Wow that was fast.
Can you tell us which "agent of a foreign government" Hillary colluded with? Steele was not an employee of Great Britain.
2
These "comments" all seem to be the same old Republican anti-Hillary talking points. That the Democratic campaign took over the research from the Republicans who initiated it is not news. This is more of what the Times did (to Hillary) during the campaign, no more, no less.
7
The commenters here who say this is not "new news" are just flat wrong. First of all:
"The role of the Clinton campaign and the national party in funding the research for the dossier was first reported on Tuesday by The Washington Post"
That's yesterday folks. Pretty fresh.
Furthermore a NYT reporter tweeted last night:
When I tried to report this story, Clinton campaign lawyer @marceelias pushed back vigorously, saying “You (or your sources) are wrong"
Another NYT reporter tweeted this last night:
"Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year"
Yes this is news. The confirmation of who funded it and the extent to which they lied about it is beyond what had previously been known.
97
Glad to see you want to get to the bottom of this.
It has been known for over a year that democrats funded part of this dossier. Ya know, as in after the Republicans initiated it...
2
It was reported a year ago by David Corn in Mother Jones. This is NOT a breaking story. It's the GOP obfuscation machine attempting to redirect our attention away from their crimes.
Not so. This is nothing new. Just politics as they have always been but now viewed under the microscope lens of the internet, making such behavior more difficult to hide.
With all of the spinning that this shows "collusion" between the Clinton campaign and the Russian government or is somehow nefarious, all I can say is thank God for the appointment of Robert Mueller. He's not a partisan prosecutor and he's certainly not stupid.
57
He was involved in the Uranium sale, he should be fired and Sessions should Un-recuse himself.
6
Let us pray
No, he's not stupid, but I am not that certain there was nothing behind his efforts. That may be a different kind of nothing.
This is another Trump distraction. The information. if confirmed, is the real issue not who paid for it. I suggest Mueller and the FBI are getting closer to the truth. Thus, all the current publicity of who was responsible for the opposition research. Frankly, I hope it was the Clinton Campaign. I contributed meager funds to the Hillary Campaign knowing it is their job to know everything about a political competitor. I hope I helped pay for this dossier!
6
Imagine you were a competitive racer in the New York City Marathon and you learned that one of the competition was planning on cheating, so you ask people to watch the race and one of them sees a runner duck down into the subway and then come out further down the race to get in the lead. Would that information be less valuable as long as it was documented? I didn't think so.
3
For those who don't seem to understand what the word collusion means when it refers to Trump's collusion with Russians. Investigating Trump's Russian connections isn't the same thing as colluding with Russians. Clinton campaign officials did not meet with representatives of the Russian government to obtain illegally gotten information through computer hacking (as Trump's officials did). They (along with a prior Republican candidate) asked an American law firm and a British citizen to investigate Trump's business and other relationships with Russian businesses, oligarchs, and politicians. In all cases, Trump is the one with the relationships with Russian government officials and associates. His plan was to lift Russian sanctions as soon as he got into office, hence all the back channel communications by Kushner and Flynn. He got waylaid, luckily, because people had information form this dossier.
9
This sounds like typical opposition research, which is a normal part of the political process, and used by anyone running for public office. I'm not sure why this would rise to the level of scandalous. Republicans are throwing jello at the wall, hoping something will stick. This is yet another distraction from the Trump disaster and sickening to watch.
7
Most, if not all, of the comments here and partisan. What a shame. Can we all agree that it is important to our democracy to get to the bottom of all these issues and let the chips fall where they may?
11
Agreed.
But isn't it fair to ask who's been pushing this Russia narrative and why?
5
Sure. That would be part of the global, nonpartisan investigation.
That sordid campaign will just not go away. The truth is we had a choice between 2 horrible - for very different reasons - candidates and Hillary blew the campaign. While Trump is well on his way to being the worst president in our history, if not the last, Hillary would not have been much better, if only because she would not be able to govern.
We should pursue all of these investigations if for no other reason to discover for ourselves and posterity, the truth, whatever it is and wherever it may lead. And then, regardless of outcome, the Democratic Party must shed itself entirely of the Clintons and their pernicious influence. That is the only way they will regain power, much less respectability. And, for the sake of the country, we must hope the Republicans come to see Trump as the destructive, hate filled anti American he is and get rid of him. We can then only hope this whole episode in our history will soon be nothing more than a bad dream, dimly remembered.
6
With you up to the "dimly remembered."
Forgetting the past is why we keep making the same mistakes again and again.
This is nothing new in the world of politics. And this does not make either Secretary Clinton or the DNC more "corrupt" than Trump or the RNC. That ship has sailed if ever there was a competition between the two.
Trump, Nunes, et al will use this ad infinitum to distract us from the more ominous and unprecedented Russian interference and possible collusion. Let's stay focused on the real individual/s threatening our democracy. And Clinton et al are not or never will be the perpetrators.
My regret is that the Clinton campaign did not heed this dossier and act upon it. To date, it has been proven so far by our intelligence that much of what was found has come to pass.
5
Ha lots of people with blinders on. Like it or not the relationship with Clinton and Russia with the sale of Uranium and donations is there as much as it is with Trump. Now knowing what we know of Trump would he be smart enough to collude or trustworthy enough to collude with the Russian Govt? The answer is probably not Trump would be bragging about it and or it would have been leaked ago. The campaign was too incompetent to do anything correctly. The won because HRC was probably the worst candidate to run outside of Bernie Sanders.
5
Another day and more Clinton bashing from the Gray Lady. And of course Maggie Haberman takes to Twitter in defense of this sacred cause (at least in part because acknowledging any validity in her critics' arguments also acknowledges her journalist malpractice during last year's campaign). Read Josh Marshall's point by point analysis of this web of innuendo, noting that there is nothing of substance in this article that was not known last year. I have a digital subscription to the NYT, but other than access to Krugman and Blow, I wonder why I keep it, Especially since the WaPo is doing a significantly better job at a fraction of the price (only $4/month for Amazon Prime members). Primarily nostalgia and/or habit I guess; I've been reading the NYT since the mid-60's.
10
I've read this article twice, and I still don't get it. It was reported several days after the Buzzfeed publication of the dossier that it was first the Republicans, and then the Democrats, who paid for the opp research conducted by Steele. I guess this is an attempt by the Trump legal team to invalidate the FISA warrants, by claiming what? That the warrants supported by the dossier weren't based on probable cause? Just because the Dems paid for the dossier and the investigation doesn't mean that the information contained therein is wrong. I don't think "fruit from the poisonous tree" is a good working hypothesis for the Trump defense.
8
Susan
You are correct. I read the same reports when the dossier was first released by Buzzfeed. This is an attempt by Donny the Dunce to muddy the waters.
There are also reports that Mueller or Congressional committees have corroborated some of the allegations in the dossier.
The UraniumOne deal is also very old news. Just more obfuscation and deflection.
2
So, if I'm reading this correctly, the dossier was paid for by a Republican - no one's saying who - and then picked up and funded as opposition research, but not ultimately used, by the Clinton Campaign and the DNC.
Where, exactly, is the story? Am I missing something?
It's almost as if the Times is, like, yeah, so the Trumps are meeting with Russians, the Mercers are funding Data Analytics with Kushner running the digital show (more than likely with Russian help) from some underground facility somewhere in Texas, Don Jr is boasting - with a huge wink and a nod - about his father's for sure win at a dinner party in Manhattan days before the election, and the GOP, as usual, is turning a blind eye because, hey, there's an R in the Oval Office, but, hey, let's not miss a chance to slime Hillary with something that "sounds" like it might be a crime but actually isn't because, you know, CLINTON!
It gets tiresome, guys. Especially when's there's a Whitefish Puerto Rico energy payola scandal I've yet to see anything on. (Google it)
16
it's not a big deal, although one hopes that all of the people who paid for this research to eventually be revealed. Neither was Donald Trump Jr. meeting with Russian officials to get opposition research a big deal. Opposition research during a campaign is quite common.
Neither side used the opposition research they got. In the case of the Steel dossier, it's clear why: it's a series of short memos, unsubstantiated, hard to verify. It's simply too risky for a political campaign to use explosive information like this without being able to prove the claims.
Only if you refuse to connect the dots
1
The Democrats will be exposed for their dishonesty.
29
The dems might be a little dishonest, but at least they are not Rusian agents.
If this dossier is just opposition research, then you must believe Donald Trump Jr.'s claim to meet with Russians for dirt on Hillary as just 'research'. You can't say the dossier is nothing to worry about, then yell fire about Trump Jr's attempts to find dirt.
19
I have no problem with Trump Jr asking the Russians for dirt on Hillary. I have a problem with him asking the Russians to invade our political process with troll farms and disinformation campaigns, and help them do undermine our democratic process, while running a money laundry for the Russian oligarchs.
Let me summarize this for clarity.
The DNC and Clinton wanted dirt on Trump. They hired a firm that hired someone to fabricate news to sully Trump. The FBI knew and covered it.
The same FBI cleared HRC of any wrong-doing even before interviewing her about her misdeeds regarding her emails that may have compromised the security of the nation. As well as her staff, who got impunity. All that before the election that they thought they would win.
And now, a government committee can't learn who hired the firm behind the fake accusations against Trump?
Before all this, Bill got hundreds of thousands of dollars for speech(es) in Russia. His foundation got many many millions from Russia who happened to want US uranium. And they got it while Obama was president and HRC Secretary of State. We know that corruption was involved.
Phew! HRC deserves the presidency right?
3
The difference is that Fusion GPS did not send the Clinton campaign an email saying, "We are helping you as part of the Russian government's support of Hillary Clinton." Sheesh.
3
The shoe on the other foot? Mueller is eating Tums like candy. What to do.....what to do???
15
I really have to get over being shocked at seeing the hoops, warps, convolutions, and Klein bottles that Trumpists create as they try to somehow, anyhow, come up with a crime that Hillary Clinton committed and make the record of Trump's links to Russia go bye-bye.
But then, I need to get over being surprised at seeing alleged leftists hoot and holler at Hillary Clinton, the DNC, and the newspaper they're accusing of not covering the story they're commenting on: I should by now be used to seeing Berniacs, Steiners, and Antifa types keep coming up with alibis for their having helped elect an ignorant, greedy slob President.
And most of all, I need to get over being surprised at the level of illiteracy from too many, who read this article and got pretty much everything insanely wrong.
The worst thing you can rationally accuse Hillary Clnton of is: not knowing what the law firm was doing, and then ducking questions.
Trumpists just yanked your right to sue a company like Wells Fargo. Glad to see you've prioritized.
12
There is more to this. Look for HRC to be indicted soon.
27
Hillary will be jailed right after Dan Quale is indicted for felony spelling fraud.
4
Dan Quayle, not Quale.
Is there some reason that the lead on the story is Clinton and the DNC paid for this research when it has been well known for months in other publications that the "dossier" started as oppo research from the Republican party?
Is the NYTimes so lazy to take old information reported by Mother Jones back in October, or so critical of the the DNC and Hillary as they were with the incessant reporting of HC's emails vs. Donald Trump's non-qualification for President, that they couldn't come up with a different headline?
For Shame!
10
More rank hypocrisy from liberals. I am shocked.
27
Says it all that, despite the involvement of two NY Times journalists in uncovering this, the paper itself relegates this down the page, below the usual anti-Trump headlines and op-eds.
17
I must say that I am impressed that you not only are reporting on this but have it on the front page! Getting better NYT
16
This is an *extremely* misleading piece of journalism for reasons pointed out by, e.g. Josh Marshall of TPM inter alia. I am canceling my subscription because of how the editors have chosen to present this piece of news.
7
Not surprisingly, most posts on this are defensive of the DNC and Hillary. "They do it, so should we.. that's politics". I disagree!
Read the NYT, WP, AP, Reuters and THEN go visit FOX - just to browse their headlines. No matter what the current news affairs, no matter how bad Trump and company stumble, FOX and the 35 M Trump base are focused like lasers on Hillary, Russian uranium, teachers and immigrants who commit crimes... 24/7. Its unbelievable they are still working on the 2016 election - playing to the base.
The Dems in congress and the Senate should immediately push to start an investigation and subpoena Clinton, Wassermann-Shultz, and anyone else involved in this if even a hint of a crime was committed. They would have everything to gain: 1) flush Hillary and the old guard DNC that screwed Bernie, 2) show the RNC that Dems stand for country before party, and 3) get this out in the open and over with, before it becomes the polical focus of the 2018 elections.
127
What difference does it make who paid for the research. It's the results that are important. You did note that members of the Clinton Campaign never were deeply involved in directing the research and certainly did not themselves meet with Russian operatives. Seriously you would prefer to spend more taxpayers dollars (ours) added to the fiasco of years and millions spent investigating Hillary's email server and Benghazi?
Wow, a stand up liberal!
Kudos!
Just a note here: Bernie was not screwed by either Hillary or the DNC. Unless it can be proved that they forced nearly 4 million more people against their will to vote for her over Bernie (good luck with that), that's a baseless accusation worthy of the Republicans. And really, let's be honest here: if anyone was truly screwed, it was Hillary, who Bernie continued to disingenuously smear long after his campaign was a lost cause, providing fodder for the Republicans to use against her in the general while also inciting others among the Democrats to both distrust her motives and demand "ideological purity" (again, very Republican).
3
So what really is the news here. I am sorry the DNC did not release the dossier sooner and maybe we would not be stuck with the nut job of a president we currently have. I know the Clinton name sells papers but really NYT haven’t you made enough money from the reporting of the ridiculous email debacle. Could we move on please!
4
"We will sell you the rope with wich we will hang you. " K.M.
2
This is all too sordid for me. These are just not people I can respect, pained as I am to write that. Enough, back to my work and classical music to make me forget all this happened.
10
Sorry, Nancy. We can't hide and ignore it if we love America.
4
Watch the radical right try to spin this to try to ramp up renewed hatred for the most qualified person ever to run to be president of the United States - Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton - and the democratic party.
People are asking why the DNC didn't make Russian interference in OUR election a huge issue during the campaign. Are you kidding? For the same reason the "establishment" media lambasted Ms. Rodham-Clinton when she talked about the "vast right wing conspiracy" when Bill Clinton was under attack. For the same reason President Obama tried to work with republicans then refused to take them on directly when they obstructed every thing he tried to do.
The radical right wing method is to call progressives and liberals "cry babies". Like all good bullies they know how to strike fear-anger-hate in the hearts and minds of people and they knew/know how to try get people to turn on the "weaker sex". Sadly, it worked.
Add to that the fact that the media insisted on covering the stupid e-mail non-issue ad nauseum and it's clear that "Russia interference in our election" would be a non-starter with the Robber Baron owned press/media.
Now it's up to WE THE PEOPLE to make sure radical right wing propaganda does not gain traction again. They want OUR minds and WE must not let them win again. Fight back with everything you have because everything that made/makes American democracy great is under attack every single day.
15
When you say radical right wing, what part are you calling radical? Serious question. People through out these terms like it is candy. Now before you answer please do not us talking points or start trying to attack. Give me 2 issues that are radical. I would be willing to bet that in most cases, the right and the left are not that far apart. People tend to focus on the 10% and not the 90%. Maybe we should stop painting such broad strokes. Just saying!
3
On what basis was Hillary Clinton the most qualified person to have ever run for POTUS? I have always wondered at that description. As far as I can see, every position of note she has ever had came to her as a result of who she married and the opportunities that were handed to her because of that husband.
10
Most qualified? What a delusional state that you must exist in. Qualified for prison, yes!
2
The FBI has ignored multiple subpoenas to appear regarding their relationship with Fusion and Steele.
It was a Fusion-linked Russian lawyer who approached Don Jr with potential dirt on Clinton. And it was Fusion who hired Steele to get dirt from Russia on Trump.
Maybe what happened to Don Jr was a sting.
21
And?? Wasn't it already reported that a GOP donor started the funding for opposition research? Makes sense Dems would pick it up. The actual news to be gathered here is that the Clinton campaign found a high road and did not publish it themselves.
Come on, NYT. Your coverage, and that of WaPo and every other organization's obsession over the email SCANDAL (gasp!) already contributed greatly to the election of the creature that is now our national shame. Is this your second (third, fourth, fifth....) shot at that uppity woman? For crying out loud, do not let the GOP distract you (again) from the real news happening around you. You know, news that actually matters?
Sheesh.
22
So then how did every major newspaper and network get a hold of the dossier? It must've fell off a truck.
3
So it appears that Mrs. Clinton isn’t as squeaky clean as she wanted voters to believe. And now with the investigation into how she used her position as secretary of state to elicit funds from foreign governments for the Clinton foundation, it is abundantly clear now that American voters were offered the two worst candidates to choose from in history. Which is astonishing when one considers that the GOP put up a slate of 17 contenders for the nomination at one point.
American politics is at an all-time low but what is even more worrisome is how poorly American journalists have been performing in their coverage of it. One wonders with the heavy attacks on the president and the free ride they were giving Mrs. Clinton, if the investigation into the Russian purchase of uranium and her emails would have ever been reported.
It’s easy to criticize politicians and political candidates, but the media is just as responsible for the sad state of affairs we are in with their failure not only to pursue and report the news but also to analyze those events that come to light free of political bias. While the ideal of objectivity has been thrown out the window with the advent of the “New Journalism” it would be nice if reporters could at least strive for that ideal rather than just throwing in the towel and offering us nonsense and warmed-over reporting from other media outlets.
172
What'd she do that was even wrong here, let alone illegal?
Do be specific.
4
Great comment. Finally one worth a NYT Pick. Kudos.
2
FYI -- both the NY TImes and Washington Post are reporting this story. THis information just came out and they are reporting it.
People need to be aware that in the intelligence business, you often get what you pay for, which means that the information that is delivered to the client may be slanted to satisfy the client's wants and needs. This happens regularly. A notorious example was the stovepiping of intelligence through the Department of Defense in order to justify the Iraq War. It was highly selected, uncorroborated and mostly wrong. But it was what the clients (Rumsfeld, Cheney et.al.) wanted to receive. With this lesson in mind, no one should put much stock in the Steele Dossier unless there is factual evidence to support its assertions.
6
So people associated with Clinton could have long ago admitted publicly something that 1) everyone already knew in broad outline form and 2) really doesn't matter because it was legit, but instead the folks associated with Clinton did a two-step dance around it.
Eventually the specific details would come out.
And then it would look like the Clinton's had something to hide.
Sound familiar?
Trump is not the only one who cannot learn from his own mistakes.
The Democratic Party needs to get its act together, urgently. The Trump Road to Autocracy is a national emergency. The opposition party needs to be in crisis mode.
8
Autocracy, really? Absolute power, really?
Seems more like he can't get anything passed in congress, more like no power.
"Road to Autocracy," not achievement of literal absolute power.
Leave out the words "Road to" and it looks as absurd as if I paraphrased you as saying Trump can get anything passed by Congress - one little t and an apostrophe can make a big difference, just like excising a couple of words.
The evidence that Trump seeks to undermine any insitutions of power outside of himself is pretty substantial at this point: the Courts, Congress, political parties (even his own party), and the Media are real or "fake" depending only on whether they support Trump totally and continuously.
If Hillary Clinton had anything at all to do with funding the dossier on Trump, she should all be nominated for the Medal of Freedom. Looking back at this from the perspective of history, she will be recognized as a hero. We should build her a statue.
19
Exactly Independent Voter agree with you completely.
2
Funny. A statue to be taken down in later years by those offended by her.
This revelation is one more example, as if we needed another, of Clinton making a mess of her candidacy to pave the way to Trump's presidency.
38
Shame on the Times for reporting this like it’s new news. This report has been known for awhile now. I read it many months ago. So why now bring this up yet again? What kind of politics is at play here? Disgraceful.
11
You should probably do some more research.
This IS news, especially since the Clinton camp repeatedly lied about their involvement in the dossier.
Trump's despicable, Putin's despicable and Clinton's despicable. The Obama/Biden/Clinton administration sold a sizable portion of US's Uranium to Russia for an enormous sum and Bill gave a quick speech to a Russian bank for a cool $500,000 kickback.
They are all corrupt, all on the take, all in it for themselves. The system is broke, forget about the distraction of identity politics. Don't get drawn in, demand better if you don't then it'll get even worse once Trump goes.
The corrupt system is what needs taking down.
7
Too funny!
First compare the writing, placement on front page etc of this story compared to the NYT hair on fire reporting of the meeting between Jared Kushner trump jr and a Russian lawyer that lasted twenty minutes and nothing was done, no money changed hands.
So far zero Russian ties to trump- zero. Also zero Russian money to or from trump.
Meanwhile Hillary’s pockets over $150 million dollars from Putin himself! Then Hillary pays fusion gps and the pedestal group millions for Russian misinformation
So zero money or contact to trump, but $150 million to Hillary from Russians plus tens of millions from Hillary to Russians for dirt
Even the NYT might be able to see has the real Russian problem here- as for NYT readers? Not so much...
58
Zero ties to Russia
Oh. You mean except for his campaign manager, his NSC guy, his son-in-law, at least three weird guys on his personal staff, and the many business dealings he's bragged about so loudly.
I am not sure that's "zero."
3
Yes Paul manafort only worked for trump for 2 1/2 months but manafort worked for the podesta group for years bringing in Russians money trading for favors from Hillary as Secretary of State. Jared Kushner has zero exposure and trumps business is building hotels in world capitals so that’s no surprise either.
Trump ties to Russia are zero
Hillary’s tues to Russia is over $150 million plus Hillary sold our uranium to Russia
1
You seem to have a few things confused. The Clinton Foundation is a real foundation doing real work world wide. It has an excellent reputation and funds going to the Foundation do not go to the Clintons personally. Perhaps you have the Clinton Foundation confused with something like the Trump Foundation, which has used donations for personal expenses like paying fines, buying football memorabilia, and let's not forget that statue of Donald J, or the profits going to his properties for the fundraising events the Trump Foundation conveniently holds, and charges market value, for those events.
Vast difference. As for Trump having heavy involvement with the Russians, that's recorded history. The extent of that, and how the real estate deals done with them in the past may or may not have been money laundering for the Russian Mob, how much Trump campaign staff were involved with the Russians and how much Trump may owe Russian owned or influenced banks is yet to be determined.
Since Trump has made it very clear through his career that he will lie without compunction and prefers to fight dirty, then he has the credibility of Al Capone when he denies he's not in deep with a nation that once tried to put nuclear missiles 90 miles from our coast, pointed at us.
So I'm not sure who or what you are talking about, or what universe you live in, but it has absolutely no resemblance to mine.
Dear NYT,
Now we know why The Times seemed -- shall we say, incurious -- about who paid for the Steele "dossier." Maggie asked and the PC lawyer denied it ... what more could she do?
Now that The Times knows this was all a setup, what will you do for a followup?
With this bombshell, it now appears that the Obama administration enlisted the FBI and IC in a smear operation to defeat a candidate for the US presidency, and colluded with UK and Russian IC to do it. Obama's top lieutenants - chief communications officer Anita Dunn and her husband, White House counsel Bob Bauer - worked closely with Perkins Coie's political manager Marc Elias (to provide deniability) to concoct this "salacious and unproven" dossier, and use it to drive an investigation by our FBI -- charging all the bills to the DNC and Clinton campaign.
Perkins Coie should be required to provide detailed billing records and a 30-b-6 witness so as to ascertain how much the firm got paid, who managed this smear operation, how much they paid to GPS, who in the Clinton campaign "ran" the smear operation, whether Hilary was kept informed, and how the information was vetted and pedaled to the media, the FBI and the IC, all to undermine the Trump campaign.
The Times still has an opportunity to do the right thing on the Obama collusion story, without fear or favor. There is a Pulitzer here, if not in the discredited Trump collusion angle.
Go get it.
39
“...salacious claims about connections between Donald J. Trump, his associates and Russia." Huh? Something must have gone haywire with the author's word processor: Merriam Webster defines “salacious” as “arousing or appealing to sexual desire or imagination.”
Just not important.
3
And it's ok for Trumpfolk to gather in a hotel and collect the dirt on HRC from various Russian tools? This is rich.
7
The Author is not telling the whole story, nor an accurate one. Just wait until Mueller (and hopefully the FBI) unveils the actual "who done what to who and when"............patience, America, Patience !!!
3
And the NYT continues in the new tradition of corporate news. Sell advertising with just enough prose to stay disguised.
Did the GOP or Democratic party set up Trump, Manafort, Don Jr., and Kushner? Did Hillary Clinton pose as a Russian and trick them into committing crimes, because if she did, I would be really interested in that Breaking News?
4
NYT readers/writers --- the rationalization is thunderous.
24
After a year of relentlessly tearing down Hillary Clinton and thereby enabling the rise of Donald Trump, it seems that the NYT is at it again. Several important points noted by Josh Marshall at TPM:
1) It has been known for over a year that the Democrats partially funded the Fusion GPS research into Trump (that fact was mentioned in David Corn's original piece about the Steele dossier in 10/16 --the dossier that the NYT did not think worthy of being reported on at the time). Why is this considered breaking news?
2) This article never mentions the fact that the research was originally paid for by Republicans and only later funded by the Democrats.
3) The FBI had enough confidence in the report to suggest funding Steele's work themselves. Never mentioned here.
3) This article misleadingly presents how much the Clinton campaign spent on the dossier, falsely implying that it was $12.4 million. Not true, since that figure goes back to a year before funding of the oppo research began.
NYT you helped to enable the Iraq War and the election of Donald Trump. Are you now going to help Trump avoid responsibility for colluding with Russia?
15
Wow, you mean the Democrats paid a private company for opposition research on their opponent in the general election?
This is me being shocked. Yawn.
Meanwhile, the Trump campaign took a meeting where they were told specifically that the crown prosecutor of Russia had information on his opponent for him that was part of the Russian government's support for Mr. Trump, and conservatives have absolutely zero problem with that.
This is, to coin a phrase, a humongous nothingburger.
14
I'm not sure how this is new news...I remember reading about this about a year ago.
7
This is not new news! When the dossier first became public knowledge, it was reported that the Republicans commissioned the opposition research and then the Democrats furthered the research. Why is the media serving this up like new news to be used as a talking point for Cheeto?
6
Well let’s not kid ourselves, who do we think took over paying for it once he was on the verge of clinching the GOP nomination? Ivanka? Melania? Don Jr.?
Let’s see who in the GOP got the ball rolling on the dossier; someone in the Republican camp had their own reservations about his Russian connections. No surprise there if you watched his faltering career, downward spiral, and financial disarray. The mob loan sharks aren’t the only game in town.
And for God’s sake, let’s remember that having DNC and Hillary fund this in part does not mean that the contents are untrue. I am sure Hannity and co will try to argue that but the jury is out.
6
I'm shocked shocked that the Clinton's and the DNC bought and paid for knowingly false and made up allegations that were used to try and destroy our President and the very foundation of our democracy. This made up drivel was touted by CIA Brennan's in his initial bogus reason to do an investigation. We need a special counsel yesterday. People need to go to jail for this.
18
And these are the people that liberals hope will protect them against the dishonesties of Trump!
This country is flat on its face. Let it rest in peace. #calexit
7
Trump deserves impeachment. His emoluments clause violations, self-dealing, nepotism, slander of a former president and obstruction of justice would be immediate grounds in Democrats controlled the House.
But I am seeing a lot a rationalizing for HRC and the DNC in these comments. Many here have defended paying for the Steele dossier as legitimate "opposition research." If so, then why didn't the Clinton campaign and the DNC own up to it? The cover up is always worse than the crime. This lack of transparency gives Trump the excuse to continue the investigation into his corruption a witch hunt.
Keeping the funding of the dossier secret was a blunder. Democrats need to stop behaving like rationalizing Republicans and own up to this. Then go after Trump for his corruption.
3
If the Clinton campaign and the DNC had that dossier during the campaign, why didn't they use it? The fact that they paid for it, and I assume other oppo information, is kind of irrelevant.
I believe it was reported back when the dossier was made public after the election, that the original work was purchased by on of Trump's Republican opponents. This gets obscured in this reporting.
I think it's more interesting that Fusion GPS was apparently willing to work for both Republicans and Democrats. I'm not clear if Perkins Coie worked for both sides as well.
1
All those who have pushed this piece of British sleaze are guilty of slander and should be drummed out of politics if not jailed.
11
At the end of the day trump is still a lair! When will the IRS audit be over so that we can get a look at his taxes?
2
Is this article insinuating that opposition research = fake news? There is a difference between paying for research and paying social media to spread lies.
5
Paying people in Russian intelligence for "salacious and unverified information" (Comey's words) = ?
11
Wow, the hypocrisy is just stunning.
Trump Jr met with a Russian contact - weeks of negative comment, bashing , conspiracy theories , calls for crimminal investigations, etc
Clinton campaign and the DNC paid for dirt from the Russians on Trump - eh, it's ok, lets get back to bashing the GOP and Trump.
33
Why didn't the DNC and HRC use it? My guess is that the information was so tawdry that neither wanted to use it unless Trump's pre-election polling got better. Ironically the polling data was wrong although those that voted for Trump either wouldn't care or wouldn't believe the intel. To the GOP "just win baby" was the goal. The GOP is true slime so that the 1% can get those tax cuts and the religious right can end a woman's right to choose.
1
Why didn't they use it? They were shopping this around to media outlets for months. Buzzfeed was the one that took the bait and put the dossier on their website.
The dossier was delivered to the FBI weeks before the election.
The DNC and HRC did everything short of self-publishing to use this stuff.
15
Here are the facts. The Democrats hung a banner on Trump that they themselves engaged in. This is called politics and for anyone to say my side is clean is a partisan fool. Obnoxious,boorish Trump cuts through all that and reveals DC for what it is. Too long have the Clintons or the Bushes or any other life long politician, been in control. Trump is opening many eyes and that may be his legacy. Perhaps serving ones country will become in vogue again.
8
You think Donald "Bone Spurs" Trump has the least little interest in serving his country?
Oh, my stars and garters.
1
So, at long last, we finally get the real "Russian collusion" story: Clinton and the DNC paid millions so the Russians would give them dirt on Trump (aka "fake news") in order to influence the 2016 election.
Next up: massive bribes paid to the Clintons in order to influence the State Department to approve the Uranium One deal.
25
This may be just the tip of the iceberg.
It doesn't help that the Clinton camp "lied about it with sanctimony for a year" as Maggie Haberman from The New York Times said. Looks like Hillary even had a back and forth with Brian Fallon about it publicly.
It matters. I know we're in this post-truth world now, and Hillary is famously a congenital liar, but it should still matter to Democrats.
Why did Clinton lie about it? Wouldn't it have been easier to tell the truth?
This just illustrates why so many people didn't trust her.
But the real question is the whether the FBI used this unverified dossier, ultimately paid for by the Clinton campaign, to get a FISA warrant to listen in on Manafort while he was part of Trump's campaign.
This would mean that the Clinton Camp paid for a fake dossier to hand over to the FBI which was then used as the basis for FISA warrants to spy on a political opponent in which they found nothing, while relentlessly pushing an anti-Russia hysteria after their stunning election loss.
This is going to be entertaining, which is hard to believe after witnessing the reality TV clown show from the White House for the last year.
21
So what?
The Trump campaign was the sleaziest campaign in American history. Trump is the sleaziest president in the history of our nation. He has surrounded himself with sleazy advisers like Mnuchin, of the 25 cent eviction of a little old lady. And now, after all that sleaziness, reporters will fixate on who paid for oppo research?
How about concentrating on the possibly fatal wounds being inflicted on our constitutional democracy ? And who cares anyway considering the information contained in the dossier is true? We have a president who lies every time his lips move, who defends his sexual assault and harassment by claiming the women he attacked weren’t pretty enough to bother with?
Americans, repent of this folly before it is too late. Republicans, repent before you go down in history for destroying a government that has saved the world over and over again just to capitulate to foreign and domestic enemies. Do not lie down, do not behave like boot licking dogs. That behavior is what one expects of Putin toadies, not American law makers. It is your job to protect our nation and the people who live in it. Step up before you go down in history as the men, (mostly), who decided serfdom was better as long as they and theirs get a cut of the looting of our treasury to decorate more gaudy homes in gilt. How ironic. Even the gold is fake.
4
Not surprised the MSNBC talking points are being replicated here en masse -- "nothing to see here, move on . . ." Amazing. If this is such a non-event, why in the world did Clinton and the DNC deny their involvement with the dossier for a year? Remarkable.
24
But you still can't identify the Republicans who initiated and financed this oppo research? Let's all bash Hillary and her team for the hundredth time so the GOP perpetrators can slip away unnoticed and unaccountable. Again.
7
This isn't news.
The real story is that most of what appears in the dossier is verifiable and true.
5
Who says so? The FBI has had it for a year. Nothing has been verified, as much as the FBI and Comey can be believed. What has been verified are a number of errors, including the visit to Prague by one of Trump's lawyers who, as it turns out, has never been to Prague. We're still waiting for your "real story."
1
No one has taken this dossier seriously because the sources are suspect. This is not why Trump is under investigation. Trump is under investigation because he asked the Russians to hack the Hillary campaign on TV, Many staffers had meetings with Russians and lied about it, , etc.
If both campaigns colluded with the Russians they should all go to jail. The parties don't get to cancel out their crimes. They did out too is not a defense.
2
Hilarious comments! "Why is this news?" Ha Ha!
The same commenters were foaming at the mouth when Donny Jr. met with a Russian lady, but now shrug their shoulders over the DNC paid dossier that cooked up Daddy Trump in Moscow with urinating prostitutes.
I'm sure Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Hillary and the rest of the DNC say this is all just nothing.
Tip of the iceberg, my friends. Though the NYT will twist itself in pretzels all over again like it always does when anything goes against the far Left narrative.
28
Russia! Hillary and the DNC colluded with the Russians to influence the outcome of our elections!!!!!!
15
Another squirrel, squirrel!
2
Democrats In Crisis! They have no power. Can't win elections. Pay for a Fake dossier and give it to our "Intelligence" Agencies. They base their entire investigation on it. Now it is all falling apart. Fusion Gate is finally getting going. Lookout Obama (You knew didn't you).
Meanwhile the economy is beginning to boom. Unemployment is at a record low. Illegal immigration has dropped drastically since January. Dodd-Frank is being torn apart piece by piece. If the Republican party would just listen to the voters and support the Trump agenda, the Democrats might not ever when a major election again for a generation!
16
The Clinton campaign and DNC were caught in an outrageous lie, probably the biggest scandal in politics ever.
I'm sure this is the only time Hillary and the DNC has lied, right?
18
Why doesn't the NYT mention that the inquiry was initially funded by Republicans? The headline is misleading.
6
Ok, so what? You can bet that Trump and the Republicans did the same thing on Hillary Clinton. The author of the Russian part is a retired MI6 operative and well experienced in Russian affairs. Let the Special Counsel and his team investigate the veracity of this as the GOP wails like wounded sheep.
Mr. Mueller, could you speed this investigation up a bit as we're being showered increasingly by the day with Trumpian lies and Republican fake outcry. "My heart bleeds".
3
This is all old news, reported as only one source of Russian-Putin connections allegations and it was originally funded by a Republican. Anyone needing a refresher course on the Trump lies built upon other Trump and associates lies, corruption, false disclosures on official security documents, and so on ad infinitum, and ad nauseam, can check out the Bill Moyers Russian investigation timeline at billmoyers.com website.
Putin is still conducting a cyber war on America and Russian propaganda sealed the deal for the taking of our WH by Trump. Meanwhile, the Mueller criminal investigation has grown in staff and outreach and grand juries have been impaneled.
Congress Intel Committees, on the very political side of the issue, have told the public numerous times that Russia is our enemy and hacked into our DNC during the 2016 presidential election as well as election systems in 21 states. Proof of collusion and other crimes they are leaving, rightfully, to Mueller. Charges will be brought against all foreign nationalists and Americans involved.
This dossier is just one document out of the thousands that were examined. It has some proven facts but its overall veracity still remains in question. I am sure that this is the same status that hundreds of other examined documents share. The entire purpose of any investigation is to separate the chaff from the wheat, truth from fiction, facts from fake news and the guilty from the innocent.
1
No one is saying that the Democrats were bad for paying for opposition research. We're saying they were morons for paying for this particularly dubious and transparently fake dossier.
8
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
In all seriousness, why wasn't this story the headline story of the day?
15
If any of the information gleaned from Hillary's campaign oppo research that leads Mueller to indict Trump or his minions, it's money well spent.
2
It was then Secretary Clinton's State Department who brokered the sale of 20% of America's future uranium production to the Soviet Union who is now receiving regular shipments of it to use, sell or give away to whoever they wish, including Syria and North Korea. In exchange for this, The Clinton's received millions of dollars worth of "donations" to their Foundation and fees from speaking engagements from the parties who profited from such "favors". And this is only the tip of their ice berg. Although technically what the Clintons have been doing for years may not actually break any laws (to be expected from two people with law degrees), it is still morally bankrupt and treasonous actions. It was inevitable that the American people would have chosen any candidate to be their president, even someone as inappropriate as Mr. Trump, over another Clinton. The DNC is ultimately to blame for severely thwarting a fair and transparent democratic primary process that could have resulted in a winning candidate (with or without Russia's "help"), something that even the RNC was not that corrupt and stupid to do. It is no wonder that the Democratic party is weaker than it has been for many decades and becoming increasingly so. The only way, at this point, to re-establish "good government" in our nation appears for its citizens to create a viable third party alternative.
12
I think the republicans should open up some investigations - at least 10 different ones.
2
The funding of the dossier by the DNC is merely the tape on the door of the Watergate Hotel. The starting point. The teaser. This will now lead Mueller to an examination of Paul Manafort’s role at the Podesta Group and then on to how and why the Obama administration, and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, agreed to let the Russians buy twenty percent of our strategic uranium reserves. Yes, the same democracy-undermining Russians that HRC supporters remind us, ad nauseam, are the greatest existential ever faced by our democracy. And following the thumbs up on the uranium deal from HRC, the Russians just happened to make a $145 million donation to the Clinton foundation. Imagine that. Oh, and as a further show of appreciation, Bill Clinton also got a half million dollars for that twenty minute speech that he gave in Moscow.
The Russians were buying influence. This is the real collusion story. Quid pro quo. It’s that simple.
How ironic that the Russia story pushed with such salacious fervor by the media, and intended divert attention from the disastrous HRC presidential campaign, will instead cause the Clintons to reap the whirlwind.
14
So what? Is there something wrong with funding research on your opponent? It is shameful, perhaps, that this information was not researched by an arm of the government looking into Russian interference in the election, instead of a partisan committee, but I don't see the reason why people should even be interested in this.
2
Here we go again with "Lock her up!" The real issue is whether or not the allegations in the dossier are correct. Certainly, it was the first to alert us of Russia's involvement in the campaign. But, in the extreme partisanship of Congress it will be used in the ongoing effort to discredit a document that may prove whether or not there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Why Republicans are rallying to a man who is simultaneously attacking so many of them and forcing others to retire is itself as baffling as it is frightening. In any case, the document is also in the hands of the Special Counsel who has also interviewed its author, a highly respected former British intelligence officer. Congress must defer to him on issues of criminality and focus instead on how to protect our electoral system from another Russian or other hostile actor's attacks. We do not need anymore Benghazi (dare I say) "witch hunts."
1
If you fund opposition research does that make the research any less valid? If you agree it makes it less valid then you have to forgo anything you know about pharmaceutical research, because it's all funded by big pharma.
If the research is conducted by a credible organization then it's not less believable then something funded by anyone else.
1
It's not paying for someone to do the research so much as paying for the information. Steele paid people in Russian intelligence for the dirt. And that dirt may have then been used by the FBI for warrants, etc.
And the FBI using paid-for information--generated by one side in a presidential election, against the other side in that election--is highly problematic.
12
I'm shocked, shocked to find that OPPOSITION RESEARCH is going on here in the Democratic Party!
Actually, I'm just sorry that the Democrats didn't do a lot more opposition research. We know there's dynamite still out there: for example, the off-air footage from "The Apprentice" that the camera operators are hoarding. And then there are those tax returns: there must be something really explosive there, or Trump wouldn't be hiding them.
If the DNC had done more opposition research in time, perhaps we wouldn't now have to deal with a human wrecking ball in the White House.
3
At the time that Democrats began paying for the research had Fusion GPS already hired Mr. Steel? This article states "Fusion GPS began working for the law firm, Perkins Coie, in April 2016."
Yet other reporting has it that Fusion GPS also had a client that "was a major GOP donor who was adamantly opposed to Trump. They reportedly hired Fusion GPS in Sept. 2015 and paid the Washington, D.C.-based firm nearly $1 million to investigate Trump."
If the onion is being peeled off one layer at a time, it looks like today's reporting is just the layer pertaining to the Clinton/Fusion/Steele nexus. And once this layer plays out, then we will keep digging until that next layer is peeled away and reveals who the mystery GOP donor was that instigated the entire dossier chapter. Wonder how the Trump team will try and spin that one?
2
As a liberal I just want the truth about all of the Russian and/or ally involvement in the election to come out, and let the chips fall where they may. Yes, both parties dig up all the dirt they can on opponents, and that will not stop, but what must be stopped is any colluding with a foreign power on any level and that includes not only Russian but also any ally as well.
The 2016 election with all its intrigue and "spy vs spy" has left me with a feeling of cynicism. What we are left with is a president not fit to serve, and a lot of tarnished reputations in the Democratic Party. Perhaps the real winner in all this is Russia. They have manipulated our politics and have created a lot of mistrust about our politicians, and worse they have damaged our faith in the election process.
89
I pile on with this comment - The Russians are laughing their posteriors off.
2
As a liberal? How about as an American?
She lost and couldn't deal. Much like her supporters. How petty.
Trump could be everything the dossier claims, and he'd still be better than any candidate that tries to uphold liberal democracy. If Russia really is working around the globe to overthrow western-style democracies, then they deserve praise.
4
If Trump is everything the dossier claims, he shouldn't be free to walk the streets, let alone president of the United States.
So what? Fox News has assured us that 'everyone does opposition research.' However, unlike Trump and his crooked team, at least the DNC hired a research firm, which then contracted with a British former spy. The GOP and Trump went directly to Russia and Wikileaks. And most likely got some money under the table. Steele got the goods, which is what I care about.
3
"federal and congressional investigations into Russia’s attempts to disrupt last year’s election"
enough already. gee washington politicians are corrupt? what a revelation; now mueller on his expansive fishing expedtion will be investigating the entire political complex including his own former fbi which by the way was corrupt to the core with phony entrapment policies. fire mueller, save the investigations for bar room chatter and start doing something productive.
1
Let's remember that Watergate started as an attempt at opposition research. They (the plumbers) were attempting to wire tap the DNC so they could learn what they were up to. If they were up to no good, what difference does it make, how they obtained the info?
7
The Republican Party first hired Fusion to get Hillary Clinton's dirty laundry. As soon as it was clear that Trump was the Republican nominee they dropped the matter. It was only after the Republican Party dropped the matter that the DNC's lawyers stepped in.
Seems that Steele's efforts have proved that Trump is is guiltier than homemade sin. No wonder the Republicans are so eager to to tar the Democrats and undercut the Russian ties inquiry. It's called deflection. The Republican Party will stoop to anything to kill the Russian inquiry. The Republican Party is as crooked as a dog's hind leg.
7
They weren't going after Clinton. Backers of Jeb Bush were gathering the info against Trump. When Trump won the primary, they backed out and the Clintons and DNC took over.
5
I think you are mistaken. One of the GOP primary candidates (nobody has said who) first hired the firm to dig up dirt on Trump. When that person dropped out of the race, the DNC and the Clinton campaign starting paying for the research. However, they never used it in the campaign. It all got dropped on us after Trump won. And believe me, it's been keeping him awake at night!
2
Perhaps the "campaign" never used it. Somehow, though, it was shopped around especially to "intelligence" agencies. It may have been used to get a FISA warrant. We should be concerned about these possibilities.
If this doesn't bother you, try replacing Clinton and Democrat with Trump and Republican and see how you would react.
The Trump campaign and Republican party engage a former British intelligence office to dig up dirt on Clinton. They do it through a law firm so that there is an attorney-client privilege that can be claimed, and so that if it comes to light they can say "we didn't know" (plausible deniability don't you know). The Trump campaign doesn't publish the information themselves, but instead a Republican administration uses this information to seek secret court orders for surveillance of the Clinton campaign. The names that are acquired through this secret surveillance, which are supposed to be masked, are instead unmasked at the request of the National Security Advisor. Further, the Republican UN Ambassador says that 260 people were unmasked by requests made in her name, but that she did not authorize (again, plausible deniability). Information from the secret surveillance, including unmasked names, are leaked to the press.
And you think this is ok somehow?
19
Bravo!
4
Hmmm, it might be time for Muller to expand the investigation, start looking at the DNC and the Clinton Campaign?
22
Why does the NYT publish a misleading article? See the details in the link attached. It is a shame if the NYT gives up journalistic integrity in the pursuit of headlines or a false equivalence, as it did in covering the Hillary Clinton email "scandal." The newspaper should at least provide fuller coverage and apologize for incomplete reporting.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/whats-up-with-the-times-piece-on-eli...
8
Ever since the election, I've been throwing stones at Trump on the Russia issue, along with other Democrats. I should have been warned that I was living in a glass house.
This certainly doesn't change the fact that Trump is as incompetent and indecent as Democrats (and many Republicans) say he is. But it does make it look as though Hillary is as dishonest and corrupt as Republicans (and many Democrats) say she is.
Both parties need to pull American politics out of the gutter. Hillary appears to have gotten what she deserved in the 2016 election, which is over and done with. It is time to turn our full attention to Trump, and make sure he gets what he deserves as well, starting with the 2018 midterms.
5
I am not following you at all. Why do the assertions in the dossier tarnish Clinton? This has nothing to do with Clinton and everything to do with Trump and his cronies.
1
Lucy,
She, or someone working for her, paid to extract info from Russia with which to attack her opponent, Trump. Democrats and every contributor to her campaign paid Russia for this. Maybe you mean this doesn't tarnish her further. Maybe you think that isn't possible.
2
Business as usual. All heat, no light.
Good for them, why did they stop there ?
3
Opposition research extends to foreign countries such as Russia? Then why do the DNC and Hillary blame Trump campaign for Russia meddling? They ALL seem to be involved with Russia in an awful meddlesome way. Its as though the right arm does not know what the left arm is doing except that both arms are dipping inside the Russian bowl of scandal chocolate.
8
So all this money was spent for a document that nobody connected with the DNC or the Clinton campaign ever saw? I hope they got a refund.
3
If the minister at one of Trump's churches got caught on tape with hookers in a hotel room, he would be cast out within minutes by the congregation never to be seen or heard from again. If their Donald was on the tape they would circle the wagons and claim that the person appearing on the tape with a huge behind and comb over is a fake.
One glimmer of hope, however, is that Pence and the Mrs. might go for a 25th Amendment removal.
1
Clinton and husband are both lawyers and part of the legal caste that runs and dominates all 3 branches of the U.S. government. Late American newspaper publisher Edward Scripps wrote "If there is such a thing as true freedom and democracy then the road to that goal lies over and through the ruin and annihilation of the legal caste." This article shows how lawyers will conspire to defeat non lawyers for public office.
7
So the Times is trying to go along with Trump's obfuscations by misleading us about the timeline, the origin and the actual facts about Elias and when he joined Hillary's campaign. The opposition research was funded first by Republicans. The Democrats took it on once the GOP dropped it. What is amazingly left out of the story here is that after the Democrats stopped funding it, as Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo notes: "The FBI was sufficiently disturbed and confident in Steele’s work that they agreed to continue funding his work. (They eventually stopped once Steele’s name became public.)"
9
Was something about this opposition research campaign illegal? Just the fact that the DNC and the Clinton campaign hired a lawyer to coordinate an opposition research campaign on Trump isn't illegal. That the lawyer used Fusion GPS to gather information isn't illegal, is it? If Fusion GPS got wind of possible contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia, would it be illegal for them to hire former MI6 spy Steele to investigate that possibility?
7
and?
2
Still waiting for the day we are told this is FAKE news.
Mark my words...the Independent Counsel will hand down indictments, but not having to do with so-called Russia/Trump campaign collusion. We will learn that someone in the Trump camp failed to pay the proper taxes, or file a report with the Feds related to a business deal ten years ago.
7
There is a smell test that this doesn't pass.
5
I must admit it is pretty funny to all the apologists for Hillary et al and the DNC and the hate media trying to say it's OK that the Democrat candidate for president and the DNC conspired with the Russians to create some bogus documents to slime the Republican candidate and its also OK that the FBI used the bogus documents to do illegal electronic surveillance of the Repub candidate all with the cooperation of a sitting president and his political war room in the White House. If the tables were turned and it was the Repubs that had done this, the NYTIMES would have literally no other story on it front pages for weeks. Why do Democrats think it good to turn the USA into a banana republic?
27
Disappointing that readers don't care about the fact that the DNC and Clinton paid numerous parties to create a dossier that ties Trump to Russia. I do hope the FBI will continue their objective, thorough investigation into any and all Russian ties to Trump, and frankly, to Clinton. Since she brokered and made money off a deal with Russia to buy 20% of the US uranium, I find Clinton highly suspect in her relations with Russia. What I don't understand is why are US political leaders so fond of Russia?
My confidence in anything being done objectively in DC is long gone. Honesty and integrity - where did you go?
8
I think the reason anyone in power is fond of Russia is because they admire how well the Russians grab and hold onto power. They've basically perfected corruption. They're a great template if all you want is money and power.
Is this news or a cover for Trump, he was really touting it this morning on FOX, everything else is fake news, I am perfect.....
Deflection? I assume its anything but the truth
I think it is important for journalists to start giving better perspective to matters such as this. Politics is not a clean business, and I think it is safe to say there is dirt everywhere. Clinton and the DNC paid for opposition research that, according to many, went beyond the norm. Simultaneously, Trump's son, son-in-law and campaign manager met with people from Russia to get dirt on Clinton. That latter act is not erased by the former, yet it appears many Trump supporters believe that to be the case. That is why perspective in reporting matters so much at the moment.
To say I have reached my full level of disgust right now would be putting things mildly. As an American citizen, I don't care who paid for what or who met with whom. I care about the integrity of our election process and the very plain and well-documented FACT that the Russians infiltrated so many aspects of daily American life to interfere with this election. If somebody-anybody-in America assisted them, they are a traitor. I could care less if that traitor is a Republican or Democrat. They are a traitor.
To continue to frame this story in a partisan, political light is, frankly, grossly irresponsible. It simply makes an already divided populace more divided. And what disgusts me is that is exactly what Russia was and is trying to achieve.
So I plead to the NYT and WaPo and other media outlets to not lose sight of the real issue here. And the real issue is what Russia did.
277
Why not the same feelings about China? Because of the cheap stuff they sell you? Whre was similar outrage when thousands of people had their personal info hacked by China?
1
There is nothing interesting or new here. Fusion started an investigation and used it to get the Bush campaign, the Clinton campaign, and he fbi to pay them. Good for them.
Clinton and the DNC paid for research on the 'opponent' as all parties do. To do otherwise would be political malfeasance. Russia was attacking the HRC Campaign internally via email dumps and externally via bots and russian trolls spreading lies. I sure as heck would have paid Fusion GPS to continue looking into the Trump overseas labyrinth of foreign entanglements with Russians if I had been attacked like that. Thank god for the Steele Dossier! It comprises work that in a more perfect Union would have been done by the 4th Estate.
1
Trey Gowdy agrees with most of you that it is not relevant who paid for the dossier. He continues, however, "It is much more relevant who relied upon it." How were the FISA warrants obtained? Boring, I know, who cares.
8
While there is little evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians, there is increasing evidence that Clinton and the Democrats did - either intentionally or unintentionally. It's likely that much of the information in the Trump dossier was planted by Russian intelligence agents. The fact that the FBI used this to open an investigation into Trump shows that they were duped by fake news created by the Russians.
Then there is the whole incident of Rosatom's purchase of Uranium One after Russian government entities made disguised contributions to the Clinton Foundation.
It's time for Congress and Mr. Mueller to get serious about investigating collusion with Russia - but not just by Trump. No wonder the Democrats are trying to damp down expectations regarding the investigations. They want the whole thing to go away before it reveals the real collusion.
12
I find it extremely interesting that this public release, which sounds really bad for Democrats, comes out the day after Flake excoriated Trump. I don't like that the Hillary Campaign may have hired Steele. I don't like seeing Democrats use language implying that "they didn't know what or when"-- language that sounds just like the disavowals made by members of the Trump campaign. Nonetheless, how much of the timing of the release of this information is meant to overshadow the remarks that Flake made yesterday? Let's keep our eye on the ball.
3
I a bit puzzled here. All the obviously right wing posters here gloating and crying collusion by the Democrats.
It seems this was started by the Republicans so it started as collusion by Republicans. So it's Republican collusion. But Trump is Republican so it can't be Republican collusion, so it's what?
Then apparently the Democrats picked up the fumble and ran with it so it becomes Democratic collusion.
But is it collusion? They were looking for information on Trumps dealings with the Russians not asking, as far as I can see, for Russian interference in the elections, as has been proposed by some against the Trump campaign. Seems like this is another attempt to divert and dodge by Republicans, otherwise known as the Artful Dodgers.
Smoke and mirrors, running around in circles, fact vs. fiction, divert attention from reality. America has turned into a giant fun house run by our reality show president.
13
I don't care who funded this dossier and it really doesn't matter. All arguments to the contrary are just diversions for what was revealed in the dossier. I appreciate the truth wherever I can find it!
11
Except the sources of the dossier are murky, so no reliable news sources are using it as evidence of everything. The evidence against Trump comes other spend, and trump himself, who can't seem to stop incriminating himself.
So now we know that everything in the dossier is true. If not, Turmp wouldn't be so upset about it and trying so hard to deflect.
4
Day One and the media has skipped over false equivalence and gone right to what they will harp on endlessly--that because the DNC and Clinton funded part of the Dossier research it is not reliable and should be disregarded. Haberman was tweeting to that effect this morning. I wonder why I still pay for this.
5
Agreed. After being a subscriber for almost two decades, it might be time to re-think my household budget.
2
Seems the dossier was the only thing that could unite Dems and Repubs.
The fact that a political party (the Democrats) and Hilliary Clinton lied about funding or initiating this investigation should open some eyes. Instead, a lot of folks are making excuses to lessen the impact of this information. Political bias is getting in the way of morals and ethics. Spinning false stories, misleading, and lying are things we cannot accept from our government or those who would lead us, regardless of party. No excuses, call it what it is.
7
And that is what political campaigns do, opposition research. They don't go to enemies of the state to get information---they hire firms to do the research. So what is the story here?
4
Tom Perez is absolutely the worst leader of the DNC. He's a Republican's dream. Also, this was well-known long before today. The news here is at the DNC's leader is a coward.
1
Reading comprehension is sorely lacking by many commentators here. I have read this article twice and see no evidence of collusion between the DNC, the Clinton campaign, and Russia. An American company was paid for opposition research into Trump’s connections to Russia. That is not a crime.
7
Why isn't this story at the top of the NYT front page? Not emphasizing this story is utterly partisan. This dossier was totally made up. The DNC should not have paid for trash like this.
7
How do you know it was made up? What is the evidence? Because the DNC paid for the investigation to continue after the Republicans stepped away from it when Trump won the nomination? That doesn't seem to prove anything.
2
So what? Everyone pays for opposition research...this is just another diversion from the real problem of Trump and his connections to Russia.. the very same ones that are just sooooo upset about this are doing all they can to stop or discredit the investigation of Russian help for Trump in the election...something which our very own intelligence agencies agree was very real... But hate for Hillary always trumps love of country for Trumpsters!
5
The lying committed by or condoned by the Clintons has been eclipsed only by the lying of Donald Trump. Hopefully, the democratic party is not stupid enough to resurrect her failed candidacy and the Clintons can fade away.
That said, their culpability in the progression of the dossier is interesting but besides the point. So too is the culpability of the republican candidate(s) who started the Fusion GPS dive into finding dirt on Trump. The identity of the republican(s) will come out at some point and he / they can share in the same criticism as the Clintons for denying their involvement.
But again, besides the point.
The main issue is the accuracy of the findings of the GPS Fusion dossier in determining whether or not Trump or his campaign were compromised by the Russians. If he or they were, then any coordination or collusion with Russian oligarchs to undermine the integrity of the US elections must be treated as sedition and the principals dealt with accordingly.
That is the only issue which truly matters.
1
Yes. I donated and knew it was money well spent.
Thank you Hillary.
And if Jeb got it started, thank you Jeb!
6
Hillary PAYS for opposition research and this is worthy of investigation.
Trump gets his opposition research free of charge from Kremlin operatives and he did nothing wrong.
Conservative logic. Gotta love it.
9
The research was both routine, for an election, and begun by a REPUBLCAN opponent of Donald. It was a political decision as to whether the DNC would reveal its contents.
Discount the propaganda value for Donald, it's irrelevant. Donald's base lives in a propaganda loop. Putin himself could confirm his own conspiracy, and the base would say "Putin is being paid by the Democrats to say it."
5
Bravo!
1
Nunes. As pure a political hack as ever was. A true toady willing to debase himself at the drop of a hat. Had to recuse himself from the Russia investigation due to lack of integrity. But not before he had hindered the investigations progress. A disgrace to his this country, his office, the state of California, and his constituents.
3
It's a stretch for those calling Steele a foreign spy or foreign actor. He's a former spy now in private practice working for a British company (GPS). Unlike Russia, British businessmen are not de facto state actors.
As for the claims that this shows that HRC "colluded" with Russia, um yeah ...I guess that's why Putin tried so hard to get her elected and was so disappointed that Trump won.
5
The Democrats funding this investigation was reported by David Corn in Mother Jones a year ago. The only thing we found out now is that Mr. Elias was involved. As soon as a hint of a Clinton connection shows up, the Times predictably invokes Clinton rules, i.e. ordinary stuff is spun as sinister. The Republican who started the investigation remains unnamed. The FBI continuing to fund the investigation after the Democrats stopped the funding remains unstated. Does both-sideism fully explain this persistent journalistic failing?
11
Sorry, but I don't get the importance of this Clinton story in relation to Trump's unethical/illegal actions and secretive doings (tax returns, Russians, nepotism, conflicts of interest..).
So you are a political candidate running for high office against one of the most ruthless, lying real estate developers and con artists. What is wrong with doing some "intelligence gathering" by your party having a private investigator look into this guy's doings in Russia?
That is not nearly on the same unethical level as the real-estate developer and con artist's son meeting directly with the Russians to get dirt on you, his opposing candidate. Plus all the drip-drip-drip and fallout disclosed so far about the Russians meddling in our election process through social media and who knows what else.
Of course, Trump, the GOP, and Fox will play this Clinton information for all its worth (which is not much really) in their game of false equivalence, as the congressional and Mueller investigations proceed into Trump's dealings and collusion with the Russians.
What this Clinton story boils down to is some expensive law firms in D.C. made a whole lot of money out of trying to find out what Trump has been up to.
Here is what this story tells me: Too much filthy lucre sloshing around in our elections in this country. Let's do what advanced democratic countries do and have strict limits on campaign contributions and spending and have publicly funded elections.
6
More mud, more dirt, more innuendo, more shadows, more evasions, more this, more that, more, more, more. I'm so tired of all of them.
26
Investigating Hillary Clinton is the ONLY thing the GOP can agree on and get done.
It brings warm feelings in their tummies, smiles on their faces and a reason to live.
The use of opposition research is nothing new and used by both parties. Of course the GOP will hypocritically state It's okay for them to do it but not okay for the Democrats to do it.
Perhaps if the GOP had actually done their due diligence they and Trump would not have had problems with appointees like Flynn.
The GOP and Trump look forward to the future investigations into HRC. There is nothing like singing "Lock Her Up" to bring a party together!
4
where are the trump tax returns?
5
At the IRS.
1
Until 2016, I was a card carrying member of the Democratic Party for 48 years. No longer, and no longer do they get any financial support from me. In the 2016 election cycle, I contributed over a thousand dollars, through multiple donations of under $100 each, to the Sanders campaign. Only to find out afterwards that the DNC had biased the primary process to such a level that he would never win. And in arguing for the dismissal of the fraud lawsuit against it, the DNC argued that it was free to favor any candidate it wanted. The judge agreed, and said that the remedy for those who feel their interests were not served were at the ballot box and their checkbooks.
Well, I agree. Every DNC e-mail now goes into the trash folder without being read. They might as well change the name of the party to the Clinton party, and leave it at that. I will not donate one dime to support these kinds of shenanigans
Count me now as an Independent.
16
There is something I do not get, namely, why is the GOP so incensed? This information was never weaponized by the Clinton campaign, and only came to light after Tweety Bird had been elected. I personally am convinced that the dossier is accurate. Some of it has been substantiated, but the part that Trump is most worried about, namely the Golden Showers anecdote, must be true, because otherwise he would laugh it off. It sounds so utterly ridiculous, but Trump is worried about it to the point that he denied it to Comey prior to firing him.
143
So Don Jr met with Russians (linked to Fusion) who offered dirt on Clinton but didn't get any, and that helped launch 3 investigations.
Clinton and the DNC used intermediaries, including Fusion, to pay people inside Russian intelligence for dirt on Trump, and everybody says "what's the big deal?"
Democrats, we have to get our act together. This is how it looks because this is what happened. We cannot be another party of hypocrisy.
116
Whoa! Big difference between paying a private contractor to continue work gathering information on a candidate (work begun when Republicans hired him first) and the long history of Trump's dependence on hundreds of millions in laundered Russian cash to cover personal debt, Trump family and cohorts meeting with Russian lawyers hoping to be given information (accepting a commodity with monetary value from a Russian entity as a campaign gift.)
3
The Don Jr meeting did not "help launch 3 investigations." The 3 investigations into Russian meddling in the election were launched months earlier. The Don Jr meeting was *revealed* by those investigations.
There's nothing wrong with paying people for oppo research, as long as they didn't pay Russian intelligence directly. What's the big deal, indeed.
3
Thank you, thank you, thank you. The DNC apparat seems to believe that Democrats can win in '18 and '20 by simply asserting that they're not Trump. Unless and until the Democratic Party grows a brain, a spine, and a heart, this is Trump's country. Shame on the Dems.
FYI....NY Times. You reported this story back in January. There's nothing new here that wasn't reported then.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/trump-intelligence-report...
15
Yes, old news. However, much like that fertile, fertile email field, NYT and others will be determined to plow this again and again.
It's almost like there is no other news happening anywhere right now that needs to be covered.
3
Someone else Hillary can BLAME for her stunning loss in the election?
21
Please print the full dossier in the New York Times.
13
Go to it Mueller!
18
I am perplexed. This "chain of custody" in the funding of the Steele report was outlined in the background information provided on the web site I consulted to read the full report. (And anyone who has not read the full report should do so.)
I assume that the trigger event here was the legal filing that makes the disclosure "official". But it's been widely known, as far as I can tell, for many months.
15
I fail to see the story here. It has been known for months that the GOP funded it initially and the Dems thereafter. Given HRC was the candidate who else would it be for? Further, the genesis of the report is immaterial. We are discussing the content, much of which (if reports are accurate) had been confirmed.
Trump, et al, were in cahoots with Russia, and HRC's campaign found out.
33
The real story is all the libs r blinded by hatred incapable of seeing this story. If the FBI used this dossier and even paid money for it then we have a real problem. This dossier was unsourced and if the FBI used it shame on them. It looks like Jeb Bush, John McCain, Hillary Clinton , the FBI and the CIA not to mention unmasking as well as the Podesta group and Uranium One. Really libs. Something is rotten in the state of Denmark. Where there is smoke there is fire. Did Hillary collide on a number of fronts? Most certainly
5
So? The DNC and the Clinton campaign extended the opposition research contract initited by RNC primary challengers. They did not condone or solicit interference from foreign governments in US elections. The problem is not so much that some of Mr. Steele’s findings may be wrong, but that even the most sordid accusations are quite in character for our President.
17
What kind of democracy is this in which politicians can enlist the secret service and the FBI to undermine political opponents with a dossier?
I didn't vote for Trump and found the chant "lock her up" comical. Not anymore, except that it now should included not just Hillary Clinton but republicans and democrats as well.
It looks like Trump was our best candidate after all. Sad but true.
27
How on earth is that true?
So you're untroubled by the dirt itself, but condemn the ones who lifted the rug and found it?
14
The issue here is the original source is Russian intelligence. You have no problem using data and dirt from a foreign state agency, and then leaking it out to the media?
1
The secret service and the FBI were not enlisted by any politician. The investigator was alarmed by what he found, and sent the dossier to John McCain, who turned it over to the FBI. The FBI found it credible enough to continue the investigation. Many of the contents of the dossier have been shown to be true subsequently. Proclaiming Trump to be our best candidate based on this "new" nothing-burger information is more revelatory about the person saying it rather than anything else.
4
Trying to dig up dirt on your opponents is standard operating procedure in politics. The only thing that really matters here is whether the information in the "dossier" is true or not. When will we find out? The fact that trump has done everything in his power to block efforts to look into his Russian ties, and dismiss every revelation that points to some kind of collusion, certainly creates the appearance that he has something to hide. I'm confident that Mueller will get to the bottom of it, and equally fearful of how empowered and emboldened trump will be if no wrongdoing can be proven.
13
So this is where the Witch Hunt has led. Will Crying Chuck Schumer come foreword to apologize for all the false, headline coverage collusion claims? Now lets find out who the original Republican sponsor was-I think I know, wanna bet?
Oh, by the way NYT, how is the unmasking and pre-election surveillance of Trump and his aides coming? Lots of good ole political dirt and dirty dealings here. Where should we all go to read about it?
33
Paying for oppositional research is done all the time. Sorry but this story does not negate or mean that Trump is not guilty of collusion with Russia. Just because the Clinton campaign paid for the research leading to the revelations in the dossier doesn't mean they are not factual. We will know soon enough though.
2
I'd ask how you know the claims are false, but Sam Spade was created by a man who was a member of the communist party for a little while.
I agree with most of the comments here today. Is this really new news? Everyone know Hillary and the DNC are as dirty as the day is long.
29
Since when is paying for oppositional research dirty tricks? Are you mad because the allegations against Trump might be true or that oppositional research unearthed his wrongdoings?
17
GPS Fusion was collaborating with Russian Intelligence on the dossier. Seems like foreign interference and collusion with Hillary and the DNC - not traditional opposition research. It should be investigated as such.
2
For months Trump and his minions have been declaring that their meetings with all the Russians, meetings that they’ve been lying about from the get-go, were just normal opposition research that all candidates do. If that is true, why is this a story?
And a big difference—one candidate’s campaign hired someone from a country that is an historic ally, the other worked with those employed by a country and leader who are “existential threat(s)” to the USA.
Who cares who paid for the dossier? The only thing that matters is whether its contents are true.
1
Why is this news? It has been reported since the beginning that the dossier originated as Dem opposition research, paid for by Dem campaign. They turned it over to investigators.
The only interesting point here is that the NYT is presenting this very old and well documented fact as if it were news. It's not.
What is up with that, NYT?
26
The Clinton campaign and DNC denied for over a year that they paid for this (see Maggie Haberman's tweets). The Washington Post had to sue for access under the FOIA to see a bill that confirmed the DNC and Clinton campaign had funded the dossier.
That info was first seen and reported Tuesday.
31
Lions Tigers and Bears oh my!
1
I think it is important to note that Donnie Deferment is fighting against this dossier so hard. What is he afraid of. He doth protest too much.
18
Why is the New York Times letting itself be used by Trump to create confusion to facilitate another round of his lies means touse to besmirch our government and the people serving us in it?
Did the Times forget that it and most other outlets reported that this dossier was initiated by the RNC and only offered to the HRC campaign and DNC after the RNC had given up on the idea of beating Trump because he had locked up the nod?
Why is it being hyped today as if the Clinton Campaign and DNC were the people who got the ball rolling on the opposition research behind the dossier when it was previously reported that the RNC initiated the research?
Whatever the case no one used it in the campaign. What happened is Mr Steele a former intelligence agent became so alarmed by what he had found he shared it with his own government and they in turn passed it along to ours.
74
Sadly, NYT, which I have read since college in the early 1990s, continues to allow itself to be used and manipulated. It has been the go-to tool of the anti-Hillary cabal for years, becoming finely honed by her enemies in the 2016 primary and general election campaigns. It is so, so afraid of being seen as a "liberal" mouthpiece, it contorts itself to go overboard in its zeal of holding Hillary's feet (or any other part of her it can) to a well-stoked fire of the GOP's making.
3
Truth is truth - end of story
3
So now we find there was collusion between the DNC, the Hillary campaign, and Russia. Will the "progressive" media now pound on this daily? Doubt it, more likely to attempt to cover it up.
42
I’m not sure how you conclude from this article that the Clinton campaign collided with Russia.
Deplorables with your hair on fire: this is called opposition research and it’s legal.
6
And how do you draw the conclusion that the HIllary campaign was in collusion with Russia?
2
Um, the story you're misrepresenting comes from your "progressive media."
You forgot to report that the Republicans initially paid for this report and make it sound like it was the Democrats who initiated all of this.
So you lose my subscription. I don't pay for fake news.
18
My thoughts exactly.
1
Not so. Steele wasn't involved until after the Dems got involved with funding.
But it really doesn't matter. The political world is hard knocks and both sides play to win. What's really grating, though, is when the left pretends to virtue.
Go ahead and cancel your subscription. I've considered it many times.
4
Excuse me. Let me get this right, Republicans hired Fusion GPS to look into Trump and knew beforehand Trump was nominated that Trump was not only dirty, but compromised by Moscow and they failed to stop him. Now the same Republicans, who knew of Trump's corruption, are crying foul and Trump is claiming that he is the victim. Only in land with a rightwing news organizations like Fox and Brietbart could a fraud like this be perpetuated on the American people.
149
perpetrated.
1
I think you are forgetting that Hillary and the DNC paid Perkins Coie $14,000,000 for their work - hardly a trivial sum.
1
Brilliant comment.
Republicans: "We don't care how dirty Trump is, he's going to enact our agenda."
Mr. Gehringer added that, “given the interest in this issue, we believe it would be appropriate for all parties who hired Fusion GPS in connection with the 2016 presidential campaign to release Fusion GPS from this obligation as well.”
Ya hear that JEB?
7
Eh, fake news. Since the source of this scoop is the New York Times, I’m sure that these findings will be widely discredited by real journos at Fox and Breitbart.
Yes, that is a joke. In all seriousness though, this was already suspected, and her campaign did not use the salacious information before the election. More interesting is who chose to circulate it around DC and why - probably the law firm, in the hopes that the press would pick it up. But Trump’s shady Russian business connections are real, and were already getting exposed by NYT, some European investigative reporters and BBC last year. The Russian disinformation attacks during the elections are real. And though the DNC and Clinton campaign’s law firm paid for the research, that is normal. What is more important to the country right now is if what the dossier alleges is real, not who paid for it. After all, these Fusion GPS researchers may have discovered and circulated the Access Hollywood tape too. But the video spoke for itself.
12
I donated to the Clinton campaign and am thrilled that some of my money went to funding this opposition research on Don the Con. Frankly, it's one of the best uses of resources I've heard of in what was otherwise a pretty dismal campaign.
18
This is a headline before the routing of the CFPB consumer protection rule re: arbitration?
5
What a surprise that the DNC and Clinton Campaign would fund opposition research on their political opponent. This is Politics 101 and they would be accused of malpractice if they didn't do it. I suspect that due to lack of confirmation, on some of the dossiers' findings, the Democrats held back. This is hardly a surprise either, although I suspect Republicans would NOT have held back since at the slightest hint of scandal, they go full bore. Democrats need to start playing hardball again if they ever want to get back in power. Unilateral surrender is not a strategy in my opinion...
19
Paying a British ex-spy to pay people inside Russian intelligence to get dirt on your political opponent is hardly "done all the time."
23
Yeah, it took a Trump to bring the former Soviet Union into our politics.
He is the gift that keeps on giving. If we survive, someday this will be funny.
4
Shouldn't the focus of the responses to this news be on whether or not the allegations in the dossier are true? I fail to see how funding of opposition research by either party's campaign is news. It is also not a given that oppo research findings will be untrue - history says otherwise. There have been assessments by the intelligence community that the Russians did seek to influence our election process in a variety of ways, most of which have been substantiated, and there have been obvious "memory and recollection" problems that have led to multiple revisions of the stories of several of Trump's associates concerning interactions with the Russians.
There is at least one credible investigation into this topic, perhaps only one, so the validity of the contents of the dossier described here and of many other issues will eventually be known to all unless Trump tries to shut it down, which would be clear evidence of guilt by him or some associates. He has already tried, which is at least strike one. Until the investigations are complete, why is anyone speculating or making pronouncements on the validity of allegations?
Democrats and some Republicans are concerned that there was tampering and possible collusion, and this is a major issue no matter what your politics are, so is it not prudent to find out? Or is it more prudent to open a Congressional investigation into Hillary's emails after the FBI investigation has been concluded? Which is clearly partisan?
7
And this revelation will become fodder for more half-baked Tweets from Trump and more wasted tax-payer funded "investigations" by congress. There is nothing illegal in a campaign hiring consultants or investigators.
Let's keep our focus on the real issues and the serious allegations regarding Russia. We need to protect our democracy before the damage becomes to great to recover from.
10
I'm sure the salacious claims are true, but most of the other claims have apparently been proven to be true. I'm certainly glad that the DNC decided to take over the investigation from the Republicans. Good move.
7
Nonsense.
"A spokesperson for a law firm said on Tuesday that it had hired Washington-based researchers last year to gather damaging information about Mr. Trump on numerous subjects — including possible ties to Russia — on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the D.N.C.
"The spokesperson said that neither the Clinton campaign, nor the D.N.C., was aware that Fusion GPS had been hired to conduct the research."
So I guess Hillary and the DNC gave them $12.4M and said go have fun, we don't want to know what you do with it? Is there a single person with an IQ above room temperature that would believe that?
15
The only bad thing here is that the congressional committees have made no use of the dossier. Maybe mueller will.
8
I really need someone to explain to me why right-wing news outlets and pundits are treating this like some sort of positive bombshell? If anything, the details of this story suggest that the contents of the dossier are very true: Steele has an excellent reputation; Steele was alarmed enough by what he found to alert the FBI; the FBI was alarmed enough to continue investigating the content. If the content turns out to be true, then it simply doesn't matter who funded the research; we should all be thankful someone did!
14
The article doesn't mention that Steele the British spy hired by Clinton and her campaign, used Russian spies and Russian contacts from the Kremlin to develop the "facts" and disinformation put into the dossier. So now it seems that it was actually Clinton who colluded with the Russians, not Trump.
21
Umm. Did you forget Trump Jr. said they had many valuable business dealings with Russia. If you are going to investigate business dealings with Russia, who you going to talk to, Egyptians? If you have a known con man who ran a fraud university, who had multiple bankruptcies, who stiffed his workers and this con man was running for president with no government history, you would be remiss and incompetent to not do opposition research.
2
The only blame the Clinton campaign deserves is for not doing a better, more thorough job in getting this information to the public and the law enforcement authorities. They blew it and we are now being governed by an individual who was, to an extent, installed in office by a foreign and hostile power. Clinton's people should have done more oppo research and they should have done it better.
5
Confusing article. First it indicates Clinton & Co paid for the dirt on Trump, then indicates Clinton & Co didn't know who was paid to find the dirt on Trump.
Whatever this means: look at the disastrous Trump presidency, the dire, dysfunctional straits our country finds itself in, and ask if HRC's pre-election efforts to further discredit Trump were anything more than a footnote to the disaster.
1
Who else would be desperate enough to pay for it?
4
Who else would be desperate enough to pay for it?
Well, according to the dossier...Trump.
Oh wait, you meant pay for the dossier!
I'd say collusion with Russia by the Trump campaign - which is what the Republicans are desperately trying to stop Mueller from investigating - would be about a billion times more concerning than paying for research to see if it was true.
Did Democrats do anything wrong? No, because there's nothing wrong with trying to verify if what the US intelligence agencies had reported was indeed true.
BTW, NYTimes, your front-page headline is very misleading: "Clinton Campaign and D.N.C. Helped Fund Russia Dossier" - it sounds like they funded Russians, which they didn't. Rephrase "... Helped Fund Dossier about Russians" or something like that.
17
Except Dossier was about Trump!
3
You're wrong. The dossier was created by Russian disinformation given to Steele by Russian spies and Kremlin contacts Steele had worked with in the past. In effect, Clinton colluded with Russia.
7
The taxpayer-funded FBI and DNC paid for this bogus dossier...that means Bernie supporters paid for it twice! It's time to rebuild the Democratic party from the ground up.
8
If I understand this correctly, the inquiry was first started by a supporter of Jeb Bush. I don't find it odd that people with some connection to the Clinton campaign might continue to fund it, to see if there was something there. The fact that Donald Trump is up to his ears in shady deals with Russian oligarchs close to Putin was reported ages ago by The Guardian. His own kids boasted about it years ago. The Panama Papers release seemed to hint at that direction.
Either many of the facts in the Steele dossier are true, or they aren't.
The bottom line, again, is that we are distracted by a clickbait headline, while ignoring the policy implications. In fact, the NY Times should have been doing serious and diligent homework on Donald Trump's mystery meat financial dealings, shady connections, sexual assault issues, and general incoherence and incompetence, instead of focussing on the lazy reporting of Clinton's emails. The Shorenstein report was damning on this. It is the media's constant search for the easy and eye-catching headline, instead of focussing on policy, that has landed us in the extraordinary mess we are in today. The public needs to be able to make a decision on the competency of a presidential candidate that has been fully vetted. Donald Trump got a free ride.
31
It is normal for all campaigns to gather information...why make it sound nefarious..nothing illegal. Media goes into a Pavlovian mode with anything Clinton. Why did the report not note that this was initiated by a GOP candidate’s campaign? So tiresome...so lacking in journalistic ethics
13
hmmm. usually by now there are 500 comments attacking trump for his links to russia
now we find an actual link to russia (clinton and the DNC) and everyone is silent?????
shocking.... just shocking
22
So why are you reading the New York Times? Breitbart isn't available? I'm pretty sure the comments there must be up in the thousands. Or perhaps try Fox News. I'm sure those "sources" are what you are actually agreeing with.
1
Political campaigns always try to dig up dirt on the other side. This is no different.
1
VB:
Well there you go again with the name calling. If Dems continue to follow the failed candidate down this road, it will likely be a long time between victories.
5
Finally some real Russian collusion. Add on the traitorous Uranium deal and there is finally something for the special counsel to prosecute.
23
Want to stir up the pot?
Distract us?
Tell us about the ufo’s. Or is that still ‘classified’.
9
But Hillary didn't compromise herself by accepting help from a rival nation. Furthermore, this dossier might help the public understand the danger in the White House.
See the difference?
23
All the info about Trump came from Russia.
14
She took millions from the Russians and delivered the uranium deal. No compromises? And why is Russian “propaganda” worse than Democratic Party propaganda? And how did Trump compromise himself to the Russians? Facts obviously don’t concern the loyal Trump haters.
7
Michael:
How didn't she? Isn't this info from Russia?
4
News that DNC funded this smear report is old news, as numerous outlets have already reported on this already. The argument on this board that opposition research is universal and no big deal and is better when purchased from our allies is delusional at best. We now also know that Secretary Hillary Clinton, after getting millions of dollars of "donations" into Clinton Global Initiative, greenlighted the sale of uranium to Russians, including one convicted of fraud.
My take on all of this is that both slides are total slimeballs. No side should claim any moral high ground when it talking about honesty, sexual harassment, fraud and bribery. These politicians are worse than hookers, who at least have to earn their money and not feed off the public trough.
4
Let’s look at the republicans again. And again. And.... again to keep these gutless bullies looking over their shoulders.
4
So after so many hassle and bustle from the liberals, it turned out that the Obama administration, the Democrats and the Hillary campaign were colluding with Russia and committing crime. What an irony!
35
Uh, no. I suggest you read the articles covering this a little more carefully.
3
It is the disease, perhaps lethal disease, of our era that we are asking "who says it?" and not "is it true?"
PLEASE turn the discussion to fact-checking, not source-naming.
6
You have missed the story on the "Steele dossier".
The real question is, who hired Christopher Steele in the first place?
The legal firm, Perkins Coie, which reps the Democratic Party on many issues, took over the "dossier" only AFTER a mysterious Republican gave up the venture because Trump had secured the Republican nomination.
That was when Fusion GPS offered it to the Dems.
Who is our "mystery man"?
How much did he/they pay Steele and Fusion?
Exactly what date was Steele hired on? When was he finished?
At what point was the "dossier" put in its final edition? It's my understanding that the Dems bought a finished product and that no more was added to the "dossier", that the Dems were simply trying to verify what had been already produced.
Don't miss the point: The story here is the "dark money" of a Republican mystery man. There is no story after that except for the verification of what Steele found.
And, so far, what he found has proven correct.
Is this another "Benghazi/e-mail" story?
Smells like it.
Do your work, son: Who hired Fusion in the first place?
It wasn't Clinton, it wasn't the legal firm, Perkins Coie and it sure wasn't trump!
So, who did?
204
" Do your work son" WOW! It was possibly Bill Clinton's brother from a different mother, Jeb!. He had the most moolah. Ah, these political crime families( oops meant dynasties) are as much fun as the Tudors.
3
Another part of the story is, why did the Republicans who originally hired the law firm decide to squash what they found out about Trump from the dossier? If they had published it or even threatened Trump with the info, he might have stepped down and we wouldn't be the horrific situation we are now in.
2
How odd! I never once considered Jeb Bush!
Here, but still forgotten!
I'll think on that - thanks!
1
This does not even qualify as a news story. Only trump would think it was - to divert from the Russian collusion probe - which is a real and present danger!
5
It's important to understand that the bogus dossier became the impitus for the so called investivgation as to President Trump's relations with Russia. The dossier has been proven bogus. Furthermore, the very selective focus of this article needs a broader perspective. It is now a fact that Mrs. Clinton herself was involved in the decision for the sale of Uranium One to the Russians. It is also known that $140 million dollars was transfered to the Clinton Foundation soon after the deal was done. That money, it is now known, came from Russian sources. It would be best for John Podesta to start lawyering up, as well as his brother -- who is a highly paid lobbiest for Moscow. The fish stinks from the head.
23
Len, spot on. However, you can't expect the left to get it. They think Trump Jr's 30 minute meeting with Russians -- which he didn't solicit but agreed to after they promised dirt on HRC -- where nothing happened and no money changed hands -- is evidence of collusion with Russia and treason. But somehow, paying for false information from Russian sources, leaking the document to discredit Trump and to inspire an FBI investigation into Trump-Russia collusion is somehow OK.
14
The conclusion here is that an American political campaign paid an American opposition research firm to do opposition research on another American political candidate. The fact that Fusion GPS extended its work overseas is a product of Trump's life and business, not the Hillary campaign colluding with Russia. Comparing this work to Donald Trump, Jr.'s direct meeting with a Russian likely associated with the Kremlin expecting to get something of value for free is not a comparison at all. It's like apples and cancer.
6
This isn't new! Way back when, when the dossier was being handed around and nobody would touch it, the Times reported that the original research had been paid for by the Democrats. I knew that, because I read it here months ago! Anyone who was closely following the dossier story and reading the background news on it knew that.
Were the Republicans just not reading the news carefully, and now they think they have a big gotcha moment? Jeepers. It's not that big a deal. Everyone pays for opposition research, and the Republicans do exactly the same thing. Good grief.
I remember when my aunt (a homemaker with four kids) ran for school board in the 1970s that her very wealthy Republican opponent paid someone to dig up the "dirt" on her! We all had a good laugh about them trying to falsely identify my dad as a big northern California real estate developer who made a huge donation to her campaign (my dad was a minister who never did a real estate deal in his life, apart from buying our family home, and who gave $200 to her), but the Republican still got away with his lies, because he had more money and paid a PR agent to plant fake stories about her in the press.
This sounds like more Republican money at work, trying to turn another molehill into a mountain.
5
Opposition research when taken out of context can look nefarious. But in this case it's the actual results of that research that are the most troubling; with so much of its contents already confirmed. If anyone is truly concerned about whether the source of the funding bears on the veracity of its findings, Robert Mueller's team is going to give us (hopefully) a much better look at dossier subject matter.
There were also massive dossiers on the Clintons. The Clintons were one of the most investigated couples in USA history whether by the news media or political opposition or by foreign powers. Even though that process often seemed heavy-handed, the Clintons survived it; so I don't have any problems now with the dossier on Trump. This President conducts business more like a mob boss than an upstanding US citizen so I expect many other investigations to come.
Trump's whole approach to dismantling our democracy may be treasonous. And I believe that Mueller is going to show us that it started before his Presidency began, not just with criminal money laundering for the Russians through his real estate business, but that his campaign colluded with the Russian intelligence services... followed by obstruction of justice with the Comey firing. Now it is a race to the finish. Can Trump dismantle the investigation or shape the Congress that must indict and try him, before Mueller can present evidence?
We'll see. In the meantime, don't shoot the messengers. Save your ammo.
4
Please elaborate on what elements of the dossier have been "proven"
6
Was it Manafort who fed this story to Haberman or someone who still works in the White House? Oh, wait, they're sweeping up after the Post again.
4
No. It was David Corn in "Mother Jones" months and months ago. It's right there: first Republican then Democratic oppo.
3
Oh, I love all these defensive comments from Democrats. You are true to form. Hillary complained ad infinitum about collusion with the Russians. She and the DNC will reap what they have sown.
33
What I want from people that are trying to establish some sort of false equivalency between this story and the Trump campaign's alleged collusion is to have you draw the dots for me. What this story says, essentially, is that the DNC and the Clinton campaign paid a former British spy to see if he could find any dirt on their opposition. A tried and true tactic in any election. Also one that the son of the current president as endorsed.
Trump, on the other hand, is accused, either personally or through his campaign staff that he oversaw, of colluding with the Russians to actually influence the election. Not just find dirt on Hillary Clinton, but to actually have a foreign government help his campaign. We have suggestions already that at least one Trump campaign staffer was trying to create back channel access between the Republican nominee and Russian officials and then members of the Trump campaign actually did meet with at least two different representatives of the Russian government.
How are those two scenarios alike in your head? Is it that both scenarios contain the words Russia or Russians? How, in your minds, is getting opposition research the same as getting a foreign government to actually wage a campaign information war on your behalf? If I'm running for office and I know that a British national has damaging information about my opponent which I pay for does that, in your minds, mean I've colluded with the British to get elected?
9
More important than the actual funding of the work done by Steele is that people involved in the funding with deep ties to the Clinton team have been sanctimoniously lying about it for a year. Maggie Haberman, who contributed to this article, tweeted as much, yesterday. The attempt by the DNC to wash its hands is pathetic.
Here's what needs to happen- The public needs to know in detail what is in the dossier. Steele needs to publicly testify about his work. Everyone involved in the funding of this needs to come clean. No more taking the fifth's and no more cover-ups to protect anybody on either side. I'm sick of it.
69
And Maggie Haberman is being brutally attacked on Twitter by her "fans" for straying from the narrative.
16
the only thing disgusting about this is WHAT IS IN THE DOSSIER!!
America needs to know
What is new here? We knew this months ago.
1
Clearly, the Russians already had both Clintons in their back pockets.
"Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal"
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundati...?
With their attempt to ingratiate themselves with the Trump people the Russians were hedging their bets in case Trump got elected.
13
Oh please! That a Republican Primary candidate did the initial commissioning of the research and that the research was picked up by the Clinton campaign once it became clear that Trump was was going to win the primary has been "out" for months. It's standard opposition research. Dirt on your opponent. The only reason this one is such a "scandal" is because it is, well , a scandal. Some of the "info" in the dossier was either known previously from other sources, or has been verified since. Some of it hasn't and may well be false or "planted". Again perfectly normal. It is quite clear that Russian was meddling and shrieks of outrage from compromised politicians from all sides is not going to change that, nor should it influence in any way an investigation into Russian meddling and who or what they paid off in the process.
9
Yes. The DNC did. But, just to make sure this goes viral, what is the name of the Republican who also paid for that dossier when he was running against Trump? Any takers it was Jeb Bush? Cruz would have been too much the dullard to make such massive international contacts. So would most of the others the GOP ran from their party.
But, dollar to a donut, Jeb Bush, whose Daddy was a CIA chief and brother, a former president, had a vault full of MI6 contacts he would have access too that the other GOP candidates didn't.
Now, Loony Nunes and Godawful Gowdy are trying to ignore that it was a Republican, not the the DNC who first paid for the Steele dossier. And that could ONLY be done by a GOP candidate with a treasure trove of contacts in the UK and a name that would allow such a transaction.
7
Perhaps I am politically naive, but what is wrong with investigating the background of a political candidate. If we had known more about the escapades and despicable nature of Donald Trump, he would not be in office.
3
You're not naive but Investigating a political opponent is one thing, using information supplied or trumped up (pardon the pun) by a hostile, nuclear armed nation is another - that's the concern underlying the whole "Russia, Russia, Russia" business: collusion, fake news, email hacks, Facebook ads, voting rolls hacks, etc.
We had a pretty good idea of what and who Trump was as a man and candidate by election day with or without Russian contributions to the information pool. The problem was that we knew the same about Hillary and the choice was not well received.
3
The DNC and Clinton campaign paid lawyers who paid Fusion who paid Steele who paid Russians for the info. With the FBI somewhere in that mix.
It is the intersection of DNC/ Clinton campaign paid and Russians were paid that makes it relevant. The FBI adds oomph.
9
All of these articles and breathless reports about the dossier oh-so-conveniently avoid all reference to the contents of said dossier. Donald Trump's sexcapades with Russian agents gave the Kremlin massive leverage over the U.S. president. That strikes me as being somewhat more newsworthy than the matter of who paid for the research.
4
How convenient for many of you that it is nigh impossible to prove a negative.
4
This is endgame for the Hillary/DNC crowd litigating the events of 11 pm, Nov. 8th, 2016. I don't think many here truly grasp the anger they have caused across this country by their pettiness.
Trump's Russia connection seems to have been entirely from when Manafort was campaign head, and his clumsy tenure ended quickly. Has Bannon been linked to Russia? Nope. Trump Jr. met with some Russian, with Manafort, but it was fraud.
I suspect Russia is playing the DNC like a fiddle, making it appear they backed Trump in order to stealth-infiltrate them. either way, this is huge. Hillary will never live this down, and she is the leader of the party. She also said, it is unthinkable to not accept an election, remember that?
15
Trump is President and Hillary conceded.
4
Who cares if the Clinton campaign helped pay for the Trump dossier? I’m glad they did, and will be even happier if it results in an end to this nightmare presidency we have.
7
I really do not care who paid Christopher Steele, what is important is if what he reported is true or not. The American people deserve a simple answer to a very simple question. It has been proven the Russians worked to discredit Clinton and sway the election of Trump. Did Trump and the GOP take part in this? I believe anyone who dealt with the Russians to interfere with our election and get trump elected should be prosecuted.
2
Didn't we know this already? I mean that is where all this started was from opposition research during the campaign? Right.. or am i actually losing my mind...hard to tell lately.
1
Shocking, just shocking. But just how did this effort lead to the Trump Campaign taking meetings with Russian spies and former KGB operatives during the election? How did it cause General Kelly to set up back channel negotiations with the Russians? How did it cause the Russian FSB to coordinate email hacks, the distribution of stolen documents, a full scale propaganda effort and ad buys all to the benefit of Trump?
487
The full gallon of Koolade apparently having been drunk -- I suspect you still believe that Hillary didn't lose the election, but that the Russians stole it.
Read the WSJ on the Clinton's plutonium deal with Russia--coming soon to a real newspaper, unlike this one.
Sorry Chet, but you mistake Kool-Aid (TM) with evidence; and the evidence shows that there was a significant level of collusion (i.e., conspiracy) between the Trump Campaign and the Russians. The evidence also shows that propaganda played a large part in determining how the swing states broke towards the end. So it is not a matter of belief, but a matter of fact and evidence pointing to inescapable conclusions.
1
Interesting that after months of Trump-Russia collusion we find the actual collusion was between HRC/Dems and Russia mediated through Fusion GPS. Paying for opposition research -- regardless of where it comes from -- may not be illegal. But this is certainly a much more serious ethical breach then Trump Jr. having a 30 minute meeting with a couple of Russians who claim they had info on HRC but that turned out to be a bait and switch. No money. Nothing happened.
More important, the info from the Trump dossier is likely simply made up, and at the very least isn't verifiable as far as we know. Nevertheless, after Trump won, the Obama admin and/or democratic operatives managed to ensure that the dossier was leaked in order to besmirch Trump's name. And at the same time we have the Obama admin, as soon as it was clear Trump won, asserting that Russia meddled and Trump colluded, perhaps even before. We don't know why Comey started investigating Trump-Russia collusion in July 2016 but I'm betting it was the Obama admin that prompted Comey.
And of course, this isn't the 1st instance of dem-Russian collusion. Uranium One. Millions of dollars to Clinton foundation & $500k to Bill for a speech. We knew that. But now we know that Russian agents bribed officials to get the deal through and that was covered up by the FBI under Mueller.
It all stinks. And it ain't Trump. It's the Clintons, the Obama admin, Mueller and Comey.
14
Hopefully those Dems awaiting the conclusion of the investigations linking Trump to Russian meddling in the 2016 election will realize that little of consequence is going to emerge. Time now to focus on building a party that offers solid policy alternatives to those of President Trump.
One has to admire the smarts of the three former WSJ employees who formed Fusion GPS. They realized that there was a law firm looking to spend over $12m to trash candidate Trump. Fusion GPS gave their work cred by hiring “former British intelligence officer” Christopher Steele, fully realizing that nobody at Perkins Coie would ask if British intelligence officers were supposed to stay mum once they left the service.
So Mr. Steele looked through his notes, processed common knowledge information on the internet – Trump attends 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow, etc – and, voilà, a dossier. Truth be told, Vlad Putin may have been in on the joke and submitted a snippet or two.
As crony ridden as the DNC may be, an organization cannot dole out $12 million and not know the purpose the funds are to be used for. So, no, I’m not buying that “that neither the Clinton campaign, nor the D.N.C., was aware that Fusion GPS had been hired to conduct the research.”
It only proves that if you dangle $12 million out there, you will be able to buy the answers you’re looking for. Those of us who contributed to that $12 million by responding to DNC ads for $25 here, $50 there etc - are not impressed.
11
We already knew that after a Republican source hired this research firm, a Democratic client stepped in to continue to fund the work. We also know that Russia worked actively in many ways to make Trump President. The bigger questions:
Why are Republicans so uninterested in a campaign to take an election away from American voters?
Why were media organizations, including the Times, so ready to downplay the story before the election?
Why has the media follow up on Russia (and on the FBI New York Office--a different form of interference) been so desultory? The big "investigative piece" read like an exercise in transcription.
Likely answers: Republicans are happy with the results.
Media organizations don't want to examine their own role, and some level think Clinton deserved it.
1
Sure, of course. I see no problem hiring an American law firm to combat an enemy of the state that was colluding with a dictator of an enemy of the United States.
1
A Trump campaign worker is a regular (gets the best seat in the house) at a restaurant that is owned by the second cousin once removed of Vladimir Putin's father-in-law's brother. The connection is clear, and the election was rigged.
This dossier thing? Much ado about nothing.
4
This is BIG! So, it's all coming together. Now we know that the Clinton campaign funded the document that sparked the FISA order that enabled FBI to listen in on Paul Manafidt's phone conversations while he had an office in the Trump tower. Then Comey shows the dossier to Trump during the intergenun in a one-on-one meeting to let Trump know what the FBI has on him. We know all this from The NY Times. Not difficult to connect the dots.
You might help readers of you filled in some of the facts:
The contents of the memos circulated in Washington in late 2016, and were briefed to Mr. Trump by [replace "senior American intelligence officials" with "FBI Director James Comey"] during the presidential transition.
4
Good.Rarely does the democratic party go proactive..give the GOP a little taste of their own medicine for a change.
It was inevitable that going after Trump for colluding with the Russians would backfire. A few of us who detest Trump have said this for some time. The burden of proof is way too steep before we'd ever see Trump take the perp walk as a traitor. You would need a photo of Putin handing Trump a satchel full of cash before House and Senate Republicans would concur.
The worst part is that as the case for proving Trump's collusion with Russia unravels, Trump may get a free pass on the violations for which evidence already clearly exists: self-dealing, emoluments clause violations, nepotism, slander of a former president and obstruction of justice. However, it would take a blue House in 2018 to see justice on these charges.
Most liberals and progressives have gone for the quick and easy path to removing this stain on the Oval Office carpet. We need to work on the more difficult but thorough cleaning.
3
The original story had it that Republican opponents of Trump paid for the dossier as he was surging ahead in the primaries. Now it would appear that it was the DNC and the Clinton campaign that initiated the investigation hiring a foreign intelligence officer to compile evidence of Trump's connections in Russia. Yesterday, Nunes and Gowdey announced a House investigation of Clinton's and the Clinton Global Initiative's involvement in the Russian acquisition of uranium stores in the US while she served as Secretary of State.
I remember as a child responding to taunts with "I'm rubber, you're glue..." These stories are the politically equivalent Republican defense strategy - defuse the Russian collusion story be attacking Clinton and her team's own questionable practices - and one more reason why she was the wrong candidate.
She was the glue to Trump's rubber.
1
Eye roll. Didn't we already know the dossier came out of opposition research? I'm more interested in how much of it is true.
6
Why would HRC pay for info linking Trump to Russia unless she and the Dems already had suspicious info about Trump's dealings there? The info doesn't sound very credible, but in any case, I'm not sure why anyone thinks this is a big deal.
And?
Because they paid for it doesn't make it false or fake news. Someone had dirt on a politician and they sold it to the highest bidder. Secondly, they used a British agent, Britain is our ally , so what is the problem?
2
This is old news. Both parties investigate the opposing candidate during an election. Unfortunately for Trump the investigation discovered that he indeed had Russian connections.
3
First, is there any information that suggests that the Clinton campaign used any information contained in the dossier during the campaign. Remember the dossier did not come to light until after election day.
Standard opposition research. In no way equivalent to conspiring with a hostile foreign nation in a covert attempt to undermine US democracy
4
So? Sounds like traditional politics to me. If only Trump had done his own intel, instead of relying on Russia.
This headline is misleading and should be changed. To the casual reader, it gives the impression that HRC and the Dems were colluding with Russia like Trump. Should say, "...dossier on Trump's ties to Russia." Also sounds like it was not necessarily done with their knowledge. Headline doesn't make that clear.
3
The headline is click bait.
1
Please explain what the news is here. Are there any allegations of illegality? Any allegations of collusion with Russia? Is oppo research illegal? Is paying a foreign entity for oppo research illegal? I have asked the WAPO the same questions. Please have a follow-up article that explains the significance of this story more clearly to readers, like me, that may be ignorant. And, Maggie, I don't think, "they lied to me" (Twitter) is enough basis for this to be news.
I thought we knew this a long time ago. Maybe that Clinton's campaign specifically contributed is a small wrinkle that I had just assumed, but this seems like more ridiculous coverage of a pretty insignificant issue. The fact a Republican initially funded the perfectly legitimate work gets only a passing mention.
Why is the media no longer talking about the private email server used by Jared and Ivanka while this is a "major" story? I continue to question the editorial decisions of the times and major media in general.
3