Since when is it wrong to try to disciver whether someone is a traitor? If Trump isn't a traitor he has nothing to wprry about. I applaud these efforts to vet our nation's leaders.
30
Putting the GOP in charge of anything is like putting Frat kids in charge. Conservatives think about governing the way frat kids think about hazing; and they're hazing America being completely in charge. Whoopee ... everybody gather round we're giving away money that we don't have -- worse, we're in debt so lets put a Ferrari on the card -- the plumbing can wait. Nah, we can afford the plumbing too, but the plumber is going to have to take us to court to collect his fee. Seems I've heard that somewhere before. We love the snake oil hyperbole Trump tells us about everything he's going to set out to do, don't we? The next SOTU speech is going to be painful to behold.
14
"Those who are willing to look the other way because of political convenience do their country no good service."
You are too kind, commenter Joe. Too civil. Fact is, those wiling to look the other way are complicit--accessories after the fact. Even that is too kind. They took an oath, hand conspicuously on the Bible, to defend the country against enemies foreign and domestic, and they've betrayed that oath and our country. What does that make them?
19
This is a sideshow. The real party begins with Mueller's indictments on Monday. Maybe the country will start to come to its senses, because it's not too late.
18
Sorry, that dossier is not tied to those "Never Trump" conservatives no matter how hard the link is pursued. It was a document fully exploited by democrats and Mueller.
12
It is remarkable that people believe things based on nothing.
14
Let's focus on truthfulness of the Steele's dossier, please.
17
For conversation’s sake, let’s say Trump and his campaign did partner up with Russia to swing the election. Continuing on this track, let’s assume he’s removed from office. Would that mean that Pence becomes President? As VP on the ticket, would he too, not be part of the crime? It seems the election is a farce and a new election would be in order. So, where does the buck stop?
15
It stops with Hillary!
3
Trump: "The buck stops there."
7
I wonder when the Russians will release the salacious types?
11
Let's see what happen next Monday. Congratulations to Special Counsel Mueller and his staff. The legalist community will certainly appreciate your efforts.
17
I guess they all want to dig up dirt on the other candidate. The question is whether they are willing to collude with a hostile government to do that.
25
The self-serving quoted paragraph by vulture fund money grubber Paul Singer's outfit denying all involvement with Christopher Steele or any of his work product is not believable in the slightest. When you read the entire Steele dossier, it's immediately apparent that this info took months to gather. Singer's outfit funded this oppo research for 8 MONTHS from September 2015 through April 2016. It is impossible that Christopher Steele instantly started gathering all of this amazingly disgusting (and repearedly proving to be true) info detailing Russia's myriad dealings with and cultivation of Trump in one or two months after Hillary's campaign started paying the bills.
But of course none of this really matters unless you are desperate Trumpian diehards like Fake Snooze blaming Hillary (at Putin's request) to distract from the real story-- obvious treason between Trump and Russia.
Keep those INDICTMENTS coming, Mr. Mueller, and save our failing country. Many former prosecutors like myself are counting on you. Then we have to sweep all elected Repubs that we can from office in Nov 2018, and finish the job in 2020.
Time for baby boomers like me to raise our moral voices again just like with Vietnam and Watergate. We must DEMAND open hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee to inform the American public just like during Watergate, and flip the Senate next November if Grassley keeps inventing dirt on Hillary and stonewalling.
41
It’s not the same Republican Party. These guys don’t care about America. They don’t care about the constitution, don’t care about lies or truths. They’re willing to sell out to Russia and Putin. They all know Trump’s guilty, they know the whole story just like everybody else. They don’t care.
22
Personally, I think Clinton should just go on Fox News and say "Yes! we paid for the Trump Dossier. We thought Trump may have been compromised by Russian Intelligence, and, as true patriots and political rivals, we felt the need to investigate it." She might then point out that paying British citizens for opposition research is maybe just a tad more honorable than actually engaging directly with the Russians to rig an election...
37
Nothing in the dossier has been refuted. Republicans are trying to claim that it is invalid because the Clinton campaign picked up part of the tab. This is a ridiculous argument, and does not vitiate the facts of the case in the least.
The GOP started by saying that the entire idea of Russians interfering was fake news. Now we know that they did interfere with the election in many ways. The Trump team denied under oath that they had met with Russians. Now we know that that was a flat-out lie.
So, the noose is tightening. People don't lie when they have nothing to hide, and there has been a mountain of lies emanating from the Republican Party, the Trumps and their factotums and water-carriers.
There may not be a direct tie to Trump after all is said and done, but there is no doubt that his presidency hereafter will be tagged with a gigantic asterisk.
29
William -- think about this. The burden of proof is on those who make the accusation, put forth the hypothesis. It isn't up to Trump or others to refute whatever is in the dossier. Those who put forth the proposition that the information in the Trump dossier have the obligation to verify.
I could propose that our universe is the product of a child's chemistry experiment in another universe and we merely exist in a test tube there.
Refute that....
2
Nothing in the dossier has been proven.
7
Hilarious, seeing Trumpists bellow about how this or that has not been proven.
6
If the employment of opposition research is so routine and normal, why didn't the Hillary campaign and the DNC admit their role in it? Rumors were going around for months until finally CNN broke the story. In the meantime the Democrats were still trying to reap the benefit of it by suggesting all of it was true. Now they're caught with their pants down, so they try to legitimize it by pointing out that a Republican website first hired the same research outfit. So what?
15
You seem more intent on proving that the project was part-funded by the Dems than establishing whether what the dossier contains is true.
Why?
12
It's not either/or. If the dossier was accurate, the Democrats would be embracing it instead of treating it like a hot potato.
6
Ed the dossier is all true. But you don’t care anyway to you?
5
The Russian thing -there’s no there there- is a waste of time. Concentrate on the donut not the hole. The donut is the tax cut for the rich. And endless wars and money for the Pentagon
And sure Trump is a charlatan and a buffoon but that’s not it at all. That’s distraction. We live in an oligarchy and we need to fight it. But, alas , Neither party is putting its shoulder to the wheel.
22
I'm both thankful & hopeful a few get it.
3
Agree, in principle.
But the Republican party has itself so entrenched by their constant lies, gerrymandering, accepting the Trump bribery, that there is actual danger for this country. Check the recent article in the NYT finding that the Rep party is more and more under the spell of Trump, Bannon and company. And the background larger funders, documented by the pathetic last attempts to slaughter ACA because the funders were getting angry at the GOP for no success.
It is much more dangerous than many of us think.
11
"Who knew" opposition research was done and funded by the opposition?
29
1. It is very difficult to see how it was illegal to hire a British national to do research; Federal election law says no to paying into our elections or working to fool around with them, not that you cannot hire anybody from outside the country for research.
2. The dossier never got used, because it wasn't possibly to independently check the sources. And if it had, Trumpists wouldn't have given a rat's. They didn't so much as blink at Trump's massive indebtedness to the Chinese government, his bragging about his businesses in Russia, his refusals and lyings about his taxes, that Access Hollywood tape, his screaming at Gold Star parents, his shabby little attacks on John McCain, or his obvious laziness, greed and ignorance, so why would that have bothered them?
3. Reading some of these comments reminds me that Freud was right about the Bucket Joke: all defensive hostilities are structured as, "I never borrowed your bucket, I gave it back last week, and anyway, there was a hole in the bottom when you loaned it to me."
Country's in trouble, and you lot rant like this.
30
That’s what they do they bang the bucket. That’s gorillas do if you give them a bucket, they bang on it. It makes them feel in control. Unfortunately for them Mueller’s not listening.
9
At least some of these commenters are bound to be Russian trolls coming out of the woodwork again.
Even Trump supporters cannot be that stupid and gullible, can they? After all, the US intelligence agencies all confirmed that Russian cyberattack on the election to help Trump, and there were almost 20 meetings between senior Trump officials and Kremlin-tied Russians in 2016 alone, and all lied about them until they were caught. Even Trump's son-in-law, campaign head, and Flynn were all guilty of interacting with Russians in highly suspicious ways.
Can the Trump supporters really be that stupid? The mind boggles.
21
"Politics is a dirty business. If our friends knew our business was politics instead of gambling or drugs or even women, they'd RUN FOR COVER."---paraphrased from "The Godfather"
2
Fusion GPS then contacted Perkins Coie, a law firm conducting opposition research for the Clinton campaign, to see if they were interested in continuing the research. They were, since opposition research is what they were charged to do. There is no evidence anyone else in the campaign or DNC knew about the dossier until it was leaked to the public. So, exactly where is the scandal the right is pushing so hard? I can understand why FOX is desperately trying to create another Clinton distraction, but seeing the legitimate press help give this diversion legs reminds me of the disgraceful negative reporting bias they exhibited during the election. All that aside, I can tell Trump supporters one thing for certain; Clinton is not the one who is named in the Mueller indictment.
21
This article is a non-starter. Republican client retained Fusion GPS during the primaries to do research on Trump before the Clinton campaign and the DNC did. TRUE
BUT
the dossier's author, Steele, wasn't brought into the mix until after Democrats retained Fusion GPS. So while both sides paid Fusion GPS, Steele was only funded by Democrats. So let's get real here.
22
Getting real would require questions that might lead back to the media's own ineptitude. After all didn't it publish quite a bit about the dossier and miss the story of Hillary's and democrats' involvement?
Perhaps if the media weren't so anxious to indulge its biases it might have had more clarity of judgment.
8
It should not be left out of this reporting that there is also a link to Rebekah Mercer who helped fund the Russian activities against Clinton and the Mercers are the top GOP donors and very much to the right.
All roads are starting to point in the same directions.
Trump is once again wrong about his rantings. The DNC merely picked up where he original Republican funded ended but it doesn't seem they used the information.
What is required now is to protect Mueller's investigation.
As for the Dossier, allegedly much in it has been proven to be true. Given time the investigation will connect all the dots.
In the meantime, this country needs to be strong. The hired guns are out to get Mueller and that includes some of the GOP congress with their roadblocks.
Patience and vigilance is needed and then healing this wounded nation has to be next.
18
RE: Dossier (From Wikipaedia) "In February, it was reported that some details related to conversations between foreign nationals had been independently corroborated, giving U.S. intelligence and law enforcement greater confidence in some aspects of the dossier as investigations continued."
"INDEPENDENTLY CORROBORATED"...which trump fans, means VERIFIED. So all these comments saying that nothing in the dossier is true, and that it is all "fake news" are FALSE.
11
Being strong will involve going on to the streets to protest Republican attempt to sabotage the Mueller inquiry and I have no doubt that is what it will come to.
4
because it says so on Wikipedia? Do you know how wikipedia works? Anyone can add something. And all it says is that "it was reported that..it was independently verified." Reported by who? Not any credible news source. Recall that "it was reported" that Hillary and high level Dems were involved in a pizza parlor/kiddie porn ring. Did you assume that was true as well? After all, "it was reported..."
4
The Russians have been interfering in our affairs and elections for years. This is news and something we should be concerned about as Americans. All the NYT seems to care about is whether Democrats or Republicans were hurt or helped. That is not the important issue.
5
It is clear that the NYT is also concerned about the Russians interfering in our elections, otherwise they would not be interested in it as news. If they thought it was trivial, it would be on the back page, if anywhere at all. Whether republicans or Democrats are helped or hurt...or if there is MALFEASANCE, CORRUPTION, TREASON, ETC. really figures into the entire picture, don't you think? When the Russians interfere in our elections, they are always harming Americans, and they harm either Democrats or republicans, so it is important to know WHO the Russians are helping, and who they are hurting. The "team" that the Russians are helping is the team that you DO NOT WANT TO VOTE FOR. This is a VERY important issue.
7
This story is very important because it keeps your eye on the dossier. Republicans would be glad to turn the story into Hillary. This puts the story back on their lap.
1
Come on, it really doesn't matter who funded it or who carried out the investigation, it is what it says that counts. If it says Trump colluded with the Russians and that can be verified, impeachment is in order.
31
Obstruction of Justice is a criminal offence. Time to indict!
8
Come back Gerald R. Ford. Once again, we need someone to start to heal this nation currently suffering from another Republican mess, again the one at the top, excuse me, the two at the top. The second Watergate is happening right before our eyes. The Trump group will soon be proven to be linked to a national security issue even greater than the one U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy initiated in the 1950’s and this will mean he will be forced to resign like Nixon did when you were VP. Both were proven liars of the greatest magnitude. Oh, our current VP is the other problem. Remember Spiro Agnew, that VP whom you had to replace? Well, our current VP is the same problem. Pence has been totally supporting Trump and lying repeatedly, just like Agnew, but because he feels that he will become the President soon and that his lying will be more readily accepted by the right-wing extremists that Trump has had behind him all the way to now, he is a shoo in. This nation has just recovered from the financial mess George W. Bush created which has cost us so much more than that Vietnam war that Nixon supported. Our national debt is getting close to the point of no return, so get back here right now. If you do there is good chance that when you come up for reelection this time, there will not be a Jimmy Carter to take you down.
12
Old Bernie paid Revolution Messaging 28 million for opposition research against Hillary.
How much would the Republicans have paid for dirt on HIM, if he had managed to get the Democratic nomination?
How can anyone be surprised that a "Conservative Website" looked for "damaging information" on Trump, et al.?
14
In Trump's recent interview on the lawn of the White House, a reporter asked if he knew which GOP presidential candidate ordered the opposition research. He said he did, and it would eventually come out ("we'll see"). It bugged me that one of the network reporters in a nightly newscast then reported that Trump knew. But it was quite obvious this was yet another of Trump's bluffs. He didn't know.
8
Trump knows everything he has a really good brain.
He went to an Ivy League school. His memory is the best memory in the world. He’s the only one that can fix it
He knows more than the generals, ask Kelly.
4
Fusion GPS is headed by a former WSJ investigative reporter. It was retained by Clinton to conduct an investigation of Trump, and hired a master spy for that purpose. When Planned Parenthood was under attack based on videos allegedly evidencing mishandling of fetuses, they hired Fusion GPS to determine if the videos were secured illegally. Fusion GPS has contacts that run the gamut, from legitimate reporters to British spies to PP. I have little doubt that the Republicans engage in similar intelligence gathering. But I confess I had no idea that this was how the game is played. Presumably, Fusion GPS can sit down with reporters and spies to do its research, which calls into question how often reporters and spies work together. And with the whole operation funded by a hedge fund manger and member of the 1%, you've got the media, the 1%. and MI-6 in bed together. This is scary stuff.
6
You're upset at a legal company's being legally hired legally to look at whether a video attacking Planned Parnthood was faked, and whether the man who's now President was in Vladimir Putin's hip pocket.
Good grief.
By the way, the video was faked by guys on your side. And while it's unclear as yet whether or not Trump colluded with Russia, he sure--as Michael Steele said apropos of Trump and racists--seems to hang out with Russians a lot.
2
Christopher Steele has long been a retired British agent. Don't make it seem like more than it is. Steele retired in 2009.
3
The fact that Democrats were paying for information that may have been supplied by Russians is what sets them apart from the Trump campaign, which was willing to accept damaging information on the opposition as a gift from the Russian government. The former is legal and proper. The latter is solicitation of aid from a foreign government, which is illegal. As with so much of the legal framework meant to protect American democracy from corruption by forces that do not have the country's best interests at heart, the Trump supporters seem very confused about this matter.
21
Newspeak? Just when did "willing to accept" become "solicitation?" I would not argue that Donald Trump, Jr. should simply have called the local FBI office to report the offer, and should not have hosted the meeting unless so advised by the FBI and his own and the campaign's attorneys. However, based on what is publicly reported, the claim that the information was sought out is rubbish.
6
Or, they understand completely and are desperate.
1
There is not much new here. Since January it has been known that the initial research was paid by Republicans. In any case the title should be "It Has Been Confirmed Singer Was Behind Initial Opposition Research". Not as sexy a title, I guess.
4
The US was attacked by a hostile foreign power, who cares who paid for the information as long as we find out the truth and stop it in future elections.
8
Too much of the discussion of the Steele Dossier is focused on its least important part -- the rumors of a salacious Trump sex tape.
But the most important part is the third part, which posits that the central essence of the Kremlin's 'kompromat' over Trump consists of detailed knowledge of alleged violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, regarding bribes paid and kickbacks accepted, during Trump's commercial activities in developing countries.
While a salacious sex tape might be embarrassing, chapter and verse of possible criminal activities would be far more dangerous to our dear President, and would inspire his maximum efforts to put whatever quietus he can to the Dossier and any investigation thereinto. This is the part of Trump's background that MUST be fully investigated and brought to the light of day, for all of the country to know.
16
Opposition research is like paying for a taxi. Obtaining opposition information from a foreign government on a quid pro quo basis is like accepting a ride, in a stolen car.
11
Clarification: The Clinton campaign obtaining opposition information from a foreign government on a quid pro quo basis is like accepting a ride, in a stolen car. As this article reported.
6
Well, it depends if you know if the car was stolen or not!
Paying to figure out how compromised Trump is by his association with Russian oligarchs is not the same thing as being compromised by Russian oligarchs. Whoever that unnamed candidate was, he deserves plaudits for being concerned enough to at least try to figure out the depth of Trump's corruption. Unlike the New York Times. I only wish he had succeeded and used whatever they found.
8
Who cares, does it matter anymore?
Unless our net worth starts with a B as in billionaire, we are pawns in the game of global banking. Oh sure, I'll celebrate the GOP's failure to repeal the ACA, but the truth is I don't see much difference between the parties other than small technicalities.
Hey, only five Dem senators voted AGAINST the $700 billion Pentagon budget which was $91 billion past the statutory cap and more than Trump asked for. The Pentagon didn't ask for more F-35s but they're getting them anyway, courtesy of us suckers.
Obama bails out global banks with nary a single condition. He didn't have a choice in the matter -- it is delusional to think a president has any power against global money. Make the banks help an underwater homeowner by adjusting his loan principal? Forget it.
Does anyone actually think soldiers scattered into Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq are there on a mission of principle? This is the oil and banking conglomerates playing chess, country of origin doesn't matter. They don't intend to lose their investments on some Arab spring where regular people might want a say in their own destiny. Millions of refugees streaming into Europe as their homes are smashed to smithereens is simply collateral damage.
And now we have a tax bill that will further tighten the grip of the global elite, who continue to rape the livability of our world.
So tell me, why should I care about silly candidates researching dirt on each other?
17
"Obama bails out global banks with nary a single condition."
Completely untrue and as it happens the government has made a profit on the whole process.
24
To John - "After the original $700 billion bailout, the ongoing bailout was kept very secret because Chairman Ben Bernanke, argued that revealing borrower details would create a stigma — investors and counterparties would shun firms that used the central bank as lender of last resort. In fact, $7.7 trillion of the secret emergency lending was only disclosed to the public after Congress forced a one-time audit of the Federal Reserve in November of 2011. After the audit the public found out the bailout was in trillions not billions; and that there were no requirements attached to the bailout money - the banks could use it for any purpose."
-Forbes, July 14, 2015
1
The tax change will employ a LOT of people. Can we assume you are good with that?
1
Wow, talk about a sore winner. Nobody’s even hacked into the facts about the research, which is the only importance of it at this point. The real problem and threat to the American people is in the White House already. So maybe Mueller should check into these allegations to see if they are true by interviewing the source.
7
Questions about the dossier: 1. Is any of it accurate? 2. How much were the Russian spies, officials that provided the info to Steele paid? 3. What did Steele do to verify the info he got second-hand that he put into the dossier? 4. Why did Fusion pay Steele to come to USA and pitch the dossier to selected leftist media outlets before the election? 5. Why did these legit news organizations refuse to publish the dossier? 6. How did McCain get a copy of the dossier? 7. Why did he give it to the FBI and what did the FBI do with it? 8. Did the FBI use the info to get a FISA warrant to surveil the Trump campaign? 9. Did the FBI set up perjury traps on the basis of their surveillance? 10. How was Comey involved in all this? 11. How much did the DNC and HC campaign know about the dossier? 12. How did copies of the dossier get to CNN and Buzzfeed (Steele handed them out or what?)? 13. What did Wasserman-Schultz and her IT guys now under investigation know about the dossier? 14. What are Steele's ties to the FBI and to Fusion? 15. What are Fusion's ties to the FBI?
11
@aldebaran
new York
16. What are your ties to the Russians? 17. What are your ties to the Trump campaign?
15
Why did Trump collaborate with the Russians to take an American election?
3
What about Trumps character in all this? Lol. I think that’s the story. But nice try.
5
I have to say that all of this is mighty distracting from the news that Mueller is getting ready to drop charges. Interesting, huh?
5
@Jim
New Milford, Ct
Do you mean press charges?
10
First indictment(s) Monday
3
It's actually the reverse. The leak about Mueller's action was designed to deflect attention from negative stories about democrats (ex., plutonium deals, lies about the dossier, etc.)
2
When you're investigating the Mafia, you speak to mob informants. That is not colluding with the Mafia. And the Fox and WH distraction machine knows it.
115
It's a distraction now that Mueller has handed down the first indictment. Some Republicans are already talking up the fire Mueller meme so he must be getting close. Only in Trump supporter universe could investigating Russian suborning of a candidate for president and subversion of the American political process be called collusion with the Russians.
21
Trump warned us if Clinton became President we'd have a President under a criminal investigation. Trump was correct, we now have a President under investigation.
19
Tom from Florida wrote:
"Trump warned us if Clinton became President we'd have a President under a criminal investigation. Trump was correct, we now have a President under investigation."
Tom, go back to school and take a Logic 101 course...
3
Tom! This doesn't make any sense! Clinton did not become president...and yes, we have a president under investigation: trump.
This whole thing stinks and Trump himself is maybe trying to reinvent the rules and the standard operating procedure. Is this acceptable in business and encouraged? Seems like when the heat's on, the opposition needs a little checking-up on to distract from the heat and to create a diversion. Ignore the man behind the curtain? When the 'fake news" claims don't dissuade or discourage the public and finger-pointing and accusations don't work either, there is always the diversions in the form of just-released information about the other side.
8
Do you think FOX will even mention the fact it was Republicans who initially funded this Research Firm?
Probably not...Conservatives are way too busy BASHING/BLAMING Hillary!
20
According to the article, Republicans hired Fusion GPS and later, Democrats hired Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS found Mr. Steele. If employing Steele to do research was illegal, it was the Republican conservatives at Fusion GPS who broke the law but that's another investigation.
6
The fact that HRC investigated Trump's collusion with Russia is not the same thing as HRC colluding with Russia. This is such a simple concept; please repeat it until you understand it.
8
Once Trump was the winner among the Repubs, he became Hillary's opponent, so why wouldn't she do opo research? It remains to be seen how "fake" the research was.
5
Trump and his worshippers cannot believe that his opponents — both republican and democratic — would fund research to find facts to be used against him.
Why pay for research, they wonder, when it is so much cheaper to make the facts up?
16
Republicans have been about this all wrong and quite myopically, if their comments are even to be taken in good faith: the vast majority of the evidence implicating Team Trump in nefarious dealings with Putin operatives and the Russian mafia are from other public sources, as I note here in the piece that goes deepest on these ties, so the idea that the case against Trump et al. hinges on this dossier is pure nonsense. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/think-you-know-how-deep-trump-russia-goes...
7
Isn't it abundantly clear to everyone with more than two brain cells to rub together that the reason the Trump administration is resuscitating any and all Clinton-related accusations is to distract from the deepening mire they're sinking into re: the Mueller investigation?
I've got a short lesson in critical thinking for the GOP: Google the logical fallacy formally known as "tu quoque," or less formally as "Whataboutism." What it describes is the illogical attempt to deflect guilt from one offender by saying, "Well, someone else did it too!"
Obviously — if you look at such deflections logically, saying that someone else committed a similar offense does in no way, shape, or form exculpate the perpetrator of the original offense.
In other words — simply put — Hillary Clinton could have torn the liver out of Barron Trump and dined on it with a fine Chianti, and it would have absolutely zip, squat, zilch, and nada to do with any charges Mueller may or may not bring against Trump and his team.
25
Unfortunately logic has no place in the thinking of Trump supporters. It's terrifying how delusional such a large proportion of the country has become.
3
I just wish they'd lookup the dictionary definition of collusion. I've met a lot of people who think it means two people talking or gossiping in secret.
1
Isn't it abundantly clear to everyone with more than two brain cells to rub together that the reason the Democrats and Team Mueller are suddenly about to dish out some indictments is to distract from the deepening mire Democrats are sinking into now that it's been revealed the Clinton campaign covertly funded illegal oppositional research that relied on collusion with shady Russians?
2
What,, in a nutshell, do we learn from this tangled tale? Nothing really new but it's useful to be reminded of the fact that it takes money to dig up political dirt. Rich people have that money, we don't. Which means, inevitably, that we will eventually learn as much of what their investigations unearth as they want us to learn and no more.
We don't really have a free press. Like just about everything in our system, it costs money. More than most of us have.
5
Welcome to Halloween smoke and mirrors Trump funhouse.
The BOLD print should be that the Republicans ordered this investigation and paid for it to begin with.
BOTH parties wanted to find something nefarious about Trump and send him packing. He was then, as he is now, a major threat to our country. We we looking at our own Kim Jong-un candidate!
Don, Jr. has already admitted even The Trump family was trying to get dirt on Hillary and meeting with Russians at Trump Tower to do so.
This is nothing new in the world of politics and campaigning. These measures are protocol for every election. The dirt on candidates then turns up in political commercials that drive us crazy throughout the campaigns!
No one should be surprised, especially Donald Trump who absolutely knew these investigations were de rigeur and going on by his own family and team.
Trump will continue to blame Hillary so he can blunt the blow of Mueller's investigation and subpoenas. He knows his Base believes his lies so, he has nothing to lose here.
Had anything turned up before Trump won the nom, which would have caused Trump to step out of the running; the Republicans would have been thrilled to get rid of him and wouldn't have cared who uncovered it.
12
So now an FBI undercover informant that worked for years inside the uranium one deal is going to tell all what exactly happened.
Trump isn’t worried.
Democrats are apoplectic with fear, lies, cover ups and stonewalling
If the undercover guy delivers DC will never be the same
13
"Trump isn't worried."
Beg to differ. The word on the street is he had an absolute meltdown when the news of Mueller's impending indictments hit the news yesterday.
7
As another reader's comment noted, Trump and associates are still under investigation, by the House, the Senate and by Mueller and so this will do prescious little to deflect their work, but the public will get very excited as old information is released.
1
Will that "FBI undercover informant' reveal this amazing information before or after Trump's investigators in Hawaii reveal the "truth" about President Obama not being a US citizen?
11
Alice in Wonderland, that's what this administration as done to this great country.
I'm so sickened by the likes of Sarah Huckabee, Devin Nunes, Kellyanne Conway, Steve Munchin and all the others who have show zero respect for the truth and will literally make up any story or Alternative Facts to suite their needs or the narrative at the time.
Do all politicians stretch the truth? Yes, but the difference with Trump and his band of sociopathic misfits is that they have no problem with completely making up entire stories or facts then presenting them as the truth. To them it does not even matter if what they are peddling can be easily refuted, they roll with it anyway.
The danger here is the complete erosion in the trust of our leaders and the institutions itself. The fact that nearly all republicans seem to have no issues with either remaining silent or helping to promote the fact news of the day is even more deeply troubling.
At the end of the day, I feel sorry for the average American who voted for Trump as they actually think this guy is looking out for them, when in fact he's looking out for himself and his family's wealth which is exactly what his inner circle of billionaires are also doing. If you voted for Trump you bought the equivalent of his phony get rich real estate seminars, you know, the ones where he had to refund $25M to avoid a charge of fraud.
26
Looks like a classic Trump head fake, make it about someone or something else
The reality is that none of us really know what's in Trumps past. We do know that US banks stopped doing business with him and his family years ago because of their poor ethics. We do know that he initially said no one from his election team had any contact of any kind with the Russians and that this has proven to be completely false. We do know that he has no problem with lying about anything and everything and he's told some real whoppers. We do know that despite his rhetoric about American jobs, both he and his daughters clothing lines continue to be made in China. And we do know that it's been Trump who has been investigated since coming into office and by Monday there will be indictments of his inner circle. All this in just 10 months.
8
For "the most corrupt politicians in Washington" the fact that no one has been able to pin so much as a parking ticket on either of them despite over 25 YEARS of investigations is pretty telling. Donald Trump won't even show us his taxes, but it's the Clinton's who are corrupt? Yeah, right.
You were telling the truth about Hillary Clinton being under scrutiny had she won though... Chavez, Nunez, Gowdy, and the whole witch-hunt crew were poised and ready to begin "Whitewater II: the Electric Bugaloo" the second she set foot in the White House... in fact, even with her LOSING the House and Senate GOP STILL want to open hearings to investigate her. It's like they have no other purpose in life (heaven knows that actually governing holds no interest for them).
8
What will happen to Devin Nunes when is he wrote goes to jail. How long will his nose remaining dark brown?
2
In the face of overwhelming facts of Russian interference in our presidential and state elections, including his son, son-in-law, and campaign manager eagerly welcoming collusion, Trump thinks he can continue to deny and it's just going to go away. I can hope the Mueller investigation is thorough and revealing.
I also find it amusing that as this mountain of evidence showing practically everyone Trump has ever met is involved with the Russians, that his supporters are still trying to talk about Clinton. Where are the indictments against her? Either the accusations against her are simple character assassination or the accusers are complicit, by now doing nothing. Take your pick.
18
I am not surprised. Hillary and the National Committee tried dirty tricks on Bernie. Why not the GOP as well? Both parties need reform, the party line votes in Congress are a laughing stock to most citizens. At least some GOP Senators can think for themselves.
8
Those would be the ones who quit? How helpful was that?
3
Dirty tricks on Bertie? Lol. Bernie had the entire Republican Party working for him, and the Russians. And he never said anything about it even though he was told many times. Not a peep.
4
While it's a little hard to see how the DNC's opposing a guy who isn't a Democrat of campaigning against your political opponent in the primaries amounts to "dirty tricks," one may only agree that yes, John McCain, Bob Corker, and Jeff Flake have been thinking for themselves.
4
News article, with evidence and such: "Hey, Jones did something they shouldn't have done."
Jones: "Yeah? Well, ... Smith did it too!"
Smith: "Yeah? Well, ... Jones did it first!"
Jones' friends in the press: "The real issue here is that Smith did it. All the stuff about Jones is a distraction."
Smith's friends in the press: "The real issue here is that Jones did it. All the stuff about Smith is a distraction."
Commenters on a Jones-friendly website: "Smith is a horrible person! You can't go blaming Jones, you have to fight fire with fire."
Commenters on a Smith-friendly website: "Jones is a horrible person! You can't go blaming Smith, you have to fight fire with fire."
More specific to the situation at hand: NYTimes, you don't need to do anything more to convince the public that Trump is a terrible person. Those that haven't figured that out never will. What will actually change things is when those who think he's on their side discover he's not.
18
They do still have to cover the news, though, because they're a newspaper. A good newspaper. I agree with you that sometime Trump news feels like deja vu all over again, but it's still news.
12
You missed the point of this article. This is one of the most important New York Times stories.
It might seem trite, but it takes away their narrative. By saying Hillary funded it it makes the story about Hillary and takes away it’s credibility. Now the focus is back on the story. Which should be the point of it no matter who funded it.
7
Fusion was also a partner of Veselnitskaya who tried to peddle stuff to Don Jr.
17
Fusion was a "partner" of Veselnitskaya? Or did she hire them for something?
The Washington Free Beacon funded the research on ALL Republican candidates, not just Trump alone. They dropped the funding once Trump got the nomination. Your headline stinks.
26
What about the story, what about shame. It shows what you Republicans are are like supporting somebody like this .
7
All the Trump supporters who are trying to whistle past the graveyard with the tired old "Hillary" song might want to whistle louder. Scream even. But Mueller's indictments are still coming. As soon as Monday. No song and dance, no matter how frantic and loud, is going to get you out of that. So have a good weekend, and enjoy that old out-of-date "Hillary" song that everybody but you is sick and tired of (she ain't the president nor even running for office anymore, dears) while you still can.
36
LOL: and a full throated assault on Pence would ensue before the Cell Doors Slammed.
6
God, I hope so. I've "ensued" it already.
3
The Trump campaign was either very smart or very cheap. When looking for dirt on Clinton, it went straight to the Kremlin and cut out any middlemen.
27
Money well spent, right? They (and no one else) ever found a thing...
2
It is a shame most people either love one candidate or the other only to ridicule and insult the opposing side while each side prides or hides their own dirty tricks to achieve their own selfish goals. The reality of it all is that both behaved as nothing short of being a low life, that lacked both any respect and a good sense of decency and composure. The worst part of all of this is you have a general public of opinion, that is just as fallable as the ones they admire.
3
That’s just a typical Republican excuse “everybody does it.”
15
Mick....The "everybody does it" is exactly the kind of argument that is frequently used by the Russian trolls.
6
Sure and they were equivalent in:
- eliminating health insurance for people
- pandering to the fundi evangelicals
- denying science
- denying climate change
- working to get rid of medicaid, soon medicare, then soc security
- insinuating violence during the election phase
.... you name in.
Sorry, but I do not recall Clinton to push those matters
9
boy, talk about tangled webs!
9
If both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump could be sent to jail on this matter, then it would be a win/win for the country.
8
Oppo research= legal, Help from sworn enemy = not legal. How in any way does this send HRC to jail?
15
one can only hope!
Opposition research like this article reports Fusion GPS did for the Washington Beacon is unquestionably legal. Nothing in the article suggests that the information obtained came from other than public sources.
Later DNC/Clinton campaign hiring of Fusion GPS for opposition research on Donald Trump is legal on its face. Fusion GPS engaging Steele to do research in Russia in an environment that seems to invite offer of compromising information that might serve Russian interests in US election meddling would seem to get into a seriously gray legal area. It is not obvious whether or how well the multiple cutouts isolate the DNC and Clinton campaign from information collection that is pretty questionable. A lot would depend on who knew what, and when.
2
So we have gone from "Hillary funded opposition research, so what?" to "conservatives did it first, so this is threat to our democracy and headline news" in under 48 hours. Amazing
10
What part don't you get that opposition research is legal and a common practice within political campaigns?
8
Cuddlecat: Don't even bother. They will NEVER get it.
The conservative web site was smart enough to drop it. If it wasn't for the DNC and the Podestas no one would have ever heard of it. But lets keep blaming the conservatives.
14
Ok let's play that game. Now how did the info get out into the public days after a certain orange tinted candidate bragged in a press conference days before it's release? You know the press conference he held just less than 24 hrs from meeting with his son who just met with the Russian operatives? Hmmm somehow I don't think the Trump administration wants to leap down that rabbit hole.
5
But it also shows that conservatives didn’t have the guts to stand up for what they believed in. And they succumbed to the will of the deplorable‘s.
7
Another whimper of a story, without even a hint of a bang...And on the front page above the fold nonetheless. Mueller indictments may be something substantive--that would be first amidst all the Trump/Russia hysteria.
4
It seems conspiracies actually do exist.
6
besides being old news what is the significance? i.e. we know the establishment GOP hated an outsider taking over as much as Hillary wanting to win at all cost
the real issue is did Obama and his cronies use this fake doc to spy on the Trump campaign QED
8
No, the real issue is whether the info in the dossier is true. If there were FISA warrants issued as a result of some of it, a judge somewhere decided that it must be.
7
The Times is doing its level best attempting to distance the DNC and Ms. Clinton from this. Commissioning a firm to do oppo research is absolutely standard practice, as Singer did. Commissioning it to obtain information from Russian sources, i.e. after Steele got involved, as did the DNC and Clinton campaign is another.
If the Times had just stopped harping on Donald Jr's meeting with a connected Russian lawyer, most of us would let this DNC/Clinton mess go. What goes around comes around, and belt up for all sorts of salacious, tenuous innuendoes and speculation.
15
The Russians must be laughing til their sides hurt. Their KGB fairy tale unit creates some garbage about Trump, and first is paid by a Republican for it and then the campaign of Mrs. Clinton and the DNC throw more millions at the story as it coincides with their (HRC + DNC's) warped view of reality. Having a lousy candidate, the HRC campaign and the DNC clutch at any straw and having too much money and too few intelligent politicos they throw more $$$$ at it. The US political system ties itself in pretzels for over a year, hires hundreds of lawyers at ridiculous fees and makes an absolute fool of itself.
To ice the cake the FBI itself may have used the fake info and thrown in some more dough. Well, for those who watch "The Americans," we've seen Phillip and Elizabeth dance rings around Stan and the FBI for about four years now.
Reality apes fiction.
4
I find it hilarious that a project first funded by the GOP will bring down the GOP. "Be careful what you wish for," Mama always said.
19
Imagine… the absurdity of it all, John Podesta and Debbie Wasserman Schultz played the old democratic shell game on members of Congress when telling them; they were unaware of Dossier payments! Only in the la-la-land of politically correct never-never-land can you expect the principles of a PC altruistic origination. To hide behind the asinine notions of not knowing who authorized payments upward of $10 million USD and or to whom or why payments were paid out!
Imagine… a political shell game or thinking the politically correct La-la-land of neo-nonsensical babblers has reached new absurdities. Where the likes of John Podesta and those associated with Debbie Wasserman Schultz seemingly thrive in the la-la-land of the farcical levity of selected memories and witlessness and the blessing of their foolish ideological donors.
Imagine… the absurdity and hypocrisy of it all; while wily principles and operatives representing the DNC practice their art form of financial cronyism, bribes, kickbacks and pay for play scams. They cling to selective memory regards their treasonous and criminal antics to enrich themselves. Their absolute distain for the Laws of Our Nation and Land is exposed for all to see with their selected memories, neo-nonsensical babble and continuing shell games. Has anyone given any thoughts to term limits!
7
They were unaware. The DNC hired a law firm who did this on their own.
4
Term limits is the only answer to our current shameful politics. Politicians are far more concerned about their job than about their country !
3
Oppo research is not illegal and no one has ever said so. Collusion with a foreign government is. All the Trumpists can continue to put their hands over their ears while they chant, "la la la la la," but the fact remains they support/elected an administration that cheated its way to the highest office in the land, and they did so with the backing of a foreign power. The only potential positive is that the GOP will lose credibility for the next 40 years, and we'll see the backside of the swindling cheating operation we've seen with their last 3 wins.
20
Notice how this old news comes out just as the Mueller Investigation starts to bring the hammer down.
First arrests by Monday, I hear.
12
Thank you New York Times for posting this Storey as a headliner.
Donald Trump and his disinformation campaign was working hard to push the dossier to the Clinton campaign. This puts it right back square where belongs in the Republican hands. One thing Donald Trump is good at is disinformation and confusion. The mainstream media has to know this and has to work to make sure the American public have the right information. The email scandal was blown out of proportion by the mainstream media and Trump and Republicans used it to confuse the public.
14
You obviously misread, or did not read, the article, which states fairly clearly that Fusion GPS retained Christopher Steele after the DNC and Clinton campaign (working indirectly through Marc Eiias and the Perkins Coie law firm) hired it to do opposition research on Trump. The article also reports that the Washington Beacon dismissed Fusion GPS once it was clear that Trump would be nominated.
3
Mr. Dial...SO???????? What is your POINT?
1
Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that it was a “disgrace” that Democrats had funded the dossier, calling it “a very sad commentary on politics in this country.”
Trump fails another IQ test.
14
No matter what Mueller uncovers, the Trump crowd will never admit they are wrong.
17
These can scream it between the bars. I hear the halls in prison echo louder than they do in the White House.
7
It's pretty astonishing, watching Trumpists try to warp this article into claims that the Beacon did oppo research, sure, but only to help protect Trump; that the Clinton campaign hired a law firm that hired the exact same investigators to do the exact same things but that means they're evil; that Fusion GPS hired an investigator experienced in Russian spycraft but this means Steele colluded with--well, who knows?--and paid "millions," but there's no evidence of that because "they," covered it all up.
Wow.
This is exactly why Trump's claim that he's releasing the JFK materials "to lay the conspiracy theories to rest," is laughable
NOTHING will ever do that, there or here. These guys haven't got facts, so they make them up; they don't know how to argue their case, so they scream.
And they always will. About all one can say is that this is hatred whomped up by people who make a lot of money off hatred. It's like selling fancier and fancier guns: they're too lazy, too ignorant, to work on what would actually make them safer, so hey, lemme go spend $2 grand on an AR knockoff that'll shoot around corners.
Gee whillikers, there's always been plenty of LEGIT stuff to complain about, with Clinton. You've always been able to just argue your side.
But noooooo. Not enough, not fancy enough, doesn't deny a voice to everybody else, doesn't get you off.
Instead, this phantasmagoria.
10
I remember a quote from early childhood: "When people speak ill of you, so live that no one will believe them." It is terribly sad to have a "president" whose life causes everyone to, at least, consider he may be guilty of the most disgusting behavior. If the same allegations were made toward Obama, they would be so unbelievable as to not even create a ripple of news.
13
Haven't we known all of this since January? I do enjoy watching Trump supporters try to make silk purses out of sows' ears though, so cheers for that, anyway.
8
And one of the Fusions' clients was - you cannot make it up - Russia!
9
areader: I am not sure that this matters. Research firms, like lawyers, take all kinds of clients. As long as the client has the money to pay. The clients can be good, bad, guilty, innocent...these firms are not interested in the integrity of their clients. They just get paid to a job, and they do it. (Which is why I could never be a criminal or a divorce lawyer.)
"Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that it was a 'disgrace' that Democrats had funded the dossier, calling it 'a very sad commentary on politics in this country."
Had my eyes not already rolled out of my head, this piece of bloviated, slimy, sanctimonious blather would send them twirling across the floor.
No, Donny. It's sad that you actually did all described in the dossier. It's sad that you did all this and committed treason so you could play president without ever reading a sentence or having a thought.
I'm literally shaking my head. What words are left for this walking, overstuffed hyperbole of hypocrisy and delusion.
Maybe one word and one number: 25th Amendment.
16
Based on the facts that don's immigrant grandfather made his money from hotels he used as prostitution houses because his barber shop wasn't giving him the streets of gold he wanted, and on his history of womanizing and demeaning women, his episode with Russian prostitutes is entirely believable. Also believable are real estate bribes. If the shoe fits, and it does; if it walks like a gander, and it does...
5
I believe the Trump Jr. meeting was a nothing burger. The Russkies (is that a slur or just nostalgia for the cold war the dems seem intent on re-instituting) asked for to meet claiming they had some info on HRC that might be helpful to the Trump campaign. Fair enough. If the info proved to be valid and useful I don't view that as collusion. But the Trump team found the promised info to be basically nothing but air and a pretext for another issue the Russians wanted to discuss. Trump team terminates meeting. No $$$ paid.
Hard to see collusion there. But let's say that the meeting happened this way. The Trump team calls the meeting. They then pay the Russians several million to produce negative info about HRC, whether verifiable or not, so they can discredit her. Doesn't matter if they lose the election, they'll use it to discredit her presidency and set the stage for retaking the WH in 2020. And they also are able to use the information to convince the FBI to issue FISA warrants targeting Clinton team members. The FBI director, no friend of Clinton, then uses the info to start a formal investigation into Clinton-Russia collusion which despite being bogus,dogs her admin. Trump team funnels the $$$ paid to the Russians through an intermediary who pays on opposition research team as the formal investigative team. Then the Trump team denies doing it.
Now -- if it happened that way -- I'd agree that the Trump team colluded with Russia and should be prosecuted.
4
I think it's absolutely marvellous that you told one completely warped story about what actually happened, and one completely madcap story about what woulda happened if, and then sat back smugly and declared victory.
8
THEY ALL DO IT!!! Of course Trunp had one on HRC as well. It's a welll known practice. In fact since the dawn of politics men have tried find dirt on their opponents. For the GOP to pretend to be incensed is the height of hypocrisy - and that's a high hurdle to clear in this environment.
5
Sure are a lot of people commenting here who seem to have trouble with reading comprehension. There is NOTHING about Russian collusion in this story. Fusion GPS is not a Russian firm. They, not the DNC or Clinton campaign, hired Steel. It's common practice to hire opposition research firms during campaigns - that's why they exist in the first place. There is nothing illegal about it, and it is not evidence of any collusion with Russians on either side. Both Republicans and Democrats hired the firm.
Geez, guys.
6
Come on. If I pay a firm millions of $$, I should know what they are doing every day--not some vague 'just do oppo research and don't tell me about it but send me the bills.' I assume Fusion was giving someone reports on their activities and at minimum someone in the DNC knew what was going on. If they gave all that money blind, more fools them and another reason HRC lost the election. The DNC, HRC campaign was doing extensive oppo research throughout the campaign and came up with some accusations that they announced in the debates and elsewhere--namely, Alicia Marchado (Ms. Housekeeper), the Khans, and just maybe the NBC Hollywood Access tape was also something they were involved in. To think they did not know what their client Fusion was doing is laughable. The DNC etc are responsible for the actions of their client Fusion. They were in effect the major contractor and Fusion the subcontractor to Steele (Brit spy with connection to Russian spies and officials and the FBI). In any construction project, the contractor in charge is responsible for any issues with the work of the subcontractors.
3
Even if they knew, so what? Russian sources aren't the Russian government. That's why Trump is a criminal.
3
The Clinton campaign and DNC paid Fusion GPS to pay Christopher Steele to compile the Russian Dossier. They colluded with Fusion to compensate a foreign national's work for a U.S. political campaign. That's a violation of U.S. election campaign law. The collusion also involved Russian intelligence officers who fed Steele information for the dossier.
4
“Conservative Website First Funded Anti-Trump Research by Firm That Later Produced Dossier”... However, ..."Josh Levy, a lawyer representing Fusion GPS, said questions about who funded Mr. Steele’s work should be secondary to its credibility”.
I have to agree with Mr. Levy. The failure of the articles authors to list one creditable aspect of it proving that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government to influence the 2016 election seems to answer Mr. Levy's question.
8
The most interesting news here for me is the way DT supporters are twisting the news to insinuate that Clinton/DNC tracking down the details in the dossier is equivalent to the Trump campaign colluding with the Russian government to disrupt the election. Good to know. Sad.
7
I for one am grateful that this research finally got out. Mr. Trump, as we all know now is the most vile and corrupt individual to hold the office. But it's the vile and corrupt Republicans who continue to support him just so they can get their agenda through. It's become very clear that neither side of the aisle cares about what the American people want -- they just go along with what they want individually. The American people don't recognize the power they have to run their government and hold these people accountable -- ignorance in the electorate has been growing and Betsy DeVos is set to take it over the top.
6
A Democratic presidential campaign hires a Washington D.C. - based investigative firm to dig up dirt on their opponent. That firm retains a former British intelligence agent to talk to people and gather information by apparently legitimate means.
A Republican presidential campaign allegedly coordinated with Russian intelligence services and the Kremlin who hacked into opposition computers and e-mail, spread fake news, and trolled social media websites, including with bots. It was also shown that the Russian intelligence agencies were attempting to hack into electronic voting machines.
I think it is obvious that the degrees of malfeasance are an order of magnitude different. In the latter case, claimed collusion with be with a hostile foreign power that was committing criminal acts to subvert the democratic process.
5
Donald Trump is just not a President. As much out of ignorance as malice and self interest, he and his staff colluded with the Russians to tilt the 2016 election. I was born when FDR was President, living through the terrible years of the Vietnam War and then Watergate. I worked in a national administration and was the State Director and held other posts in various states and Washington, DC for President Carter, Sens. Glenn, Simon, Kerrey and Gov. Dukakis, I also served in New York's City Hall for John Lindsay and was the Advance man for Bella Abzug in her run for Mayor of New York. So I have been a Democrat all my life but not without the same hostility on many occasions for several Democrats that I now have for Donald Trump.
I grew up 3 miles from Trump in Queens when he lived in Jamaica Estates. I met him a few times in City Hall when he was a street guy in a silk shirt on the make like everyone else. A friend of mine did business with Trump for several years. He was pretty much the same then as he is now. It is really a shock to the system to have Trump in the White House. A man without any curiosity or ideas (except two in the area of foreign policy where he actually has articulated approaches that rightfully contradicts Sen. McCain. former VP Biden and others) he has become a corrupt toady for his current Party's leadership and their agenda without a clue or interest in what that agenda is. His victims will be his supporters. This is America in 2017.
6
Lost in this kerfuffle of who paid for what, is the question of whether the dossier was used as the basis for FISA Court warrants to surveil members of the Trump campaign.
11
Lemme help: it wasn't. Among other things, the timing's wrong.
2
Political parties and donors carry out investigations on rivals and opponents, that's not news except to the naive. What is different in the 2016 campaign and election was the candidacy of Donald Trump, a totally unfit, rabble-rousing pseudo-populist and nativist, his hostile take-over of the Republican Party, and plausible collusion with a hostile foreign power which interfered in several ways in the election to tilt the results. This is especially concerning given Trump's obvious contempt for tradition, public decency, and the Constitution, fawning on Russia and repeated attempts to obstruct justice. Jeremy Steele and those who funded his investigation should be thanked for putting in focus eye the shady and long relationship of Trump to Putin's network of oligarchs and mafiosi, and the undoubted contacts of Trump associates and family with Russian operatives.
6
So, in Trumpland it is perfectly fine if your own republicans try to dig dirty on you, but it is treason when the democracts do the same? Such a twisted logic could only appeal to Fox News/Breitbart. What's important, however, is whether the dossier is true. And parts of that have been corroborated. Let us not forget: it was foreign intelligence agencies (friendly) that first alerted US agencies about collusion between Trumpland and the Russians. And it is FBI and other US intelligence agencies that are investigating along the lines of the dossier, interviewing Steele and picking it up. Trump and his palls will stop from nothing: collusion with Russia, partnering wth Assange whatever that will make them elected. But then again the far right have always had the same understanding of democracy and patriotism as dictators in third world countries.
4
So this somehow exonerates the Clinton campaign? That a major Republican doner first contacted Fusion GPS? It is irrelevant to the fact the Clinton campaign successfully arranged, via Fusion GPS & Christopher Steele, for Russian disinformation (Trump dossier) to be spread on then presidential opponent Donald Trump. This Russian disinformation later proved the source of Comey and Mueller probes of Donald Trump. Doubtless, the Clinton folks got their money’s worth on this salacious, unverifiable material. Time will tell if it was worth going to jail.
13
What should be a side note was elevated to a headline.
Meanwhile, what should be the headline is underreported, downplayed, and rarely mentioned by many in the mainstream media -- the fact that the Republicans are trying to implement a totalitarian state, and the fact that criminals are running the White House. They wish to gain complete power and control, and gather all of the wealth that comes with it. All of this is at the expense of the American people, particular those who are poor and disadvantaged. Our Democracy hangs in the balance. Stop downplaying it. Stop normalizing Trump. Stop with the nonsense.
4
If Mr. Trump really wanted to lay speculation to rest, he would release his tax returns. If he wanted to be trusted, he would divest himself of businesses that create conflicts of interest.
6
So let me get this straight... the republicans hired the investigation initially, but when it came up with really seriously damaging information, damaging for the entire country, they chickened out and quit, letting the comprised presidential candidate, whom they knew to be compromised by Russian contacts, become president???
1
ammonium chloride: No, I don't think so; I think the republicans dropped the investigation when it became clear that trump was going to get the nomination. (Not because it came up with seriously damaging information.) Whichever republican(s) were funding it probably figured why waste more money when the imbecile got the nomination. THEN, for THEM, it was "over."
3
Does anyone really doubt that the President did the things mentioned in the dossier? Or that those behaviors would be out of character for him?
5
Of course he did them. And somebody has video, and that somebody threatened to out him, and so on, and so on, and so on, ad nauseam.
He's so revolting.
3
This entire story tells us nothing but how contemporary political campaigns are conducted and the streams of money that flow to the parasitical law firms, consultants, and pollsters who feed off the candidates and campaigns. Get them all out of the business, force campaigns of one year only, and we might have a chance at a system of politics that creates a system of government that is competent, open, and based on the rule of law. Otherwise, as the captain told the ensign complaining about his deck crew, When the boat leaves the dock, you got what you got.
3
Well, I guess it wasn't Jeb! like most people suspected...
This dossier might be the most bipartisan thing to come out of Washington in years.
Knowing who funded this research really does little to change it's significance.
It is the content that matters, just like with the DNC emails.
What's true and what's not among the allegations therein?
Obfuscating the truth with irrelevant minutia is counter-productive.
If Hillary and the DNC enlisted Steele to produce fake material with the help of people connected to the Russian government in order to discredit Trump and in order to deflect from their own vulnerabilities on Russia, stoking a massive anti-Russia hysteria with worldwide consequences, I would think that would be rather significant, possibly illegal.
Unless you're going to argue that it's totally false because it was opposition work on the part of Hillary, it doesn't matter who paid for it.
Why didn't they use the dossier info before the election?
Why did John McCain pass the dossier to FBI director James Comey? Had he verified the contents or just didn't like Trump? Or anxious to start a war with Russia to benefit his donors from the military industrial complex?
...
There are lots of interesting questions remaining.
Who paid for the dossier is really not one of them.
7
You're right. It won't make a bit of difference to followers of Vanilla ISIS, but you're right. I'm guessing the HRC campaign did not release the dossier because it's contents had not yet been verified. You know, integrity--what a concept.
4
@ Kim Murphy
If they had so much integrity, why did the lie about funding it?
To Congress, no less.
I know this seems to be popular In America (Clapper), but it still is a terrible concept.
4
How do you admit funding something you haven't released?
The election of Trump has been so polarizing that we all struggle to find balance or to verify our own beliefs. Interpretation of information is subject to our own bias and the more it is overthought the muddier it gets.
What is the point of this information? To some, it somehow vindicates Trump and offers more evidence of the "crooked Hillary" mantra. To the media, it is likely about balance in reporting. It makes me even more desperate for some hard facts that somehow get us closer to some answers. But I fear that will never be enough, no matter what the outcome. We will continue to return to our corners and massage our beliefs. The longer it goes on, the less likely we can heal as a nation. Isn't that the goal of those that want to disrupt our government?
1
Ironically, both parties smear each other. Part of todays politics is smearing. In this case, both parties are guilty. But, if I had to choose, the GOP are far better at smearing than the Dems.
But there is smearing and there is Smearing. If facts are unearthed that are true and it besmirches the character of a candidate that is politics. If false facts are thrown out than that is smearing.
Part of the problem of all these arguments is that both parties are guilty but one needs to look at how they are playing the game. Both parties want to act like smearing does not go on and it does.
I don't have a problem with government, it's politics that's sinking our country.
As George Carlin said decades ago: Republican/Democrat - it doesn't matter. It's an illusion of choice."
The 'American Dream' is just that, a dream, and the nightmare has begun.
1
The issue is disclosure. Anything related to elections in our great country needs to be disclosed. That means everything. The political class hides behind attorney client privilege-even with campaign funds. There should be no such privilege for any and all funds related to a political campaign. Lawyers engaging in the practice of hiding the source or destination of any political funds should be halted immediately. Last I checked that is a form of money laundering. Anything related and or funded with political campaign funds, including emails, ads, consultants, servers, and telephone records should be accessible and available for public scrutiny.
4
I am in disagreement with the defenders/advocates of Trump who claim it is wrongful behavior by the Clinton team or anyone else to compile and disseminated derogatory information about Trump. The only important question is whether the derogatory information is truthful and accurate, not the source of the information and not who disseminated it to the public.
However, the exact same criticism applies to the defenders/advocates of Clinton who claim it is bad and wrongful that derogatory information about her was compiled and disseminated by Russia. The only important question is whether the derogatory information is truthful and accurate, not the source or who disseminated it.
It the derogatory information about any politician is truthful and accurate, then its revelation to the public is a service to the public. Suppressing exposure of the truth about a politician is against the best interests of the American public. Those who support such suppression of information about their preferred politician are supporting deception of the American public.
When considering matters regarding Trump, what the President says is true is usually false. His claims of falsehood are generally directed at things mostly true. I don't think we need to question the validity of the Steele Dossier. I'm sure the document isn't entirely accurate but the document is probably more accurate than not. The company was paid to find the research after all. Who cares who paid for it? The only lasting consequence is the political ramification. If a voter is cares who paid for the dossier, the question is who can best convince them the other side paid for it. Like swing voters, there aren't very many out there who are willing to change their mind. That difference decides elections. Period.
How very odd that this story would suddenly appear just at the time when an indictment is coming down from the Mueller investigation. Sort of reminds one of the "coincidence" that occurred when WiKi leaks dumped the hacked DNC information just after the Access Hollywood tapes were released.
They are coming clean because there is a lawsuit to force the bank to give up records that would show who paid for it. The judge was supposed to make a ruling this week but has put it off until Monday.
You have the DNC hack and Access Hollywood backwards.
The DNC hack came first . Then the Democrats and the Liberal Media, who had had these tapes for years, released them to dampen the DNC hack story.
They were saving the Access Hollywood tapes for an October surprise.
They made a bad move. They should have saved them for later.
5
In the matter of Russian attempts to interfere with the U.S. election: The Russians hacked the DNC and dumped the information to Wiki leaks. The Russians hacked half of the state election boards. The Russians hired bots and trolls to spread false stories and disinformation on social media all designed to damage Clinton and help Trump. Manafort, the Trump campaign manager had to resign because, of Russian connections. Flynn, the head of National Security, was fired when he failed to disclose Russian connections. Sessions, the attorney General, had to recuse himself because he failed to report contact with the Russians. Kushner, advisor to the President, had to revise his request for security clearance when failed to report contact with the Russians. There is an e-mail from Trump Jr. that shows a meeting with top Trump campaign officials and a Russian operative who was alleged to have damaging information about Clinton, which occurred at Trump Towers.
There is an old lawyer adage: When the facts favor your case, argue the facts. When facts damage your case, try to change the subject. Hmmmm?
48
My opinion lot of spinning here like where is the direct evidence of who hacked the DNC which of course informed us mainly that the DNC hindered Bernie and that Hillary had two opinions one for the public and one private. What else and did those two truths change any votes? don't think so. Read Manafort had lot of business dealings mainly in Ukraine - any crime in that? don't think so. Those Russian business disclosures that sunk Flynn very minor and apparently Sessions didn't disclose he greeted the Russian diplomat at a Trump rally - very minor nitpicking. If someone offers free dirt info to Trump Jr on Hillary is that a crime? don't think so. Now apparently for a year Hillary and the DNC denied any connection with the British dossier. A dossier that threw extreme dirt data on Trump but that's not important to Hillary's supporters. BTW who dumped that NBC video to the media?. Just asking.
3
You just about wrapped up the entire story in one paragraph.
Signed, sealed, delivered, impeached, and straight to jail.
3
Do you really believe that the Democrats are any better ? Well, my friend one fact answers that question the actions of DNC and Hillary toward Bernie says it all Loud and Clear! Both parties will and have done anything to gain power and we poor jerks are caught in the middle ..stop drinking the cool aid.
2
Reuters reports this morning, and CNN reported last night, that Robert Mueller has brought the first indictment(s) granted by the Grand Jury. There are no details, as the indictment(s) is/are sealed. Go Get 'Em, Mr. Mueller.
Meantime, PBS News Hour reported last night that OUR Census Bureau is underfunded, and no one has been appointed to head the agency, so the 2020 census is in doubt. WE THE PEOPLE must DEMAND that the census be funded and held as it has since 1776. The Robber Barons who have taken over OUR U.S. government love things just the way they are - with districts so gerrymandered that they think they can't lose. Time for a class action civil suit against The Con Don for not doing his job - WE must have him removed and force elevation of one of the longtime employees as head of the bureau and adequate funding put in place so the 2020 Census is held correctly. WE must also have citizen watchdog groups to make sure the data gathering and results are true and accurate.
WE THE PEOPLE must not let the Robber Barons further destroy OUR United States of America with their insatiable greed and missing social consciences.
77
How patriotic! I am impressed....
Gotta love this! “Yea, we caught Hillary red handed paying Russia for help, BUT TRUMP.” Wake up people. Both candidates from last election were disgusting
28
Sorry, Joe, I do not agree with you. Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign did not start the investigation - The Con Don's republican rival(s) did. Why wouldn't any .patriotic American want to pick up the investigation?
No, there is no comparison between the garbage dump The Con Don and his Robber Baron brethren hide in and the DNC. None.
35
No, they were not. Clinton is the rightful winner of the election .
What actually happened was that the right-wing Beacon commissioned opposition research, which is perfectly legal and a part of political campaigns since David ran for office.
After Trump got nominated, then they dropped it. Then the Clinton campaign's law firm hired Fusion GPS to do nore oppo research (also perfectly legal), and they hired an expert (also perfectly legal).
Then the expert, Steele, drew on his sources in Russia, and turned out a series of memos.
Whoop-de-do.
All legal, if on the tacky, sausage-making side of politics. And not at all taking money from foreign governments, or taking meetings from Putin's operatives to get their dirt, and so on.
Oh, well. You couldn't care less.
2
I can't help but think that people outside the NY Washington complex of never ending political garbage are excited to think that maybe there on the horizon cometh a solid waste technician in a large truck to haul this stuff away.
15
Time to change the meme:
Hillary Clinton and the Democrats could gun down a dozen people on Fifth Avenue and it would not only be justifiable, but the NYT would write a headline that the manufacturer of their guns was a Republican.
39
Are you disputing the fact that the dossier was, in fact, first funded by a conservative group? If we're going to play the blame game about who paid for it, why not report on every group who had a hand in it?
Park bench, please articulate what Clinton did was wrong or illegal.
3
The Steele dossier was not funded by the conservative Free Beacon. The article now contains their statement. Steele was hired by Fusion GPS after the DNC & Clinton Campaign retained them.
2
Paul Singer! The one of Argentina's buitres (hawks)! He is such a sinister character! Now, he has been backing the government of Mr. Macri, totally corrupt (of course), and, another Panama Papers guy !But, it seems the sinister deeds of these kind of sinister characters spreads everywhere.
16
After having managed to put into office an unfit real estate tycoon-grifter with highly questionable bona-fides (with the help of the Russians, the right wing Hillary Hate propaganda machine, and the mainstream media etc.), Republicans are now scrambling to invent an opposition scandal bigger than the one they are actually responsible for.
89
Yep. Conservative Outlet funded opposition research but did not have anything to do with hiring a foreign national Steele
Hillary paid millions to a former British spy to purchase disinformation from the kremlin. So it’s that clear. Hillary did in fact conspire with foreign agents and the Russians to alter the national election
Next up? Uranium One, the Clinton family foundation, fast tracked approvals and $145 million going in Hillary’s pockets...
33
All of which has exactly what to do with the confirmed Russian interference in the U.S. elections? I have an idea. Why don't you have Congress reopen the investigation of Benghazi? Hello, Clinton isn't President. Why are you trying so hard to change the subject? What are you afraid of?
14
Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better, but don't say you weren't warned.
Keep dreaming. Meanwhile, in the reality-based world, Mueller is closing in on the Trump cabal.
1
This sounds like a pretty clear effort to distract attention from a damaging, anti-Clinton story. The Times has a right to publish what it wants. But when it becomes effectively a partisan newspaper, it loses its remaining credibility.
36
Ah, maybe you haven't noticed, but Clinton isn't President and is no longer involved any governmental office. So lets ignore Niger, and open up another Congressional investigation of Benghazi.
15
Funny. To me, this sounds like a pretty clear effort to distract attention from a damaging dossier.
2
Or a totally transparent effort by Republicans to distract from the real story of our President's campaign having colluded with the Russians, Russian hacking of our election and the extent of our President's possibly less-than-legal financial dealings with Russia
2
Now you know why we don’t trust either party... The Democrats need to have a rebellion the Clinton smell like dead fish the super rich are always causing problems and also the Democrats are in bed with the super rich!
19
Ahhhh, the dossier. It was only a matter of time before Faux News, Breitbart, et al were able to ring Pavlov's bell (Hillary Clinton's name) to get their conditioned masses running to ascribe "the real" blame and conspiracy of Russian collusion. With Mueller's sealed indictment(s?) soon to be revealed, they're gonna need a bigger bell.
64
The New York Times put this article on the front page as if it was a scoop generated by them. If I were David Corn, I would be upset. David Corn writing for Mother Jones in October of 2016 laid out the Steele dossier, including that it was the product of Fusion from money given from a conservative source. The only point that Mr. Corn did not discuss, was any connection to the Clinton campaign and preparation of the report. However, that is a non-issue, and in reality amounts to nothing. Investigating Donald Trump's connections to Russia is no more nefarious than my wife having me investigated to determine whether I am having an affair. As I recall, the New York Times and others we're reluctant to discuss the Russian connections prior to the election. By printing this article today, the New York Times is buying into the deflection and detraction strategy that Donald Trump is generating. Why is this suddenly becoming news? Last night CNN reported that indictments have been issued. Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong, but the Trump Administration and the Trump campaign is full of rotten apples.
45
You said "David Corn writing for Mother Jones in October of 2016 laid out the Steele dossier, including that it was the product of Fusion from money given from a conservative source".
Perhaps you should try reading the article, because it said:
"Hillary Clinton's campaign and the Democratic National Committee had begun paying Fusion GPS in April for research that eventually became the basis for the dossier.
3
My thoughts exactly especially since Trump himself said at the Wednesday press conference that a Republican donor started the dossier and he had pretty good idea of who it was. So what's the scoop here?
Obviously a number of readers here can't read in detail before getting on their anti-Trump horses to write their daily anti-Trump screeds.
The article clearly states that the Free Beacon hired Fusion to obtain damaging information on several Republican candidates. Several, as I understand it, means more than one. This suggests that Free Beacon may have had a favorite candidate and wanted to discredit those that seemed the clearest threat.
OR, let us not forget, that legitimate opposition research (as opposed to the Steele dossier bought and paid for by Dems/HRC) also includes investigating your own candidate to see what publicly available information is out there that could be damaging. You know your candidate's opposition will find that info and make it public so you need to know what it is in order to prepare counter arguments.
Moreover...while it is presented as if Free Beacon's purpose must have been to damage a group of candidates, perhaps not. Perhaps they took the most likely candidates for the nomination and researched what the dems would find when they started their own research. Maybe Free Beacon wanted to find out if any of the top candidates had a skeleton in their closet that would make their candidacy untenable.
Further, we've not heard anything negative come out about Trump from Free Beacon have we? This implies that maybe there was no dirt and the only way to get dirt was to manufacture it. Hence the Steele dossier.
19
Nonsensical.
Can you explain why the Steele Dossier is not legitimate oppo Research?
The most laughable part is your supposition that there was no dirt on Trump so they had to manufacture it.
No dirt on Trump? You have forgotten the 6 bankruptcies, numerous lawsuits from contractors waiting for Trump to pay them, the Trump University fraud suit, the other lawsuits alleging fraud, the allegations of sexual harassment, the Access Hollywood tape, the promise of charitable donations that he had to be reminded to pay, etc.
The only question was why did the Democrats need even more dirt.
82
You can talk to us again when Trump reveals his tax returns.
17
Free Beacon ceased funding because Trump became the Republican nominee not because they found nothing. In fact, there was enough for Fusion to be able to shop for another funder.
3
The real scandal here is that despite spending millions, all they could do was dig up some innuendo and unsupported assertions. If Trump is as dirty as he seems (and I believe he is), they should have been able to dig up at least one video, audio, deposition of him encouraging a lover to get an abortion, illegitimate child, scores of cheated business partners and contractors, traces of money flow from Russian state-connected oligarchs. Where is the value in money in some rumors for all that was spent?
He's a blundering bull in a china shop--we should be able to find the pieces of porcelain. Are his lawyers really that good to have buried it all or is he right that this is a witch hunt?
12
Or maybe the news media just dropped the ball prior to the election.
If the media had given the same attention to the numerous skeletons in Trump’s closet as they gave to Clinton’s use of a private email server, would Trump be President?
Admittedly digging up Trump’s dirt requires far more legwork than harping on Clinton’s email server. Investigative reporters would have had to go to Remote places like Kazakhstan to investigate Trump’s profitable relationships with corrupt dictators.
And, yes, Trump’s lawyers are indubitably that good.
27
Suggest you actually read the dossier. It's far more than innuendo which is why excerpts were provided to Obama & Trump prior to the Inauguration..
It seems that people can't see the forest for the trees. That there was a privately funded investigation of Trump is of no consequence. That the investigation found that Trump was dealing with the highest levels of the Russian oligarchy, and the fact that independent research, independent investigations and American intelligence agencies have confirmed this is what is important. The current occupant of the White House was willing to cooperate with foreign agents and hostile foreign powers to obtain the highest office in the land. That cooperation involved illegal espionage, theft and other felonies. What profit this brings him is a matter of speculation only because he still refuses to release his tax returns. He and his administration are criminal dupes of the Kremlin, doing the Kremlin's bidding and taking the Kremlin's dirty money. Those who are willing to look the other way because of political convenience do their country no good service.
74
Can you cite a source that proves that the dossier is fact and not a set of unproven allegations? The talking point “some of the allegations have been proven” is way too fuzzy to mean anything without knowing specifically which ones.
4
We still know less about Donald Trump's personal experience and financial background than any other president in modern history.
Given what Donald admits -- bankruptcies, bad deals, shady business partners and sexual assault -- why have Republicans allowed this guy to take over their party with so little understanding of his personal and financial background?
We don't even know if he's loyal to this country. He seems to favor Russia.
64
Ah, did John from Hartford unwittingly lets the cat out of the bag?
"Er...the Clinton foundation still exists, is still doing humanitarian work around the world, and still taking donations. You can send them one if you want."
Could this be it?
The Clinton money machine has needs: it must continue raking in big "contributions" to stay alive, right?
To draw big contributions, especially if the donor has a quid pro quo in mind, Clinton must be projected by this political machine as a still-credible future candidate for high office. When that projection falls apart, the political machine the Clintons have constructed collapses like a house of cards.
How better to project Clinton than to organize a campaign to continuously push every salacious charge in the book against the sitting office holder, who thus appears vulnerable to a potential new Clinton candidacy?
If anything would keep big "contributions" rolling in, and the machinery well-oiled and running, wouldn't it be the prospect, however vague, of Clinton yet deposing the current office holder, gaining power?
Is that in the end what "Russia-Gate", and all these salacious allegations being bantered about in the media these past months, are actually all about?
A "dossier" solicited by the top levels of the Clinton campaign via the usual networks using the usual cutouts and misdirection (Perkins Coie, Marc E. Elias, DNC-DWS), sourced from "the respected intelligence agent of our trusted ally"?
10
Insane. As a lifelong Democrat, I can assure you that Hillary has retired. If she harbors any misconception, I will be the first one to set her straight. HRC was out there for a bit flogging her new book nothing else. Most Dems want to move on, like really move on away from the old to the new.
Elizabeth (Roslyn, NY), thanks for your assurance that HRC has permanently retired and will not run for high office again. Not just a few people have been worried about this.
We don’t want to see Trump, or his successor, get another pass to the Presidency because we again put up a corruption-tarnished, self-serving, self-dealing candidate with zero credibility.
But if she does run again anyway, you’ll set her straight? Just curious, how would you go about that? You do know that a lot of folks tried that in 2016, don’t you? We’re you watching closely, did you catch the details, as the DNC, the Clinton operatives and their well-oiled money machine destroyed the one serious candidate who tried to “set her straight” back then?
Most Dems want to move on - away from “the old” - that’s no doubt true. You seriously think that would cause HRC to stay in “retirement”? Remember, Elizabeth, we’re not just talking about Hillary here - there is a huge political-financial machine behind her that needs to be cared for and fed. Suppose they won’t let Hillary retire, what then?
Elizabeth, excuse me, but I hear there’s a bridge coming up for sale soon - would you like to put in a bid on that, too?
2
So ... Hillary, thru an intermediary, bought information from the Russians with the objective of influencing our election. The Russians, naturally, wished to do this and Hillary (and the utterly corrupt DNC) went along. This information was also part of the rationale for establishing a Special Prosecutor to investigate Trump and his "Russian" connections.
That about cover it?
20
Only in Trump Fantasyland.
The lawyer paid a company that specializes in opposition research. How you jump to the conclusion that this means payment to Russians is not addressed.
33
No, that does not cover it. And no, she did mot buy info from the Russians. It' s a little different to buy info from British former intelligence officer and Russia specialist.
1
No, either you either cannot comprehend what has been demonstrated or you deliberately want to distort what has been reported. An attorney for Clinton hired Fusion GPS to continue research they were doing on Trump and Fusion sought material from Steele about Russian collusion with Trump and Russian information which could be used to blackmail Trump.
1
So now the pro-Trumpers accuse Hillary Clinton of collusion with Russians after a law firm used by her campaign hired Fusion GPS to research possible collusion of the Trump campaign with Russians, at a time there were ample indications this might have happened, such as Trump Jrs and Kushner's meeting with a Russian representative who promised them dirt on Hillary Clinton. That's like accusing a crime victim hiring a detective who then uses his contacts in the underworld to find out who committed the crime, of being a criminal herself. That doesn't fly with me. It's typical Trump tactics: Accuse your opponent of the crimes you committed or plan to commit yourself.
61
Stunning. Trump Jr. has a meeting with a couple of Russians that the Russians solicit claiming they've got some dirt on HRC. The dirt proves to be nothing of interest. Meeting is terminated. No money changes hands. No quid pro quos established. Etc. Yet dems scream collusion.
Meanwhile, the DNC & HRC's campaign pay millions for a dossier of unverifiable information on Trump created either from either thin air or fake intel from Russian sources. That info is then passed along to the FBI where it is used as impetus to obtain FISA warrants to wiretap Trump team members and likely to start the FBI investigation into "Trump-Russian" collusion. An investigation which has gone on for over a year and produced no evidence.
Then the dossier is leaked to the press just as the new president is about to be inaugurated and the FBI director, no friend of the president, shows the info they have on him to Trump. Sort of a J. Edgar Hoover trick.
Then HRC and the dems lie about funding the research into the Steele document.
So the Trump Jr. meeting was collusion. But the Trump dossier is simply opposition research.
I'm not sure how liberals can sleep at night living with the knowledge that such twisted logic is the foundation of their political arguments.
25
"The dirt proves to be nothing of interest. Meeting is terminated. No money changes hands. No quid pro quos established."......Perhaps you might tell us where you got your information about what transpired at the meeting. Did you attended? Do you have a transcript of what took place? And by the way, simply agreeing to and attending a meeting with a Russian operative, the subject of which was damaging information against Clinton, is in itself collusion. And it is collusion without regard to what may or may not have happened subsequently - about which you know exactly nothing.
4
It is not clear from this article how much Singer (conservative Republican billionaire) paid the research firm he hired to find negative information on Republican candidates?
Ralphie, there is plenty of evidence Trump campaign collided. How can you sleep at night peddling such fake news. Russia gave Trump Jr. what they promised: hacked emails and Russian bloggers appealing fake news on Twitter and Facebook targeting voters in key states.
1
Recap, there is no moral indignation about digging up dirt or throwing dirt at a political candidate unless it is yourself. Trump law. All lies, false accusations, down and dirty personal attacks, fake news, political propaganda and hate ads against opposing candidates are acceptable practices for the GOP but not Democrats. Is there actual legislation on this? Will this become another Trump executive order?
I would prefer legislation limiting the amount of political funds that candidates can use for their campaigns. This way we can stop the profanely wealthy from buying America, and everyone is on equal footing. In light of Trump and the very wealthy ruling the current administration, this needs to happen or the American majority loses its voice in government as money talks louder.
This dossier did not start the Russian probe into their hacking of the DNC and breaching 21 states election systems, or their continued waging of war against our democracy by working alongside and supporting the Trump hate and fear divisional political tactics. Trump Russian connections were a by product of the U.S. intel community investigation. There was so much evidence that a criminal investigation under Robert Mueller III became imperative.
I don't care who paid for what, when, only the findings matter.
30
Lost in the noise coming from both sides is the fact that an ostensibly friendly foreign national spy - Mr Steele - was paid to contact other undeniably unfriendly foreign nationals -Russians- to conduct muck raking into a US presidential candidate. The back and forth between the supporters of Trump and Clinton carries the stench of selective outrage, the last refuge of hyper-partisanship.
11
The revelation of these dirty schemes just show that all the political power the establishment Republicans and Democrats could muster still couldn't defeat President Trump. Time to listen up...
13
Hmm. This comment suggests that there was a higher power at work. And I agree, but it wasn't the Almighty.
2
How Trump backers conflate investigating the Russian connections by Democrats with conspiring with the Russians is a giant step, unbelievable.
29
Magaudet, but not surprising, all things considered.
At this point if someone can't see this for what it is, they are either very dim or so partisan no amount of information will lessen their zealotry. Clearly, Clinton signed off on this and was hoping to destroy Trump before or after the election. The collusion Clinton accused now morphs into opposition research. These people are so despicable and underhanded they should be in prison. Clinton approved it. It wouldn't have happened if she didn't adamantly support it. Whatever happened to the "buck stops here?" Never existed with Hillary Clinton, which is why the public rejected her as their candidate.
14
John LeCarre would find the Steele dossier highly entertaining. I certainly find it to be loaded with intrigue and have felt from the first time I casually perused it that if even one page could be proven, some men in high places would have reason for concern. The frolicking in the Moscow Ritz with Russian prostitutes is too good for a fiction writer. Come on, Mr. President and say it's so: That scene fits you like an Armani suit.
18
I have thought the same, but your last sentence made me hoot out loud....picture humpty-trumpty in Armani! Think I will reread some LeCarre!
Democrats really need to stop riding the hobby horse of foreign meddling. Israelis have been "meddling" in US elections-and not just presidential ones, either, for years! If the President or the Premier of Israel is showing preferences for certain US candidate, the most anyone does, in NYC or any other state, is to mildly and sweetly point out that this is a "no-no" and we leave it at that. But lots of Israelis have "Dual citizenship" and vote in US and Israeli elections. Once Democrats-most now vote strictly GOP. No one complains. Meh.
But Putin and millions of Russians don't yet vote in our elections, as do so many Israelis.
Already, America's elections are polluted. The only way out of the briar patch is through the big muddy via intense political involvement and especially, to stop believing rumors and interesting if dirty stories off the internet or your so called smart phone.
Had all Democrats voted on election day-had not not mailed votes which are ignored-and all voted for CLinton, Trump would be celebrating his newest hotel in Moscow with his bosses, the oligarchs and Boyars. There are no perfect candidates, even among Illinois Democrats, or politicians who are part time angels. Lets stick to obviously possible goals and let Russia bury the dead and Republicans.
2
All this complex reporting about Fusion GPS, the dossier, Christopher Steele, etc. serves only one purpose.
It shows how desperately many people tried to prevent the nomination and election of Donald Trump. The only difference between the "right" and "left" is that Singer and others on the "right" abandoned any semblance of morality after Trump was nominated and elected. The "left" continues to resist the utterly amoral, unqualified narcissist.
History will judge us all, and Republicans like Singer who sold their souls for "unification" will not fare well.
158
I don’t get it this the basics at least was already reported and known
. I assume dredging it up again with new details is aimed at deflecting attention or muddying the waters of some kind and wonder about the timing
2
Two things come to mind:
1) I find it troubling how those at the top of the food chain like Singer through the power of their purse will try to sway elections in such an active manner. There was also the story of the man who recently passed away who brought in Michael to get dirt from the Russians on Clinton. It's one thing if the donate money; it's another if they are trying to pull the levers. But big money distorts free speech.
2) It's clear that anybody who's funding anything political needs to made transparent. I don't know what Clinton's response has been to being exposed, but if you can't stand u[p and say "Yeah, we paid for it", then your name should simply be attached to it from the start.
1
Is the information in the dossier factual and useful? That is all that really matters. Who started the research and who contributed funds for the research is interesting, but does not change the nature of truth.
7
Granted, opposition research is conducted by both Republicans and Democrats; however it appears the DNC took their opposition research to a new and potentially illegal level by utilizing law firm to shield DNC funding of opposition research and thus avoid reporting such funding as required by law. Further, it appears the DNC and Clinton operatives utilized the end-product (the Steele Dossier) to trigger an FBI investigation and illegal unmasking of Trump operatives. Likewise, the DNC used the same disinformation to deliberately mislead the media about alleged Russian collusion by Trump operatives. If true, the DNC and it’s key operatives will face serious legal action. These events on the part of the DNC will not go away by simply stating that their “opposition research” was just that and nothing more. Their dismissal doesn’t pass the smell test.
12
"Josh Levy, a lawyer representing Fusion GPS, said questions about who funded Mr. Steele’s work should be secondary to its credibility."
At this point, yes.
Untangling the money trail, and evaluating the ethical implications of sponsorship by the various parties, is an intellectually stimulating activity. But what matters most is whether Steele has provided solid facts about Trump and his campaign; and whether the anxiety he expresses in that document is well-founded.
We know that Steele's stellar reputation is based on a long career of compiling accurate information. We know that certain Republicans who read the dossier walked away considerably shaken--and that our own intelligence community has verified some, if not all, of its contents.
The part about the prostitutes is merely of prurient interest. Let's focus on the important question: Did the current POTUS knowingly gain office with the help of a foreign adversary? Everything else is a footnote.
9
He may be a Republican but he was a member of the establishment ,like many in Congress,that is fighting to maintain the status quo that President Trump is upsetting.This is what the people wanted .
2
"Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that it was a “disgrace” that Democrats had funded the dossier, calling it “a very sad commentary on politics in this country.”
But Mr. Trump and Trump Jr. both have no problem with "opposition research" when Jr. said he met with a Russian lady at Trump tower to glean dirt on Hillary. And when Trump, the president, later learned of it ( I believe he knew all along but I can't prove it) he said opposition research is the norm and maybe malpractice if not done according to his staunch supporters. As long as they were not colluding with a foreign government it passes the smell test. Now this is very different from collusion with a foreign government to help aim specific ads at certain demographics in different states.
6
Federal election law permits foreign nationals to do volunteer campaign work as long as they are not compensated. The Trump campaign did not pay the Russian lawyer for "oppositional research." She asked for no compensation. However, the Clinton campaign and DNC paid Christopher Steele for oppositional research. It is a violation of federal election law to pay foreign nationals for political campaign work. Steele is a foreign national/
4
William Case you totally ignore the gist of my comment. You're reading me the riot act about what is legal. I'm saying they both claim to have done opposition research. Also I don't believe you. We live in a global age. That means you can hire anyone from around the world who is qualified to to do detective work on your behalf. Also most importantly you totally ignored that the article mentions Paul Singer who funded the opposition research for Republicans during the Republican primaries. The only reason they called it off was when they realized Trump was running way ahead and no one could stop him.So these are people from the same party looking for dirt on Trump. Yet you have nothing to say about that? The British man is a former spy who was hired. He does not work for any government in an official capacity.He wasn't hired to take sides in a campaign..we know that because first he was paid by Republicans then he was paid by Democrats. He didn't care who won. As long as he was paid.
According to the Federal Election Commission, “The Federal Election Campaign Act prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment.” As the FEC points out, the act provides an exemption that states: “The value of services provided without compensation by any individual who volunteers on behalf of a candidate or political committee is not a contribution.” However, Steele was compensated for compiling the Russian Dossier.
1
As is often the case, the comments are more enlightening than the article. There is nothing new here. The pot calling the kettle black. Both Parties are willing to use whatever dirt they can uncover - and go to extreme lengths to achieve their goals. How can you blame international forces for interfering in our election when we invite them in? I suppose the justification is that if the 'good guys' win, it would all be worth it.
The real mystery is why the NYTimes deems this worth of the top slot. To agitate the comments section seems as good a reason as any.
Move on. No more rehashing of the last election, instead, let's concentrate on working for the citizens - all the citizens.
3
The issue of who funded what is just a diversionary tactic. Everyone knows that republicans, democrats and wealthy individuals who want to influence the political process pay for this type of opposition research. It is not illegal and if done properly can benefit the public by bringing out the full story about candidates.
The important issue is the credibility of the information presented in the Steele dossier. I trust Mueller to get to the bottom of this.
5
It is no accident that both Singer and Clinton funded the fusion gps effort. Both republicans and democrats are members of the military industrial, agency complex. One manifestation of this is how the senate passed the defense appropriation bill with massive bipartisan support.It included record wartime funding, when we arent supposed to be at war. It is the one bipartisan issue, Republicans and Democrats only come together to further the deep state. Add funding Fusion GPS as another deep state operation.
1
Why is customary and usual oppo research from a campaign year being scrutinized as if it's never been done before? All campaigns pay for somebody to dig up dirt. The issue is not who looked for or payed for the research that led to the dossier but whether the allegations are true or not. That will be decided soon enough.
4
At the end of the day, the Clinton campaign/DNC paid for a British citizen to use his alleged-Kremlin contacts to dig up dirt on Trump. Isn't that colluding with a foreign power via a third party intermediary? After all, we have had months of declarations from the mainstream press that EVERYONE in Russia operates at the behest of Putin, so why isn't this working with Putin to attack a US Presidential candidate? And don't forget, this wasn't the only foreign contact - the campaign also worked with Ukrainian officials as well.
10
Do I understand this correctly? It was all just business as usual when they entertained the Russian lawyer and SEVEN OTHER PEOPLE in Trump Tower when they thought there was crucial detrimental information about the Clinton Campaign--so much so they were collectively licking their chops, but now that there's even the slightest thread to connect the infamous Steele Dossier to the Democrats, Trump and the Republicans are 'disgusted' and it's just further proof of how the system, and ultimately, the election is 'RIGGED!' Well... how rigged is it? Did Trump win or not? My least favorite broken promise from this Predisent is the one where he says: "I'll accept the results of the election--IF I WIN!" Well he won, and he STILL WON'T ACCEPT the results--it's just amazing.
10
This article is an obvious attempt by the NY TIMES to try to legitimize the democrat's ploy. The origin of the "research" does not delegitimize its content. The dossier is completely fabricated and fake news. Its all about lying to promote a political agenda and do every thing it takes to "fool" America. This is an example of how the NY TIMES is becoming more like the National Enquirer. Its the same kind of reader that want to believe the story they know is not true. But they like living in the lie.
11
Please provide one shred of evidence that the dossier was "completely fabricated."
Wishful thinking, perhaps?
6
I assume you have seen the dossier and sit on Mr. Mueller's team?
That's what we thought. BTW, your fact free bluster reminds us of a certain someone...
5
Not sure why it's important (to the NYT) that a Conservative Website hired them "Months Before" Clinton hired them.
11
All the context is not worth knowing? Both sides don't matter? The history of Fusion's work is irrelevant?
Then I guess you are accustomed to Fox News editorial standards, where the only story that matters is the one that defends the WH...
2
And they called Richard Nixon Tricky Dick. Nowadays these antics are the norm in politics.
2
Now and then read a Free Beacon article when it's linked from Drudge or BB. Won't be giving them my clicks anymore. MAGA.
2
Why are you even focusing on this? Sean Hannity sets the agenda and you play along. History will savage you two. You are the Walter Duranty journalists of your time. Don’t take the bait! You learned nothing after your obsession with the emails. How do you still have a job?
What a misleading story.
The primary importance of the dossier was that the Russian provided data was obtained AFTER the Washington Free Beacon was no longer involved.
Only after the WFB was no longer paying for the gathering of oppo research and the Clinton Campaign and the DNC kicked in $9 million did GPS hire Steele and obtain the help of the Russians.
Are you blatantly trying to mislead or are you that uninformed?
Call Byron York he can bring you up to date.
You should be ashamed.
17
Michael Henry - Blatantly trying to mislead, but desperation drove them to it as all the lies are coming unraveled.
8
I don't care who paid for it. All I want to know is whether it is accurate and, if so, when will Congress to do its job and impeach or prosecute? As for Grassley, Trey Gowdy, Nunes and all the other Republicans trying to block, circumvent or muddy the Mueller investigation with their own red herrings about uranium, e-mails, Clinton, Obama or some other time-consuming and expensive nonsense, they too should be charged with obstruction of justice and prosecuted. They would be if we had a real independent Attorney General instead of a racist sycophantic gnome who verges on being a Russian agent himself.
24
I love it! “Yea, we just discovered that Hillary actually colluded with Russia, but we’re gonna keep on pretending it’s a Trump problem, even though we found no evidence of any collusion after a year of investigations and we found direct evidence of Hillary colluding”. This is why everyone trusts the Times!
17
Joe (or is it Ivan?), it is as if you haven't read a single word of any of the stories detailing the links between the Trump campaign and the Russian secret services. Moreover, you seem not to have even read this particular story. An investigation conducted by Americans and British investigators into Trump's multiple dealings with Kremlin functionaries is not "collusion with Russia." Colluding with actual Russian agents, is colluding with Russia, and that is what all of the evidence shows that Trump and his minions were doing.
5
Thanks for supporting Russia and the Chinese, both of whom are the biggest beneficiaries of the "Trump Chaos Show". Talk about false priorities....
1
It was opposition research when the Republicans initiated it. It was opposition research when the Democrats took it over. Big deal. And you knew that, New York Times and Washington Post and the rest of you try to gin up a "both sides" controversy here. You knew that this was ordinary political practice, while Russia specifically interfering in our electoral campaigns to benefit one candidate is not, nor is a campaign inviting Russia to do so. You knew that this dossier story isn't the point, yet here you are feeding idiotic distraction to the FoxNews nuts. Through your coverage, the NYT is complicit in Trump's election as well as allowing him to deflect attention from what people did in his name.
8
NYT this is a very misleading title. The Conservative website hired Fusion for standard opposition research. The Clinton Campaign and DNC hired Steel, the former chief of the Russia desk at M16, who produced the Steel dossier. By phrasing the headline as you did you are sowing the FALSE impression that the Conservative website first branched out in international espionage to gather and/or fabricate dirt on Trump. It was the Clinton Campaign who did this.
17
Clintons and te dnc spend millions trying to dig up dirt and create the Russians are coming environment and the news media and most of the comments here are just business as usual. If president Trumps son sits with a Russian lawyer for free to hear possible dirt on HRC it's lights out treason.
That's why president Tump won, our country is not ok with the lack of integrity and honor the Democratic Party and our media has turned into. BTW Trump is not a republican.
12
Armo, just stay with the dnc and HRC no matter what. See how that works out. People in thus country are sick of the lack of honor and integrity.
2
"Perkins Coie was paid $12.4 million to represent the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 race, according to campaign finance filings, though most of that money probably went to legal compliance."
How does the NY Times know "that most of that money PROBABLY went to legal compliance"? When it comes to investigating the DNC and Clinton campaign, why does the NY Times show so little curiosity in investigating this issue? How much money was laundered through Perkins Coie and wound up in the hand of foreign, including Russian, agents?
14
Because they have only admitted to paying Fusion/GPS $5.5 million for the fake dossier? So far.
1
Though the article in itself is factual correct, again the NYT displays its bias against President Trump simply through the title. If you stop after the title, like many readers do, you conclude something different than what the article says. When you read the article it becomes clear that Clinton was behind the final falacious document which Steele and Fusion GPS concocted to undermine Mr Trump. Excellent example of one of the methods the main stream media use to manipulate the facts. That's the way to create fake news.
15
Indictments are coming down on Monday. Gloat now. Gloating season ends Monday.
2
I am a regular reader of the New York Times and appreciate the depth of their articles. I think the reporters do a very good job.
But, it is my understanding that the reporters do not have control over the headline which is apparently a creation of the Times editors to fit their political agenda. Sometimes it fits and sometimes it's simply contradicted by the facts in the article.
Unfortunately as Gunter Deleyn suggests above, too many people stop at the headline or perhaps after the first paragraph and don't actually read the article, but merely assume the article will confirm the headline.
2
Now I'm confused.
I thought Trump was the one colluding with the Russians to get dirt on Hillary Clinton. Treasonous, right?
Now it turns out it was Hillary Clinton who was colluding with the Russians to get dirt on Trump.
Still treasonous, right??
16
This repeated right-wing talking point, that investigating what Trump was doing with the Russians, is somehow "colluding with Russia" , is just dopey. Yet it is also so pervasive as to raise the question, where is it coming from? Are these talking points being circulated from by the White House, Fox News or are they coming directly from Saint Petersburg and the FSB?
5
Half this country has brought us to a place where opposition research is going to be about finding decency in a candidate and using that against him or her, since the Trump Era indicates to me that we are at such a low point of decency and morality, that someone like this truly loutish man could be president. All I saw, and continue to see, is that the cruder, ruder, more vulgar, lying, attacking, vapid and idiotic Trump is, the more his base loves him. I think the only time Trump has told the truth is when he said he could shoot someone on Fifth Ave. and not lose one supporter. The real problem with this dossier isn't what it says about Trump but rather what it says about Congressional Republicans and Trump supporters.
5
If we thought politics was corrupt before, the shenanigans of the 2016 campaign also exposed the corruptness of the FBI, DOJ, CIA, and the other national security agencies that are supposed to protect our country. The MSM is full of bad actors, like the authors of this article, who have been embedded with the Clintons for years, and turned a blind eye to their corruptness. The MSM also deserves s black eye for protecting Obama snd his administration for the lawlessness to our constitution so arrogantly trodden on throughout his 8 year tenure.
5
What's great about this article is that it points out that the conservatives hated Trump so much, that they paid to have sources dig up dirt on him before the Democrats.
How crazy is this whole mess? The conservatives essentially have said we hated him enough to pay to dig up dirt, but now that he's elected we're with him?
I'm with Talbot and Luciano, the previous commenters, on this, no clue as to the truth, but for me the one ironclad fact is that it's all really dumb and distracting!
Stop wasting our time and give us facts, not garbage and innuendo.
2
What I find funnier, is that, not for lack of trying, they were unable to dig up any real dirt that they didn’t have to fabricate.
2
Some very amusing comments here by the liberals.
1. "They say what Clintie did was oppo research, hence it is ok. But what Trump did is collusion so it is not ok. "Except, what Clintie actually did vs what Trumpie is supposedly did are exactly same type of things (pay foreigners for info to influence domestic election, foreigners paying money for favors - 145 million for Uranium deal) but Trumpie supposed actions are being called Collusion and Clintie's being called oppo research.
2. They say "Brit spies are Ok Russians are not". Except the rule says no foreign entity shall interfere in US election. Does not matter it is an ally or not. But that does not matter - make up rules as to suit your position is how liberals do it. (This keeping aside the fact the Brit guy got info from Russia)
3. They are saying Clintie spy was investigating Russia while Trumpie was colluding. How did the clintie spy "investigate" Russian actions ? Ultimately it was by asking Russians ! So what is the difference !!
4. Like someone pointed out, while Clintie had power their foundation had donations whereas when Clintie does not have power there are no donations for the Clintie foundation. How can the liberals not look at the obvious while making all the unrelated things to be connected.
Ultimately, Trumpie does not have the intelligence to collude with Russians who are far more intelligent than Trumpie and neither do they need Trumpie's ideas nor permission to influence American elections !
3
Lock them up. Lock them up. How sad! Opposition "research" to discredit politicians who may become POTUS. This is the filthy world of partisan politics. Clean out the swamp! Disinfect the White House. Send them all to Siberia.
2
Bloomberg and the rest of the press doesn't seem willing to go with the 'nothing to see here' spin of DNC and Clinton inc. apologists. Indeed, a large number are extremely keen to actually read the dossier, to learn more about Fusion's other clients, and to know why the FBI was so willing to pay for Clinton campaign oppo research. Other questions not likely to disappear anytime soon include the dossier's role in obtaining FISA warrants, and the unmasking of American citizens by political appointees in Obama's security apparatus. Samantha Power requested the unmasking of hundreds of Americans in her capacity as UN Ambassador? There are real questions about Obama's IRS denying US citizens the right to organize politically, and now more questions about the role the FBI, CIA, and Obama's justice department played in the 2016 elections. When the UN ambassador is demanding to know the identify of American citizens, how many other agencies are making similar requests, and for what reasons? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4907644/Former-ambassador-Power-...
7
Republicans hired Fusion.
Democrats hired Fusion.
The one thing the people who know government best agreed on from both sides of the aisle: this opportunistic, immoral con man must not become President.
Trump tapped into a well of hatred so deep in our country - wooing people to vote against their own financial interests in order to luxuriate in a steaming bath of Trump's lies - and no amount of 'intelligence' could stop him.
4
Wait, they started the snowball rolling down the hill, but their not at all responsible for any damage it causes at the bottom?
If Robert Mueller's investigation reveals that Donald Trump's campaign colluded with Russia to disseminate false information about Hillary Clinton, look for Trump supporters to focus on the source of funding for the special counsel's office.
Well, well, well. Its about time the focus was on the Clinton's. Lets see if CNN reports this or they will just say its Trump changing the focus....
6
To the New York Times:
Roy Cohen was the Trump family attorney for many years and later personal adviser to now Pres Trump. An expose of Cohen, his background and the interaction with Trump, the discrimination lawsuit and other incidents would provide the readers insight into the mind of Trump..many traits from Cohen.
it would be interesting reading and provide a unique perspective as to Trump's personality and "demented mind"
Liberal media saves face: "It was the conservatives who did it first! Hillary did it second." Sounds like my little kids at home arguing. Sheesh.
6
So basically money can buy anything and anyone. We already know this so lets just get the truth. Singer is an economic parasite who could care less who the host is. Loyalty is usually fleeting with billionaires and 'unity' is bought.. as in a quid-pro-quo. ROI is the common denominator.
It is now evident that Democrats, the DNC and Hillary's campaign paid to have a completely fabricated dossier created, leaked to the press, and then fed to the FBI to be used as justification for wiretapping the Trump campaign. In typical Clintonian fashion. the perpetrators totally lied about their involvement to the public all along.
This fabrication, the fake Trump/Russia conspiracy dossier, was originally intended to negate Clinton's own incredibly corrupt relationship with Russians by implying Trump also had corrupt relationships with Russians.
The information in the fake dossier has since morphed into a convenient excuse for why a thoroughly corrupt Clinton lost.
For a year, a disingenuous, incurious and/or corrupt liberal press and Democrat political hacks have cried and whined about Trump/Russia collusion,
All along it has been a completely fake news story.
The NYT faces a choice.
Start reporting the actual news, this article being a tepid start, and be a news organization or continue to flog theories about Trump/Russia collusion, pretending nobody knows the whole thing is fake, and be even more completely irrelevant.
12
I find it mind boggling that somebody would spend perfectly good money to dig up dirt on Trump. Take a lesson from the Yoda of Spin: make up a lie, say it a bunch of times, do your damage, repeat. If the press calls you out, just deny everything and call it fake news.
Here’s a bit of interesting speculation. According to the Times’ piece Fusion GPS was hired by the Clinton campaign April ‘16 to specifically dig up any connections between Trump and his campaign and Russians. How did they know to do this? According to this article Fusion GPS had just been digging up non-Russian dirt on Trump. Was the Clinton campaign tipped off by the Intelligence Community which had already been monitoring and unmasking people (Manafort, Page) subsequently connected to the Trump campaign? Apparently the Clinton campaign was well ahead of the FBI who didn’t launch their investigation until July ‘16. Your reporters might want to look into that.
2
Why didn't the Clinton campaign/DNC use the info in the dossier to smear Trump? The Republicans stoop to such dirt all the time - look at what happened to John Kerry and the Swiftboating of his Vietnam service. Why didn't Barack Obama make a national statement on the Russian interference?
The Democrats lost the election because of a lack of guts to trash Trump.
1
What I find the most discouraging is how this is being reported by the media. The emphasis of the NYT and Fox is polar opposite, 180% apart.
The Fox angle is that there is a Russian conspiracy all right, actually 2:
1. The DNC and the Hillary campaign broke the law by not declaring the $9 M payments made for the dossier that both funded.
2. The uranium 1 deal, a pay to play quid pro quo deal made during the Obama administration, where 20% of America's uranium supply was sold to Russia after a huge donation to the Bill and Hillary and Chelsea Clinton foundation. This deal compromised America's national security interests, and was made without oversight of Congress.
The NYT has an emphasis 180% opposite:
1. the GOP initiated the dossier in the first place so 'what difference does it make' if Hillary and the GOP later jumped on the bandwagon.
2. There was dirt on Trump, bust who cares if it is unsubstantiated and does not pass fact checking.
3. That Russia interfered with the US electoral process by purchasing $100K of Facebook ads
4. insinuation of collusion, but so far unsubstantiated
Russia was not our enemy when Obama sold the uranium at Hillary's urging, but was certainly the sworn enemy when they bought Facebook ads.
The news outlets seem like extensions of the political parties and not independent media. To be informed, a reader has to consume news from outlets from both sides of the aisle. It used to not be that way; it is a loss to the American reader.
7
Except that The New York Times is a legitimate news organization and Fox is another of the Murdoch's tabloids. Fox has become Trump's state-run propaganda outlet which is complicit in dividing our country by spreading lies and incendiary stories which have no truth to them.
I sometimes wonder if Rupert Murdoch has Kremlin ties.
2
That being said, this news is of no consequence for president Trump. He and Bannon created a parallel America through brilliant conditioning techniques. That is why Trump was not off mark when he bellowed, during a stump speech in 2016, that he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and, still, get elected. The legitimate press can show a surveillance video of Trump leaving Trump Tower and gunning down a person in front of said building with 20 eyewitnesses all around him and his 95% (ers) will receive a tweet saying, It wasn't my fault, Fake News #instigatorinchief. This new set of facts will only embolden his rabid fans.
1
So what? The democrats continued to pay for it, to the tune of millions of dollars. And then it is the democrats and the Clintons that used the bogus "dossier".
The Clintons are the ones who used the fruits of the poisonous tree.
And the Clintons are the ones who received millions from Russian entities in so called "contributions" to their foundation.
3
Suddenly the world has come to the same conclusion, Trump was apparently the only one NOT colluding with the Russians.
Mueller needs to resign, immediately.
But alas, the trolls will continue their nonsense.
7
As ugly as our political process is, there is a silver lining. All this dirt digging both sides do, sometimes it does turn up some skeletons that need to be revealed so we can know more about the people who ask us to vote for them.
2
This does nothing to take the spotlight off the despicable actions of the Democrats to pay $9 million or whatever it was to create a story. Par for the Clinton course.
5
If you want Russians and a politician look no farther than the DNC and Hillary, the money trail is plain for all too see. It was the Democrats that not only funded the dossier but it looks like the FBI picked it up and used it to spy on US citizens. This mess makes Watergate look like childsplay. The present DNC will not even back Hillary on this they all declare they knew nothing.
6
Ridiculous. There is no linkage between the Repubs hiring FusionGPS to investigate a number of Republican candidates and the dems and Clinton's campaign later hiring the same firm to dig up dirt on Trump and Russia. If the Free Beacon had hired another firm to research Republican candidates there wouldn't be anything here at all. The progressives are trying to insinuate that somehow the Steele dossier was originally paid for by Republicans but that is simply not true.
Further, there is a world of difference between researching publicly available material and hiring a foreign spy to gather information from other foreign entities where there is no way of verifying if what they say is true, then putting together a dossier of unknown provenance and leaking it.
If you want to know how to tell the Trump dossier is a fake, think this through. There is no other corroborating evidence. Further, the story of the prostitutes in the Russian hotel room defiling the bed Obama slept in is laughable.
If Trump wanted to desecrate beds that Obama slept in, why Moscow? Why not put together an itinerary of all foreign stops made by Obama, visit those hotels, and desecrate those beds? And once you are in the WH, you can have a field day desecrating the bed Obama slept in. You could even publicly burn it if you wanted to.
Ridiculous.
6
Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that it was a “disgrace” that Democrats had funded the dossier, calling it “a very sad commentary on politics in this country.” So, who exactly will little Donny nuke?
1
John Meacham said this week, regarding all this mendacity, that the only true thing about Alex Jones' show, "Info Wars", was its title. There are no more "facts" anymore; not for the GOP. Just "info."
"Info", that you . . . . "war" about.
"Truth" is not merely something that we all agree on, in order to keep us level with one another, in order to survive - it's really whatever these unrepentant, hypocritical liars can get people to believe- or whatever they can get away with.
Matt Taibbi called his investment meltdown book "Griftopia." It could just as easily stand for the entire GOP at this point. "Grifter Old Party"
Please just GO P away, all of you. . .
4
Given all the liberal progressive hysteria about Trump and his very real flaws, this information, along with the massive uranium sale to the Russians by Clinton and Obama, are historic. The fake Russian “collusion” is also historic. The hypocracy of liberal progressives absolutely matches that of the conservative right. Liberal progressives rightly accuse conservatives of being blind, and I kindly suggest to liberal progressives that they need to take a hard long look at themselves in the mirror. Drain the swamp.
7
I kindly suggest that if an actual fact comes out that conservatives don't like, they just repeat the opposite over and over until it becomes the "new truth." Your comment reflects that "truth."
1
Hillary Clinton and her neoliberal Democratic allies are not progressives. The progressive wing of the party is the Sanders wing.
1
Sealed indictments have been filed by Mueller. We are facing a roller coaster weekend. Times needs to get out of bed and on the case as it breaks.
The people who are saying, 'Who cares what the source is?" crack me up. So when Trump is accused of collusion with the Russians the source matters, when WIkileaks releases actual real emails hurting Clinton, the source matters (Russia!)--but when Clinton and/or her party itself is accused of collusion, then the source doesn't matter. It's all Faux News. Everyone knew. No biggie. Nothing to see here.
7
When will the Clinton Campaign release the "Dossier" they have on Bernie?
6
Why would Hillary and the DNC lie about their funding the dossier? What were they trying to hide?
4
It sounds like the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton Campaign had not received a copy of the dossier before it was leaked to BuzzFeed. Would there be a possible motive in an election party involved to leak the dossier before the Clinton Campaign had the first chance to review and analyze the information to thwart off their using their take of the information negatively against the Trump campaign?
Why I personally believe that the dossier had a true Trump connection comes from the information that two of the prostitutes had wet the bed. That can happen in crime; it suggests that two scared prostitutes with a full bladder were victims involved in a blackmail incident.
1
Democratic denial just rings hollow. Players both sides are equally tawdry and tainted and the moral corruption is as clear as the moral protests are loud.
4
Oppo research is not illegal (but collusion with a hostile foreign power to win an election is). And even though we now know that convervatives started this whole dossier thing, it will be Hillary Clinton who is targeted with allegations of criminality.
2
This article is the very definition of "muddying the waters".
My Grandfather always said of the Times: "It gets the little stories right so that it can manipulate the facts of the stories that matter".
3
The gaping hole in Trump's logic is that he is President and Clinton isn't. Therefore the quid pro quo persists via his presence in the White House and Russia's blatant influence on US politics and policy and thus Trump's collusion continues to wreak its damage right now. The insinuation that the Democrats are guilty of what is alleged against Trump and his accomplices is laughable, yet this Through-the-Looking-Glass administration doesn't seem to know how to govern except through mind game shenanigans.
4
This story is another incentive for Trump to start a nukular war over North Korea and go out with a bang. Trump doesn't care about anything but his insecure ego trip and will even resort to contriving a war to hide his feet of clay.
4
First indictment(s). The chickens are starting to come home to the roost for Donald Trump.
4
What is a Trump supporter to do? When it came out that the DNC and Clinton campaign had fired this firm, Trump supporters came out in droves, online, to guffaw and declare that it was Hillary who had "colluded" with Russia (not the brightest bulbs, those Trump cult members). According to these geniuses, hiring an American firm to do oppo-research is colluding with Russians...but actually meeting with Russians, in Trump Tower, in the hopes of getting dirt directly from them is not.
I think we can assume that, with a conservative paper having started the Fusion GPS dirt digging, those Einsteins will be back to saying it is not collusion?
Reminds me of Trump saying, if Hillary wins, the Election is rigged, but if he wins, it is not. The right wing in this country seems to have no ability any longer to objectively process information. Everything now is through the lens of partisan warfare. They want to put Hillary Clinton in prison for having committed no crimes...after having voted for a man who, during the campaign had to pay $25 million to settle a case brought because he defrauded thousands of Americans.
The American right wing is exhausting.
4
Not a very bright bulb above. Read the article, not the misleading headline.
2
There is no equivalence between the Steele research and what else went down in the 2016 election. The media made no use of the information any more than they fact checked the multitude of lies and fake news items. Compared to the Russian hacking, bots, Twitter, Facebook, bald faced lies by news anchors, unchallenged lies, etc. the Steele report is dull and boring. This is another instance of balancing a 50 ton rotting stinking whale with a brand new ping pong ball.
77
Wrong, the "media" regularly referenced a British Intelligence dossier purporting connections between Trump and Russia. Purporting and substantiated are "professional' journalists tools to use the information and say they didn't.
2
Dull and boring? Meh? Especially if the Russians have a golden showers video and hold other debts over President Trump.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump%E2%80%93Russia_dossier
What is all this brouhaha about?
So investigations were done, so what?
Everyone (yes everyone) knows Trump is a liar, that is a given, no need to go to Russia to find that out.
Smokescreen is what it is. Let's all face the fact that Trump's organization was helping Russians to launder money through the purchase of Trump properties, whether the $100 M paid for his $40 M property in Florida or condos in various Trump Towers world wide that are in the names of phony front corporations, Trump's next priority was to kill the magnitsky act that made money laundering this way a crime. That was what the meeting with the Russian attorney was about.
5
Dont bring up the truth the Trumpies will say its fake. Fact The largest fine very levied against a casino to this day was Trumps Casino, what was the crime? Money laundering, by who? the Russian Cartel, they had the suite one floor below Trumps suite in his Tower when they were busted but of course Don The Con says he had no knowledge of that. Why Is Trump the one real estate mogul who sold more properties by far to Russians than any other Real Estate Company, Why does a Russian mobster pay 10x the assessed value for a Trump mansion in Florida, never spend a day there, then have it bulldozed to the ground and it is now still an empty lot. The Government may want to do some digging on that site. Why Was Trumps Daughter Ivanka and Jared on the Putin family yacht in the Black Sea 2 months before the election, yet Don says he does not know the Russians and has nothing to do with the Russians
3
Sounds like diversion from the NYT. Paying for a little opposition research is a whole lot less than a campaign by then Secretary of State paying $Millions for this dossier, then colluding with the various intelligence and law agencies and the then current administration to use it to justify FISA warrants so that they could use it to spy on and destroy first, a presidential candidate, and then a President-elect. This is MUCH, MUCH bigger than Watergate and unless steps are taken to make sure this never happens again, this spells the end of our great republic. EVERYONE involved must be held accountable, prosecuted, and sent to prison if found guilty.
6
OP research will work for anybody who pays them. What matters here is not who hired them first. Both parties used their services, but one of them lied to reporters for over one year about the matter. And if they lied to the FBI, thsat is indictable. The democratic party operaives lied. Ask Maggie Haberman, the NY Times reporter.
Cardinal sin #2. Accepting or dealing with a foreign nation hostile to the United States. The dossier on Trump had its roots in Russian propaganda. They were happy to provide junk to disrupt our political system. And the democrats took it.
Who used the op research people first does not exonerate the democrats from possible violations of the law.
3
Deceiving headline once one reads the article. Yes, the conservative website first hired GPS Fusion. No, they didn't hire it to do Russian collusion research, hire Steele, or get info from Russia to be used in our election.
It was Hillary and the DNC who hired them to do that. Ironically, the Democrats brought foreign nationals (the Russians and Steele himself) into our election to try too influence it.
4
It is not illegal to pay a U.S. firm like Fusion GPS for political campaign work—including oppositional research—but it Is illegal to pay a foreign national like Christopher Steele for political campaign work. According to the Federal Election Commission, “The Federal Election Campaign Act prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment.” As the FEC points out, the act provides an exemption that states: “The value of services provided without compensation by any individual who volunteers on behalf of a candidate or political committee is not a contribution.” However, Steele was compensated for compiling the Russian Dossier. If the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee paid for Steele’s work, they are guilty of violating federal election law.
3
"...according to campaign finance filings, though most of that money PROBABLY went to legal compliance"...a fitting "30" to a foggy "not news" piece.
so there's this company, fusion, that offers services ("opposition research" to paying customers) hired by two customers to do two separate jobs...and the connection is...?
the free beacon hires fusion to make a no-trump file for republican opposition to his nomination, the DNC hires the same lot to make a file they can use in the campaign...christopher steele worked for fusion on the DNC project but not on the trump project...it was steele's work that came to be called "the dossier."
now, if the no-trump project, funded by paul singer can be connected to the dossier, that would be a story...the free beacon's denial, "none of the work product that The Free Beacon received (from fusion) appears in the Steele dossier,” could be checked without much effort (the same for singer's "allies" denial)...the steele stuff is either there or it isn't.
what has been checked, it appears, is that the dossier "also contained unsubstantiated accounts of encounters between Mr. Trump and Russian prostitutes, as well as real estate deals that were intended as bribes"..."unsubstantiated" but trumpeted, if you will, as fact by a ratings-hungry media.
while waiting for the fusion financial records subpoena to be resolved maybe NYT could look into the 12.4 million the DNC lawyers were paid and resolve the "PROBABLY" of their disposition.
2
Maybe the opposition research is also meant as a blackmail tool.
2
Dishonest Donnie and The Deplorables are once again singing in unison the chorus of "Deny, Deflect and Distract" whenever someone mentions the mostly corroborated "Despicable Donald Dossier of Dirt". Of course, everything from mass shootings, the opioid epidemic, catastrophic hurricanes, along with Donald Trump's Russian problem and his utter incompetence to accomplish anything in the Oval Office, are ALL the result of the nasty Hillary Clinton. My admiration for Mrs. Clinton only grows stronger with every new Trump scandal and crisis, as shepherd Donald and his sheep continue to assign her superior political acumen and power beyond match.
Resistance is NOT futile; it's absolutely imperative to preserve the integrity of our precious democracy under siege by the least qualified, the least honest and most corrupt occupant of the White House and his complicit sycophants in US history.
3
The dossier eye opener is that after all this time the truth of its salacious content remains an open question!!
1
Indictment served. More to follow. Trump wants Vogel, Haberman and reporters generally to concentrate on reviewing the waiter who brought the dish to the table, not the full outrage served. Nowhere in the Times summary is it pointed out that Steele's facts have been substantially corroborated by the Intelligence Committee's independent investigation that used separate sources for its basis.
All the huffing, puffing and blowhard Republican distractions trying to dig up Canadian uranium (P.S. The FSU has greater reserves in its own lands) as an issue can make the coming indictments go away.
The conclusion will be that Trump is a traitor, and that he and his associates have mired this nation is their sordid and long-term conspiracy to steal our democracy. They'd rather we be distracted by Christopher Steele instead.
44
Haberman has had a peculiar weakness for Trump and following his bouncing ball since this campaign began. Plus she was always out to get Hillary - or so it seemed to me.
NYT, we really appreciate your staying on top of this and your singularly focused mission of toppling Trump, somehow. We have a big problem guys. We have to get the work done, of uniting our country and putting in the effort of rebuilding our country, like never before. Politics will always be politics, its dirty, filthy, but we are talking about our citizens' lives here and we the United States, have to pool our resources, our juices together and stay focused on going forward. With or without Trump.
1
It sounds like the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton Campaign had not yet received a copy of the dossier before it was leaked to Buzzfeed, mentioned in the article. Could there have been a possible motive in an election party involved to leak the dossier before the Clinton Campaign had the first chance to review and analyze the information to thwart off Democratic leadership using their take of the information negatively against the Trump campaign?
Why I personally believe that the dossier had a true Trump connection comes from the dossier's information that two prostitutes had wet the bed. That can happen in crime; it suggests that two scared prostitutes with a full bladder might have been victims involved in a blackmail incident.
Like the Benghazi hearings the republicans will point to...I don't know, "Fusion-gate", as a huge, sinister, black hearted, Russian colluding, special council worthy, committee forming, McConnell scrutinizing, Grassley disapproving, Cruz insinuating, Sessions saluting, Trump tweeting, Putin celebrating victory.
How many millions is this going to cost taxpayers?
5
These people have made "You did it first!" the excuse for every excess of their own.
Details about who funded the Steele dossier are matters for political infighting and posturing. What is more prominent is Trump's pattern of accusing others of doing what he has been doing for his entire career. Politics in the Trump era is at its dirtiest since Nixon, and the infamous Donnie Jr meeting brought together all those capable of enabling a major deal with the Russians to smear Hillary Clinton. Akhmetshin has plenty of smear experience - he got the Newseum to show a smear film targeting Magnitsky, and Veselnitskaya has been trying to get the US to repeal the Magnitsky act. Another Russian participant is alleged to have experience with money laundering, while Akhmetshin tries to deny his contacts with hackers - except when soliciting business, as he was apparently doing at the Donny Jr. meeting. And we know Donny Jr and the Trump team were delighted at the potential the Russians offered for smearing Clinton. So Donnie Sr does his usual Big Lie stuff to cover up the kind of things he's been doing for his entire career.
7
The whole blubbering mob of American right wing juveniles evidently presumes that accusing somebody else of doing something first automatically absolves them of guilt for the same practice.
2
All US national intelligence agencies issued a report confirming the Russian interference in the American election to help Trump. The former MI6 agent who investigated the Trump Russia ties is considered one of the foremost Russian experts around. The FBI had opened its Russian Trump investigation in July 2016 and counterintelligence agents had previously noted unusual contacts between the Trump campaign and Russians. Almost 20 meetings took place between senior Trump campaign officials and Russians with Flynn, Manafort, Kushner, Don Trump Jr., Sessions, and others. All Trump people lied about their meetings, sometimes repeatedly or under oath or in legal documents, until these meetings and emails were proven through evidence.
The Russian dossier is no black swan but revealed what has been proven extensively through other counterintelligence and investigative journalism efforts. Trumpworld is laden with conspiracies. The Trump Russia axis is well established, was deliberately hidden through the deception and lies of every single person involved, and was not coincidental but was with Kremlin representatives. There is no innocent explanation for why Kushner and Flynn tried to create a secret communications channel within a Russian consulate or embassy that would evade law enforcement oversight. Russia is an adversary of the USA. This approaches treason at the highest levels.
The ruble stops in the Trump White House.
12
Perhaps the Russia/Trump fest was a sordid political affair but when pitted against the $150 million deposited into the Clinton accounts, (albeit the do good fund), and the 1/2 million for Bill's speaking fee for 1/2 hour in trade for control of 20% of America's uranium it's a toss up?
Please give specifics as to how Trump colluded with the Russians instead of just parroting what partisan hacks have generally stated. There have been no specifics given, just reckless, false claims mouthed over and over again with zero details or substance.
1
CNN reports that Mueller will make his first arrest on Monday. They don't know who it will be.
1
It is depressing to read that the US political system has degraded to the point where only people capable of raising millions of dollars from shady billionaires can run.
Paul Singer is a multi billionaire hedge fund manager that made his billions in "distressed debts acquisition" . I.e. a vulture capitalist . He is also the founder and CEO of NML Capital Limited, a Cayman Islands-based offshore company. The Cayman Islands have a reputation as a tax evaders place of business.
Mr. Singer does not pay regular income tax on his millions of annual income, because the "carried interest rule " imits the federal income tax of hedge fund managers to the capital gains rate 23.6 % rather than the top federal rate of 39.6%
No wonder he has money left to dabble in dirty politics.
This sordid story illuminates about everything that is wrong with American politics.
14
Republican legislators clearly have only one objective: getting more dirty money into the only lawful process we have to negotiate the social contract we have to live under.
In the interest of keeping your readers informed, would the NYT consider specifically printing the materials in the Steele document which HAVE been corroborated? It would be useful information for your readers to have. There would be no need for you to print the unsupported allegations.
15
Paint me envious over the ginormous fees Fusion GPS was able to get from any number of groups seeking dirt on often the same people!
1
Donald Trump is not a lawyer but both of the Clintons are lawyers. All three branches of the U.S. government are dominated and run by lawyers and this is known as the U.S. legal caste. 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 in public office will do anything to keep non lawyers out of the lawyer run and dominated American government.
7
Lawyers invert the meaning of plain language and call it "terms of art".
This turns "Congress shall make no law" into a commandment to legislate a theocracy under the jurisprudence of the present regime.
The US and Russia are a like failed states run by mobsters. Their is no democracy left in the US. All ;apr has gone to China, Farmers are now government supported corporations. China rules the world.
3
I don't care who funded it.
I want to know if what's in it is true.
13
So what? What does this change?
He's president, that's the bottom line.
6
Hey, if either side broke the law by dealing with foreign agents to influence the election they should suffer the penalty.
However, It looks like for every one Hillary's gang may have done, Trump easily beat her with dozens of examples.
7
Digging up the dirt is an American political institution. And Yes Both sides do it.
Looks like Fusion GPS is just a good old American business. They will take a paycheck from anyone to perform the task. So Trump's diversion tactics about who paid Fusion GPS is nothing but a tactic with absolutely no substance.
Trump is really driving the tired narrative "Hillary!!!!" to turn our attention away from some new revelations concerning his campaign. Nothing returns the GOP to the fold of common cause than the refrain of "Hillary". It could be said that the GOP only functions when they are investigating "Hillary!!!" and can do little else.
This whole dossier debate is made up nonsense by Trump to divert and deflect.
141
Your post makes no sense. The dossier was funded by Clinton. She intended to destroy his campaign. Didn't work and now it has been revealed what she has done. The responsibility lies with Clinton and her underhanded tactics to derail her opponent, just like she did to Sanders. Clinton is as corrupt as the day is long and she will literally do anything to further her career.
3
Trump made up the dossier?? Are you kidding??? The enemies of Trump - including McCain - went to the FBI with the fallacious dossier. Comey took it to the FISA court to seek a wire against Trump and got it in an attempt to catch Trump breaking a law. Meanwhile, Comey decided weeks before interviewing Hillary that she was innocent. His FBI didn't even record or make a transcript of the interview. Mueller is using the same dossier in an attempt to bring down the Trump administration.
1
Website may have started as a not for profit conservative site but it later became an unscrupulous forprofit site with no party or policy affiliation or agenda, working for whoever was ready to pay for their services and so it was a place for neverTrumpers and Trumphaters to park their money during the GOP primary and then in the general the Clinton campaign and the DNC hired them to dig dirt on Trump and appoint a British intelligence guy sleazy Steele who claimed to have expertise on Russia to develop a DOSSIER so that the Clinton campaign or the DNC or the FBI could use to bring down the only Republican, Donald J Trump who could win against Hillary Clinton. Every day that Clinton is not the president of the USA, is morning in America. As I have said several times Trump is an experiment in American experience. A 70 year old billionaire real estate developer who never before held elected office until this year is our president under whose watch for 9 months our economy is stable, unemployment lowest in this century, reduced illegal border crossings across our southern border, dealt a severe blow to the barbaric terrorists around the world and constrained N.Korea's nuclear ambitions. Whats not to like about DJT? Maybe his bold, audacious and sometime abrasive personality; but that would be unusual perfection. I don't think America was interested in electing a pope or Mr. Manners, I am sure his supporters wanted a president who will keep his promises made during his campaign.
2
Yes, Trump is still riding on Obama's coat tails as you mention. But the chickens will come home to roost. It is far easier to destroy things, as Trump has gleefully been doing, than to build things, which so far there has been precious little from this "administration".
The Trumpistas can't seem to get much done on policy so they keep returning to some variation of "b-b-b-b-but Hillary!" or "Lock her up!". This "news" was well-known during the campaign. The only mystery involved which Republican team initiated the research before handing it over to the Democrats after Trump took the R nomination. A big bag of nothing it is. What is of interest is what the dossier contains and whether that information is true. Given that Mueller is now indicting I'm betting that the information is at least of some value.
5
This was an old story a year ago. I was confused about why the right was resurrecting this------- until I saw that the first indictments are starting to come down. Guess someone leaked that so the right wing news outlets can flood the airwaves at the same time we start learning who dominos start to fall first. However, the notable aspect of this classic diversionary tactics is how the deplorable base can so easily get spun up about already-known information. The lack of simple intelligence and cognitive capacity in trump supports is truly depressing.
2
Think of the Billy Bush and Donald Trump bus talk. Does Trump's involvement with Russian prostitutes seem unbelievable? Think of what we already know about Jared Kushner and his involvement with the Russians. The Steele dossier is another element of Trumps collusion with the Russians to undermine our democratic process. Don't let Trump change the subject by trying to take our attention away from the special council investigating his campaign's involvement with the Russians. The press has an obligation to hit Trump and his supporters even harder. This is not about preserving Trump's presidency; it's about preserving world democracy.
5
Perhaps we should check with Devon Nunes who always finds something else to look at as the Russia investigation moves forward.
Then Sarah Huckabee-Sanders can have a press conference and not answer any questions, but instead attack the press for asking reasonable questions about reasonable issues brought forth through Donald Trump's insane twitter events at 0300 each morning.
Remember, it's all a hoax. And I'm sure Trump's minions will be screaming that very same thing at the indictment hearing.
2
The real issue remains: Does the dossier tell the truth? The issue of who funded it seems to be a smoke screen to discredit it. And, President Trump perhaps with some Congressional help from Sen. Grassley wants to pin on "Crooked Hillary" as a way to discredit the entire Russia investigation. Unfortunately, the Times has just reported that the meeting by Donald Trump, Jr. and top campaign aides was with a woman representing the Kremlin indicating that there was potential collusion as well as a concerted attempt involving the President to coverup the real purpose of that meeting in Trump tower. Moreover, the U.S. intelligence agencies did not rely on the dossier to unanimously conclude that Russia intervened on a massive scale in the 2016 election. In the end, the dossier may even be a distraction as other evidence accumulates of Russian influence and potential collusion with the Trump campaign.
2
Is funneling campaign cash through paid middlemen to purchase opposition research from Russian intelligence routine and ordinary? If it is, then Trump walks.
1
The intelligence gathering, was via a highly respected former UK Intelligence officer, not a Russian. First hired by The Free Beacon, then picked up by the DNC.
Well at least one Republican knew the dangers a President Trump would bring to this nation and the world. Just wished he had put the nation first and continued after Trump wont the primary.
At least team Hillery picked up the ball.
6
Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that it was a “disgrace” that Democrats had funded the dossier, calling it “a very sad commentary on politics in this country."
Trump obviously isn't aware of the meaning of the word "ironic" considering it's a proven fact his number one son and two top advisers went to a meeting with Russians to "get dirt on Hillary" and then only a month later hacked/stolen information on Hillary suddenly surfaced.
2
When will Trump brag how smart he was?
"I am so much smarter than Hillary is. She paid for opposition research on me while the Russians were giving me research on her for free! And they even wanted to pay me. But I'm smart and I didn't take any money. Yes, my properties are beautiful and worth a fortune whether you are buying them or or staying there. But they expected nothing at all in return. Nothing at all. The Russians are so nice to me. I am so smart!"
5
Again, so what. Any campaign that does not conduct opposition research is one that does not want to win. It is standard practice to hire third parties to conduct and dig this research. Big whoops. Ironic that the research was initiated by GOP donors to prevent Trump from getting the nomination, and dropped when he became the presumptive nominee. Why the DNC/Clinton campaign did not own up to it is a question, but still part of the side show. The real issues in front of us, and was the Trump campaign involved in any way with Russia's interference in the election. As much as POTUS tries to distract (and no Trump, hiring a US firm for opposition research is not collusion. Dealing directly with a foreign government, that takes actions to sway an election is. And despite the protests of fake, fraud, etc, (to the degree it sounds like POTUS is covering up something), it seems it is very real now that Mueller has sealed indictments through an idependent federal grand jury. Oh, and by the way, parading your proxies out to distract against Sec. Clinton demonstrates that your sickening obsession with Sec. Clinton is not the signs of a sane individual.
2
Look at the birdie! Look at the birdie!
(This is all just so much distraction, bringing us all away from the truth in this matter...)
3
What I can't understand is why the Dems paid for the research, struck gold (or ruples), and then didn't actually use it to bring Trump down.
At that point, it wasn't simple, garden variety dirt they'd dug up but information the voting public really needed to know.
1
The Dems offered the Russian Dossier to the news media but papers like the New York times and Washington post refused to publicize it because they considered the allegations it contained unsubstantiated. Buzzfeed did publish excepts prior to election day.
3
What Fusion GPS generated for the DNC and the Clinton campaign was not "oppo research", it was false intelligence then shared by members of the DNC and the Clinton campaign to discredit the President elect. This intelligence was used as the rational by James Clapper and others in the Obama administration to launch wiretaps, unmasking and an eventual investigation that has produced nothing after 11 months. The real Russian collusion is between Fusion GPS, the DNC and the Clinton campaign.
5
Did you miss the news about meeting between Donald Jr., Kushner, Manafort and a Russian representative to hear “dirt” on Hillary Clinton? Did you miss Trump’s invitation to Russian hackers to hack Clinton’s email? If Hillary Clinton had met with a Russian to acquire dirt on Trump or invited hackers to discredit him, you’d be screaming treason and she’d be in prison by now.
1
And the US still supposes it's cool to seek to export and to impose on so much of the rest of the world the best kinda democracy that money can buy?
1
The career politicians on both sides of the aisle were and are afraid Trump might upset their featherbed provided by the American taxpayer. So it is not surprising both parties would seek to destroy him. Trump’s appeal to a large degree was and is his anti-Washington business as usual approach that has these dead head lifetime “public servants” running for their lives. I say good, run faster all the way out of the building!
1
In 2014, the average federal employee salary was $84,153, approximately 50% more than the average private sector worker earned. This discrepancy increases to 78% when benefits are included. The average federal worker costs the government (aka taxpayers) $119,934.Dec 21, 2015
Federal Employees Earn 50% More Than The Private Workforce ...
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/moneytips/federal-employees-earn-50_b_885...
1
Didn't Trump entice Hoosier Pence onto the ticket by promising him a "free trip to Russia with all the delights included"?
I exspect confirmation of that would be found in the secret personal e-mail account Pence used to communicate Homeland Security/Indiana details.
Obviously Pence's personal e-mail account files should be subpoenaed to safeguard America's future.
3
The outrage is that a small group of very wealthy people fund the campaigns of our congress and then use their media outlets to propagandize their own agenda. Koch, Singer, Murdoch, Sinclair, Mercer specifically use their money to benefit their personal wealth at our expense. The top 5 funders for any ad, campaign, or commercial should be clearly visible before and after the ad.
2
Despite what is implied, the conservative press never denied Republicans first funded this. What they point out, and this article admits, is that Russian agents weren't paid for information until the Democrats took over and Christopher Steele was hired to buy information from Russians.
3
Well yes, how else would you find information about possible collusion with Russians by the Trump campaign? Oh yes, wiretapping Russian diplomats suspected of spying, Trump’s well-known shady business ties with Russia, his adoration of Putin, Russian election interference - that’s how the suspicion there might be collusion was raised in the first place. Let’s see what Mueller comes up with.
As usual, we only get one side of the story from the media...Whitewashing seems to be their expertise for the Donkeys, just see what happened with good old Harvey...
2
Opposition research is common. Unfortunately Mrs. Clinton denying anything that might be controversial (no matter how benign) is also common. This is another example of why people feel like the Clintons are always hiding something.
3
I'm impressed with the improvement in the quality of the writing of the Trumpster trolls just below this post. However, the improvement doesn't make them right. While there is enough dirt here to spread around a large farm field, the reality is that most of it is on the right side of that field. The circumstantial evidence that the entire election process was corrupted by Russia from outside and mainly the right wing from inside is overwhelming. I'm happy to see that indictments are coming which will prove that to be true. Considering the level of this corruption, a legal way must be found to remove the entire Trump gang and have a new election with an entirely new slate. Hopefully, what will follow would be the restoration of true American values, neither Trumpism nor oligarchic.
1
Well well well. Turns out to be a "friendly fire" episode or so it seems.
1
This is an absolutely bombshell story. For nearly a year, since the November 2016 election, we have been bombarded with stories that Hillary Clinton didn't really lose, that Trump's victory was the result of Russian collusion. We have been told that Russia, through its election manipulations, launched an existential attack against the United States. We have been subjected to the third "Red scare" in American history (though Russia is no longer Communist) after those following World Wars I and II.
Now we find that the collusion with Russia apparently came largely, or even mostly, from the Clinton campaign. What we were been told was the objective evaluation of the U.S. intelligence establishment that Russia "hacked the election" was in fact based on political opposition research from an operative with ties to Putin.
And yet the mainstream, pro-Clinton mass media such as MSNBC and CNN has largely been burying the story of the Clinton dossier. When the pro-Clinton media does cover the story, it is always combined with an assurance that this really doesn't affect the Russian investigation. Or, as in the present article, with a twist to imply that the Republicans, and not Clinton, were really mainly responsible.
What the Clinton campaign has done here may be the most outrageous, underhanded, and dirtiest political trick of all time. Yet there is a general blackout and distortion worthy of the most oppressive dictatorship.
7
Hillary Clinton was smeared and investigated by the for decades and none of the allegations carried any weight. If Trump cannot stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. American politics is not for the faint of heart.
2
What difference does it make who hired and why? Is all or any of it true is all that really matters.
3
I’m unclear how two opposite politial parties happened to hire the same firm to do the same research?
1
Attempting to find out that the other side colluded with a foreign nation to influence the election is VERY different than actually colliding with that foreign country. Every campaign does opposition research. NOT every campaign colludes with foreign countries. Everyone should be concerned about such collusion whatever your party affiliation.
1
The Congressional committees and Mr. Mueller who are investigating this dossier need to find out the truth or falsity of the information contained within it. Whether it was funded by rich Republicans or Clinton's campaign make no difference. It is clearly opposition research that appears to have some foundation in historic, provable truth, and that is the matter that matters.
Another obstacle that prevents the United States from making any meaningful progress. This Trump Presidency has been a disaster from day 1. Until he is removed and a legitimate candidate worthy of the Presidency is in office the United States and the wider world, which relies on her guidance, remains paralyzed.
The Steele Dossier will be proven true. Everything since has been Kabuki theater.
1
I am confused too. Why was it okay for a political operative, buried deep into layers of paper work, to go to Russia to dig dirt, but not ok for the Trump people to meet the Russians in the US? I get that many politicians say it is inappropriate, because of possibility of interference and disinformation. But why is the political operative in Russian not subject to the same interference and disinformation ?
3
Its not okay, but both sides use intermediaries for plausible deniability. The Clinton's and Singer have been at this longer than the Trump team.
Kinda like organized crime where the underlings never speak to Capo.
The Trump underlings were just new to the game. But Daddy's a master at it. Notice how nothing is sticking.
1
While I find that this sort of opposition research is personally offensive, I am also quite sure that all politicians are aware that everyone does it and it must be an expectation of running for highly placed public office. I suspect that the amount of money spent on opposition research to the Clinton family and Obama exceeds the GDP of many small countries. The cries of outrage by Republicans are therefore laughable, and I can't understand why Democrats and the Media are not putting this in context with comparisons and investigative reporting. Ultimately, the most important thing is whether the information in the "dossier" is demonstrably true.
1
The real question is what is verifiable in the Steele dossier. That the two parties do sleazy investigations into the other party or candidates unfortunately is common practice. I do not know why we get surprised by these revelations.
The best way to describe Dossier and major players in a script for a layman is respectability. However, must of us are incline to follow politics and definitely not involved with contraversy.
Opposition research is nothing new. Why is it any surprise the GOP and later the Democrats would do research on a candidate with dubious foreign investments and shady friends? Trump's reputation preceded his political aspirations. Multiple bankruptcies would be a red flag for anyone aspiring to enter politics. The fact that none of this precluded the American people to put this man in the Oval office and usher in croney capitalism is very troubling.
1
It was widely reported last January that the dossier was first ordered by a GOP supporter to weaken Trump's chance at the nomination, and that the DEMs later got their hands on it as well.
There's nothing new here other than the specifics of who it was that ordered it.
I'm sure most of the Times remember that very well.
Clearly, what was done for Mr. Singer was above board and a reasonable part of politics. It is not clear that what was done for the Clinton/DNC campaign was in any way nefarious. What Steele did remains obscure: we do not know if he fabricated his information or if there is some veracity to it. The veracity of Steele dossier remains a concern.
Journalism has branded the dossier "infamous." It is commonplace for media to affix a pejorative adjective to something and to repeat, repeat, repeat without any good reason to do so.
The dossier is an incomplete document, comprised of notes of an ongoing investigation. It is not "infamous" any more than it is "virtuous." It is a set of sources each of which need follow up. The problem is that many of the informants are not accessible.
Is it true? Parts of it certainly ring true. Some have been verified. Others may be mistakes. In any event, stop using the same branding word about it.
1
In this same issue, there is an op-ed, “How Twitter Killed the First Amendment” (no comments are permitted, I was already composing mine before I was part-way through) that compliments the attitude that pervades this article: Certain concepts and practices are to be condemned if they do it, great if we do it. Here, that dichotomy of approval/condemnation is so subtly introduced, seemingly unbiased, that an apparently universal condemnation actually expresses condemnation of the Right and acceptance of the Left, as if the use of these practices by the former forced the latter to use these same methods in self defense.
The prohibition on chemical weaponry doesn’t have a footnote, “except if used by Good Guys.” Likewise, the Free Speech protection at the basis of our existence contain no “except for bad guys” exception in its applicability.
More chilling is the condemnation of the use of professionals to create speech that is then presented, under First Amendment protection, as the words of those who hired them. It seems what is being condemned is the use of those without personal talents – investigatory and organizational – that lead to the speech they then express being condemned simply because they hired others with those skills to augment their talents.
So, is free speech available only to the articulate? I like the idea – but doubt that’s what our founding fathers had in mind.
Or maybe they did. Universal rights – but only for the intellectually superior.
I see that Republican hypocrisy is blooming again. Here is their standard bearer pleading with Russia to put out dirt on Clinton while they are crying foul that the Clinton campaign tried to get dirt on Trump. That's one thing about Republicans and their supporting network: Fox, propaganda machines in the guise of think tanks, radio conspiracy theorists, etc.: they never fail you. You can depend on them to pervert the reality of every event.
91
I think we poor political and news junkies need a new fact-checked timeline to try to track the known knowns. On the reader end, this has started to feel like being the last person in a game of Telephone.
But - have to admit - it's nice to now that Perkins Coie is just the typical amoral big buck law firm; Fusion GPS likewise an equal opportunity, non-partisan outfit who'll take anyone's money. And that they all insist on having the privacy and confidentiality that they shatter.
28
Opposition research (aka dirt digging) is standard practice by Republicans and Democrats. It's actually happening now in various situations across the country. So it's hard to see what all the Captain Renault shock is about. In this particular case the revelations were particularly damaging and what's more important probably largely true which is why Trump is engaged in his usual distraction tactics. Free Beacon is just another of those nasty little propaganda fronts for Republican billionaires like Singer. They are as common as pebbles on the beach as well.
59
@ John - Agree with your post. With one exception. The Clinton Campaign made direct contact with Russian intelligence, albeit via paid middle men - it was campaign cash, to purchase disinformation and promulgate it. That is not ordinary routine opposition research,
2
Let me explain what the shock is about. The Democratic Party employed a foreign spy to collect bogus information from sources close to or working directly for the Russian government. They then used this used this fairly tale - knowingly - to illegally use US government law enforcement and intelligence assets to illegally spy on US citizens to try to swing our elections. Then they lied about it and falsely accused Trump of collusion with the Russians. Get it now, Captain Renault?
2
Odd. The article says the DNC employed them as well and were the employers when the dossier was produced. So how exactly is this a republican front?
Opposition research in election campaigns is nothing illegal. Some Republicans didn't trust Trump and wanted to know more about him and the Democrats picked up the threads later that led to the Steele Dossier.
What is interesting was the point that the FBI agreed to pay Steele to continue gathering intelligence but reneged on the agreement after his cover was blown, when Buzzfeed first published the material in January without verification.
People living in a glass house shouldn't throw stones. Trump called the DNC funding of the dossier a disgrace, while forgetting that his son, Donald Trump Jr. was equally keen on digging up dirt on Hillary Clinton. He agreed to meet Russians in Trump Tower in June 2016, who were going to provide him with official documents and information from Russia that could incriminate her.
In this case, there was one big difference between what the DNC and the Trump team did - the DNC didn't seek to collude with a foreign hostile power.
189
You don't know that so don't make that conclusion. My opinion? No one knows anything really because the people at the top are lying...on both political sides.
So Trumps son meeting a Russian lawyer where no actual incriminating information was exchanged is proof positive of collusion. The DNC employing and gaining information through Russian hands is simply normal opposition research. What's true for the goose is...oh and did we mention Uranium 1 ?
"Trump called the DNC funding of the dossier a disgrace, while forgetting that his son, Donald Trump Jr. was equally keen on digging up dirt on Hillary Clinton."
Well, see, Donnie Jr. is a really good kid, while Hillary Clinton is Evil Incarnate.
1
Details aside, thought this was an open secret. The fact that Faux News trying to use misleading headlines suggesting the Clinton Campaign & DNC starting this and the mainstream and social media letting it get away with it means fake news is alive and well.
Who need the Russian when there is a Faux News network here in the U.S.!
115
The function that Russia happily served this last election cycle and still serves is to provide fake news and baldface lies via RU and Wikileaks along with its other disinformation sourcing that FOX, NewsMax, The National Enquirer, and Sinclair Media can quote and validate as "I read somewhere. . ." "I hear . . . " and "people are saying . . . " the three Trump Fake Fact standbys. "Trust me on this!" "Honestly, I wouldn't lie to you."
3
I have read some things that say some information in the dossier has been proven.
I have also read that none of it has been proven.
This article kind of mixes that together, talking about alleged (Trump collusion) vs unverified (the salacious stuff).
I think alleged and unverified are actually the same thing. Comey called the whole dossier salacious and unverified.
I wish there were some consistency to these charges and claims of what has been proven/not proven. It seems at times that the confusion is intentional.
47
I also wish there were some clarification about who was doing the alleging.
It's made more complicated by the fact that there are 3 hearings going on simultaneously. As far as I know Trump has not been legally charged with anything. I think Comey said a couple of times he had't been.
As I understand it the hearings are to see if there is anything they can charge anybody with, like Manafort.
The stuff in the dossier is opposition research paid for by Clinton and the DNC based on paid Russian informants.
So who is alleging? Clinton? The FBI? The House or Senate? The media?
It just gets more confusing.
17
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/24/europe/dead-russians/index.html
5
The "problem" is that the one truly independent and official investigation is going on without leaks or public announcements, as it is supposed to be done. Mueller And CO. aren't going forward with charges until and unless they have what they need to support them.
90% or more of what has been written is speculation based on limited information; 10% is evidenced - keeping in mind that all evidence isn't equal, and can be skewed.
And bits of factual information are used - especially by Trump and the far right -to anchor speculations: yes, the DNC hired a firm to dig up Trump dirt ( AKA do background investigations); NO that doesn't show that HRC met with Russians to undermine Trump - there's nothing to suggest that her supporters did anything like what Manafort, Kushner and the baby Trump jumped on - meeting directly with a likely Russian operative with the specific intent of using Russian intelligence to destroy HRC.
The increasing number of attacks on Democrats do suggest it is getting very hot at the center of this in the White House.
15
Our system is so broken
53
It ain't the system which is broken.......it is the people. We get the candidates we pay for....or, mostly, less valuable than the cost.
1
Like Bernie said, the 1/10th of 1% controls the entire country. They are the ones who bank roll our politicians. The Clintons depended heavily on celebrity fundraising, which the Obamas dutifully followed. How did these celebrities get to represent poor middle America!?! The republicans too, they have used religion, white privilege, to divide their constituents from the rest of the country, go look at how many religious pastors urge their parishioners to vote for the republican candidate. Cultural wars dominate endlessly as though in this century somehow we will solve these cultural issues by hugging each other. Nothing has brought us together. No wars, no Charleston massacres, no Las Vegas massacres, no hurricanes, no blizzards. We are back to square one after each episode. Is that the rational thinking way of going forward as a country? You just cannot solve the problems you created by using the same solutions that created the problems in the first place. Ugh Fellow Americans. Use your brains please.
1
As are our hearts.
I find it interesting that the Steele dossier was not published until long after the election, in January 2017 - surely the Hillary campaign could have gotten it out there much earlier. Why did they not? Moral scruples? Doubt about its veracity? Fear of backlash?
Also, has the Times done any reporting on the (presumably non-American) trolls who inhabit these comment strings? Is the Times itself a victim of deceptive commentaries sponsored by a foreign power, much as Twitter and Facebook were manipulated by Russia? What is the Time's responsibility to ensure the integrity of reader comments?
71
It didn't come from Clinton. It was given to John McCain by a British diplomat
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/10/fbi-chief-given-dossier-...
Nine Russians "hinted" at in the dossier, unfortunately, have met with untimely deaths.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/24/europe/dead-russians/index.html
40
Steele (and possibly others) attempted to shop the dossier August through October with no one willing to do much more than print "blind items" ... the claims of the dossier were poorly sources and unverifiable (for any reporter wanting to exploit this windfall) -- Both David Corn of Mother Jones and Kurt Eichenwald of Newsweek were approached, but seemingly copies of the dossier were circulating freely.
I agree that it is very curious how AFTER Clinton's defeat (and Trump's win), and Buzzfeed publishing it in PDF form, it became a hot property.
Today's news wrt to New Beacon answers some questions, I had wondered THEN how who "owned" the dossier and had authorized Steele to circulate it for wider distribution.
Right. There should be some mechanism by which readers/those who comment can be verified by IP address to screen out troll farms, etc. I read too much hate/disinformation/ nonsense that you wonder if those words are put there to divide Americans from one another. We learn the Russians fund troll farms to do just that so we need sophisticated tools (technology and education) to deal with this. Please NYTimes, I hope you and others are thinking about these issues and how to make progress.
1
Tuning back and forth between MSNBC and Fox and they are covering the same stories, the dossier and uranium, with totally different banners and different conclusions. Let the special investigation run its course before taking sides because it's further dividing this country.
21
Shouldn't we all be moving on beyond Election 2016? Will we conclude that the Democrats picked the worst possible candidate at a time when people felt let down by Obama's "Hope & Change"? Why would voters want the loser of the 2008 race, who had already abused the office of Sec. of State and shown a lack of any leadership in that office? Why are we stuck trying to prove that in a match up with the worst possible Republican candidate, the people still didn't want Hillary? The fact that she thought she could buy her way into the office of POTUS with an estimated $billion campaign (much of it spent on analysis-themed agenda planning, and trying to smear her opponents -- first Bernie then Trump.) Anyone she ever recommends, will be someone I definitely will vote against... even if it's another Trump, because I want my REAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY BACK!
Linda kindly get rid of cable TV, pronto!
We did back in 2009 and we don’t have any talking heads telling us what and how to think.
Fox is right.
MSNBC is wrong.
Here are few facts, several of which directly contradict previous liberal media reporting (and please spare me the ad hominem attacks, because if you attack me as a "Trump supporter" you will only be continuing your fact-free fantasies; I did not vote for Trump and do not support him):
1. No Republican candidate is known to have in any way financed the dossier.
2. Even the Washington Beacon, which hired Fusion GPS to do research on multiple candidates, did not finance the dossier.
3. All the information in the infamous Trump dossier was produced by a former foreign agent, Christopher Steele at the behest of a law firm working on behalf of Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC.
4. There is no credible confirmation that anything criminal or particularly salacious in the Trump dossier is true.
5. Steele worked (colluded) with Russians to create the dossier.
6. The Democrats colluded with Steele and employed this entanglement of foreign interests, including Russian interests, to dig up or fabricate dirt on a political opponent in order to affect the outcome of an American election.
7. The basis for why the FBI took anything in the dossier seriously has never been articulated, but we do know that Obama political appointees had a hand in circulating the dossier among government agencies.
68
It didn't come from Clinton. It was given to John McCain by a British diplomat
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/10/fbi-chief-given-dossier-...
Nine Russians "hinted" at in the dossier, unfortunately, met with untimely deaths.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/24/europe/dead-russians/index.html
28
Making a lot of statements without proof is not that convincing. Steele was the top Russian expert in MI6. He is not some conspiracy theorist but is widely respected.
As the article states, the dossier was funded by Republicans. Singer is one of the top billionaire donors to the Republicans. He originally supported Rubio, then gave to Trump.
Most of the information in the dossier has indeed been corroborated, http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/a_....
All U.S. intelligence agencies issued a report that Russia had interfered on a massive scale in the election to help Trump. The dossier was the early forerunner of this, but the FBI and other intelligence agencies were investigating all of the many, many ties between Trump and the Russians as early as July 2016.
Oddly enough, the FBI and other intelligence agencies do not inform the general public about their evidence. Obviously for the Mueller investigation to have been created and continued shows deep concern, and almost every week or month new evidence about the many, many lies of all of the Trump people about their many, many secret meetings with the Russians has been uncovered and documented by the press.
Russian trolls are back again and are very active on these issues, of course. And as usual, Trump followers will believe absolutely anything.
4
I did not vote for either, and I would say that there is a significant difference between commissioning research vs responding to representatives of an actively hostile foreign power with all the attendant blackmail risks.
1
What and how much did Mr. Singer receive for that million dollar check he wrote to President Trump? Does this mean no Trump twitter tirades or challenges to an IQ test for Mr. Singer?
Also, a million dollars seems kind of cheap to have even limited access to the most powerful position in the world, but then again this acting President cheapens everything. I would not find it surprising if Mr. Singer has also provided additional compensation, through alternative methods, to the Trump family in an effort to atone for his failed hit piece on the Don "Tinkles" Trump.
Gangsters in the White House.
"In a telephone conference with representatives for Fusion GPS, the committee and the bank, the judge hearing the case said that Fusion GPS’s clients have “the expectation of confidentiality.” But the judge added that it was “not to say that the congressional committee doesn’t have interests that may trump those expectations of confidentiality.”"
To the judge hearing the case, thank you your Honor.
19
Hey Boy Scout, there are gangsters in every White House.
1
Meanwhile, Donald Trump Jr and Paul Manafort, among others running the Trump campaign met with Russian officials to get dirt on Mrs. Clinton. Multiple lies from the Trump campaign about what the meeting was about and who was in attendance followed. The liar-in-chief coaches Donald Jr. how to spin the meeting with more lies. Trump on the campaign trail repeatedly praised Putin and begged Russian government to hack more DNC/Clinton emails and release them. Plans to build a Trump tower in Moscow were in discussion stage last year but now complete silence from Trump. Trump refuses to release tax returns which would either clear him from any possible financial motivation in the Russia collusion investigation or incriminate him. Way too much smoke in Trump land for their not to be a raging fire of corruption and lies. Lock Trump up and throw away the key. What a great role model Trump is for children, not to mention the rest of the world! Sickening.
103
The source of all financing of political campaigns should be publicly known. This includes payments made to do "research" on opponents, as well as who the individual donors are. If Ms Clinton's funding came from her foundation, we should know who the donors are. If Mr. Trump received laundered funding from Russian oligarchs which he used in his campaign, we should know about it. Any tax records that would shed light on this should be made public. In both cases these would be donations from foreign sources which is illegal.
The ads Google and Facebook ran for the Russians were also illegal. Their activity in trying to hide this suggests that they knew they were illegal, and probably knew about them at the time. Where is the prosecution under the Logan Act, or is it toothless like the F.E.C., or is this just another case where the Trump administration refuses to uphold the law?
The reason all contributions to political campaigns should be made public is so that the voters know who is trying to buy influence or further a social/religious agenda, especially hate groups, and which candidates are taking their money.
46
A lot of is already known. If all the funders were totally known, then what? The economic elites both parties raise money from would still usurp power from the citizen majority. On most issues polls show what the people want is ignored by lawmakers. This would continue unless we started public financing and limits on private donations, no matter the source.
Anyway, what's the mystery? The big funders are obviously big insurance/pharma, Wall St banks, big oil, etc. More specific disclosure wouldn't change the power imbalance, because what could we do about it?
It seems like such a simple solution, doesn't it? And yet, the simpletons in Congress have no interest in insuring transparency in our electoral process.
to Meredith: Yes, public funding with limits on private donations is the answer. I favor a matching system put forward in NY; candidates would have to have private funding from their communities to get going. Further, limits should be placed on out of state/out of district funding. The intent of the Constitution is that the voters elect their representatives, which implies that they fund their campaigns.
My comment was looking at the system that we have. Foreign contributions are already illegal. Funding from vested financial interests as well as hate groups needs to be known. The worst part of our situation today is that they are often the same.
The Attorney General of the Eastern District of VA Boente resigned unexpectedly today. He was third in line, behind Rosenstein and Brand, if Trump ordered someone to fire Mueller.
Interesting that no one seems concerned that the resignation may have been because Boente refused to fire the special prosecutor.
Its Friday night, and tomorrow we may well see another Saturday Night Massacre, ala Richard Nixon and Bork.
30
That won't happen in 2017: GOP is all about trying not to look anti-American in Russia situation. They would undo Trump in a minute if he looked like he was hiding Russian collusion.
Putin took care all opposition research for Trump who has no need for any opposition research. The Russia has succeeded far beyond the small initial investment in Trump as evidenced by his refusal to sign the Russia Sanction bills passed by the Congress, removal the condemnation of Russia aggression invading Ukraine from the Republic party platform, praising Putin publically and etc.
16
Opposition research is old news and done by both sides of the campaign.
Let's get back to the main story which is the content of the research which was compiled by a trusted former MI6 agent.
The salacious content rings true to anyone paying attention to the daily shenanigans coming out of the White House.
The question is what are Congress and the American people going to do about those who commit treason.
56
"The salacious content rings true..." A "trusted" MI6 agent.
You so want to believe. Yet, it will not make it true.
"The question is what are Congress and the American people going to do about those who commit treason."
Hillary and Bill will both be persona non grata in political circles if they don't end up wearing orange stripes. They deserve the orange stripes.
The Guardian is reporting tonight that Robert Mueller is filing first charges in the Russia Enquiry.
Details are still scant.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/oct/28/robert-mueller-russia-in...
I think a lot of people are hoping that the madness will end.
19
I for one hope these charges don't end and that this is only the first of many. The traitors in the White House need to be exposed and taken away in handcuffs
1
The issue is not who hired the research firm, but the veracity of what the research uncovered. And so far, every finding that has been further investigated has proven to be true. No finding has proven to be false. Who hired the work is absolutely irrelevant (as long as it wasn't a foreign country or agent of a foreign country).
25
Some say that this was simply normal opposition research. What is the big deal?
Here is the potentially big deal.
1. It appears that DNC/Clinton campaign money was used to pay high-level Russian officials for information. This should be confirmed/refuted once Fusion's bank statements are examined.
2. According to one legal expert, any expenses over $200 need to be specifically identified. If any money was paid to Russians over that amount and not reported, it could be an election crime.
3. It may be that the dossier was used not only for campaign purposes, but also as the basis for the FBI's FISA surveillance requests. If you don't think this is wrong, imagine if in 2019 Trump's campaign paid an investigator, who then used the money to pay foreign officials for dirt on his Democratic opponent. Then that dirt was passed along to the FBI, which used it wiretap key people in the Democrat's campaign.
Is there wrongdoing here? Potentially, but it's not yet clear. That is why there must be a full and impartial investigation into the money trails and key players.
20
Fusion GPS is an American firm which used a former British intelligence officer to use his contacts to gather information. That's a few degrees of separation. Not to mention that Hillary's campaign never made the dossier public. On the other hand, the Trump campaign needed no intermediaries. They were meeting directly with with the Kremlin representatives.
2
Like a prior commenter, you seem enthusiastic to pin Russia collusion on the DNC, when there is no indication they knew who might provide info on the dossier. As opposed to the Trump campaign, who actually met with Russians to try to discern Hillary misdeeds, and urged Russians to find deleted emails.
Rob:
I would agree that the DNC/Clinton campaign was better at establishing plausible deniability. Experienced politicians are much better at such things.
Or maybe there is nothing there. All smoke and no fire.
We just need a thorough investigation to determine who knew what and when they knew it, as well as who paid what to whom for what. (That's a whole lot of pronouns needing to be clarified!)
I can't imagine that anyone would oppose such an investigation.
1
I couldn't care less who did the hiring and paying, it was always going to be an enemy of Trump, and I'm sure he has many, many enemies. I'm interested in what the Mueller investigation finds as to the truth in the report of Trump's actions. I don't believe a word that comes out of Trump's mouth. The problem for him is he lies every single day on every single subject and when he says "believe me" I just laugh and think the opposite. I'm not the least bit interested in hearing what the GOP thinks (Grassley has tried to muddy the waters from the get go on anything Russian related, making his a very suspect character), they'll do anything to discredit the dossier because they don't want it to be true, it might derail their "lawmaking" *snicker*
41
I've never heard Trump say 'believe me' or anything else, since I turn off the sound or change channels when ever his belligerent, arrogant face appears. Guess I've missed quite a few laughs.
Well well well, if it isn't Paul Singer, the merciless shark who bankrupted Argentina, part of the Koch brothers' circle of libertarian far right billionaires destroying the 99.99% of us, the middle class and the working class, and by hijacking the government, destroying our democracy. The cruelest and slimiest of the swamp creatures who flooded our political system with their money.
62
Apparently SOME of the dossier's claims have been "corroborated," but none of the juicy ones:
"Until there is evidence to back any of the claims in the dossier up, they're useless as far as I'm concerned."
For example, it's been corroborated that Trump held the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow that year. But the allegations about what happened behind closed doors -- well, let's just say that none of that has been "corroborated." Trump flatly denies it and, frankly, if I were making those allegations and had actual evidence, I'd be so incensed by Trump's denial that I'd produce my evidence. So far, though, that hasn't happened. Lots of allegations, but zero evidence.
Nevertheless, we do know that the Miss Universe pageant was held in Moscow that year. That's been corroborated. And that's something.
10
So Hillary's campaign and the DNC were doing nothing but performing standard oppo research, which everybody does.
And they've been, one and all, lying about this thing everybody does for a full year.
I'm sure that make sense, except logically..
15
"Lying"? I am unaware of DNC lying about this. Sounds like a Trump tweet to me.
The Free Beacon and the Dems "opposition research " dossier are completely different according to The Free Beacon. No foreign agents were used in the Free Beacon hit piece. So far Trump performed no "opposition research oh HILLARY because her reputation was already public knowledge. In fact that is why she lost the electoral college and DJ Trump is POTUS.
24
Oh, is that why she lost? No justification for that boldly simplistic take.
It is baffling that some commenters are using this information to support their claim that Clinton colluded with Russia. Former British spy hired to examine Trump's ties to Russia = Clinton colluded with Russia? Am I missing some invisble ink on the page?
Until there is evidence to back any of the claims in the dossier up, they're useless as far as I'm concerned. As are most of the recent articles on the dossier's funding sources, since it's mostly old news.
26
....and what also corroborates your point was the fact that Hillary never used any of it. So, now how does that logic work again? She was at fault for paying for the dossier that she didn't use?
21
Kelsey -- what you are missing is the Fox News interpretation of events.
14
So billionaires are controlling elections by funding oppo research and blasting it to the media, which in turn blasts it to the voters?? Steele was paid by Fusion GPS to fly to USA and go to media outlets in person trying to get the dossier published before the election. Fusion has ties to FBI and Steele was chosen for his close ties with FBI, an agency that also paid for dossier research and now is investigating itself (?). Too much is interwoven here between big $ donors, media, government officials, political figures. It all shows deep corruption in the new "Gilded Age" where $$$$ controls democratic institutions.
The argument that Dems financed Steele because they were trying to find out whether Trump et al. had connections to Russia is odd. Steele never went to Russia and relied on Russian officials he had known from years back. So this means that Russian officials were supposedly revealing their own government's efforts to blackmail Trump?? I don't find that credible.
6
What? Look at the news today that the Kremlin was a party to the infamous Trump Tower meeting. I mean, its really not as hard as you're making it out to be.
16
This is why I voted for Trump, both parties wanted to sink his campaign, It was so obvious if you were paying attention. The guy ran as an independent.
22
Frontline has a good documentary on YT about how Trump won and one of the things they said stuck with me--that Trump was 'bigger than the Republican party' in the end. They tried to stop him--but could not. Interesting.
6
so it never occurred to you that both parties knew Trump was a very bad guy?
26
Nobody wanted to sink Trump's campaign - they saw clearly that he's a madman, an incompetent at best. He is only independent in the basest meaning - that he's all about himself.
22
The elephant in the room is a legal threshold that Robert Mueller's team needs to meet to make any criminal charge against Trump stick, "beyond reasonable doubt". The due diligence to close-off all possible loose ends along the trail to impeachment would be difficult to defend without a clear-cut take-down of the president.
Though it may sound crazy, if I were Robert Meuller, I would call a special witness to depose on a volunteer basis. Although the witness, being a foreign national of preeminence, would likely decline, Vladimir Putin would a 5-star Deponent. Does it hurt to send a request through diplomatic channels to "invite" President Putin to provide testimony to this historic special prosecution? He can be deposed and filmed in Moscow with legal assistance. (Putin will not likely participate in a deposition, but if he did, he would likely deny any "official" Russian involvement in the election hacking: he already stated it may have been possible for "private" Eastern European hackers to interfer with the U.S. election, but he never admitted to any "Official" Russian involvement.)
If Robert Meuller takes-out this president it will become one of the most important historic events in U.S. history. Having a deposition by Putin on the record - however he spins his knowledge of matters under investigation, would be an Oscar peformance par excellence.
4
So many comments about who funded the material, none about the reliability of its content. Why not let the investors do their work, make their report, and let Congress take whatever action it deems appropriate. Isn't this how the system should work? Chill out zealots on both sides!
5
The question is whether the FBI used it for its own purposes - that's more important than who funded it -
4
One useful reference point would be the role Andrew Wood played in this debacle. I just read an illuminating interview https://www.chu.cam.ac.uk/media/uploads/files/Wood.pdf with Wood in which he describes the need to invade Iraq twice and his 'expert' understanding of the Soviet Union while he was working with Christopher Steele - 'we tried to spy on the Russians by hiding a camera in a rock.' Given the monumental failures of the British and American intelligence services to predict - the fall of the soviet union it's astonishing we credit a word they produce. However, it is the same Andrew Wood vouching for his friend and chief Russian spook Christopher Steele in multiple interviews just a year ago who admits to informing McCain of the dossier who then requested a copy as the authors and those who paid for the dossier (Clinton and company, we now know) surely predicted he would. What NeverTrumper could ignore salacious stories of prostitutes, the Obama's bed, Trump, and golden showers? It's a shame to see Senator McCain manipulated, even willingly, at this end of his career. Russia did interfere in the US election and continues to try to foment discord among Americans. You'd think just about everyone could figure that much out.
4
It’s been a long day, but when I first read this I thought it said, “Free Bacon.” Which, is not far from truth...except the free part.
6
Amusing, were it not for the fact that the Free Beacon is a pure mouthpiece for the American neoconservative movement including William Kristol. The Beacon's preferred candidate was Marco Rubio, it seems, and the initial dossier covered all the Republican candidates. What makes the Free Beacon connection so important are the clear links connecting the genesis of the dossier to Steele (a mercenary to be sure) and neoconservative NeverTrumpers such as Kristol and his backers, connections that do not end when the Free Beacon severed formal contact with Fusion. The DNC and the Clinton campaign get wind of the dossier, provide fresh funds to Fusion (9 million?) and Steele begins focusing on Trump alone, which is when Steele (according to the Beacon) begin contacting Russians for dirt on Trump. So, the entire 'golden showers' tale is one cobbled together to please the DNC and the Clinton campaign while enriching the coffers of Fusion. And how the press lapped this tale when the story broke. The entire exercise is utterly revolting and illustrates why so few have any faith in existing institutions. I retain a great deal of respect for dedicated journalists, far less for editors working for amoral partisan interests, although they too deserve some measure of sympathy. If we ask only for partisan pap from our media sources, we can hardly complain when that's all the media delivers. We all need to be slapped in the face with reality, if only for the common good, journalists, too.
4
At some point Mueller's investigation of the money trail likely will force Trump to release his secret tax returns.
6
That makes no sense. Mueller can subpoena the tax returns, so why would Trump release them publicly.
And pigs can fly? I just don’t see Trump ever voluntarily releasing his tax returns, or he would have done it already. Clearly whatever is in them he thinks will be a big problem for him even from his most staunchest supporters, much less anyone else.
The cancer in our political system is money. And the fact that most Americans believe that if someone is rich they are qualified to lead. Rich people have no understanding of what it means to live in America. Trump is the poster boy for the uncaring idiots who are driving this country into the ground.
47
Everyone conducts research on the opponents .. so what’s the brouhaha about ???
Can the lead journalists of this report explain their tweets castigating HRC a day prior to publishing this ??
Are they independent investigative reporters or Op-Ed writers?
Now we know why DJT is so close to one of the journalists. The swamp has extended. I was wondering why all the negative reports from WH had suddenly stopped ..
Disgusting ....
12
Sad that the N Y Times has adopted fully the Democratic talking points to steer the story to the initial Republican funding of GPS Fusion. They had nothing to do with the subsequent sketchy hiring of Steele and the Russian dossier - this was all done under and paid by Clinton and the Democratic National Party, who have comically denied any role in this. Sorry NY Times, your candidate and party of choice have their hands dirty, and trying to pretend otherwise sadly plays into the Fake News claim of Trump and his supporters. Are The Hill and the Washington Post now part of the vast right wing conspiracy ?? They seem willing to report things the NY Times would rather bury.
27
This is not at all true. For instance, Christopher Steele, a well respected investigator used by our very own intelligence community, was not hired by either Republicans or Dems. They both hired GPS Fusion who in turn hired Christopher Steele. Both the conservative donor & the DNC did exactly the same thing, one right after the other. Both looking to find damning info on Trump. Of which there appears to be a near endless supply. Supporting Trump is supporting treason.
37
Democratic "talking points"? "Their hands dirty"?
We're talking about research into potentially treasonous acts here, Ann. It just seems downright peculiar to take the position you are. Meanwhile, good on the Washington Free Beacon and the DNC. It's just too bad this news story wasn't deemed as important as Clinton's use of a private email server before the election. The mainstream media should forever hand their heads in shame.
16
Everyone does opposition research, there is no crime in finding out that your opponent committed a crime. The point here is that the Republicans initiated this, which completely destroys the childish Republican talking point that attempts to make this some sort of controvery.
4
"Working for them, the firm retained Christopher Steele, a respected former British intelligence officer."
Great prop for Hillary's Cold War V2.0. "Bond, James Bond".
Tail gunner Joe's got nothing on her.
5
How long is it going to take for the Moscow tapes to finally come out???
5
I wonder if Christopher Steele carries a Walther PPK.
I'll betcha Hillary had him booby trap that Reset Button. A successful operation that resurrected the Cold War in all its glory.
3
"Later, Hillary Clinton’s campaign also hired the firm, which employed the former British spy Christopher Steele..." Should be '...the firm, which only then employed the former British spy Christopher Steele.' Vogel and Haberman have the journalistic skills and integrity (no, really) to get this story right. The question is whether the NYT editorial DNC censors will allow accurate reporting on this topic, which absolutely involves a number of key players on both sides of the Atlantic, much more than Russia. The back story on Fusion connects Blairite Brits in the intelligence community (see sexed-up Iraq dossier) and key figures in the Obama and Clinton administrations. The Washington Free Beacon story statement is unambiguous on the question of 'multiple targets' for oppo research. The dossier is a neo-con project funneled into the mainstream by 'no war-hero) Senator McCain, a man who knows how to hold a grudge. I very much hope that the NYT will provide greater context from reputable newspaper accounts in the UK press. Christopher Steele is absolutely a product of the British neo-con establishment, a community with deep ties to the US, not so much to Russia.
9
So Hillary and the DNC got involved, paid millions and used this dossier to try and destroy Trump. Where is the news about crooked Hillary and the Kremlin?
17
Did Hillary USE the dossier? No, she did not. All political varmints use opposition research. Grow up. She did nothing 'crooked' nor is she president. The current president is the crooked one and Hillary has no power. Understand now? Get over Hillary, get a NEW enemy why don't you?
1
Lots of Trump/Russian trolls are negatively commenting on this story and attacking Hillary. 2016 deja-vu. Enough said.
32
Regardless, the key point still remains: both parties are in the dump, corrupt and helpless. Wish you luck in making them better.
5
So, according to right-wingers, it should be illegal for Americans to hire foreign contractors to ferret out information about a presidential candidate's dealings in a foreign country. That's the right-wing angle on this story, as far as I can tell. And that doesn't make sense.
16
They're trying to deflect because it appears Mueller's going to charge someone on Monday.
16
Why is this news, this was known and mentioned when it came out. Trump is just trying to change the conversation, as always.
12
Well, that certainly makes it OK that Clinton picked up the tab later on, and then blamed her loss on Russian collusion after her collusion with the Russians failed.
14
I love the way the headline and this article do their best to make it sound like conservatives are behind the infamous dossier, or at least are tied to it in some way, when in fact they had absolutely nothing to do with it. In fact, they are no more connected to the dossier than any of Fusion GPS's hundreds of other clients not named Hillary Rodham Clinton. So why isn't the New York Times running front page stories about the fact that all of those other companies also hired Fusion GPS at some point in time? Such an article would be every bit as relevant as this one, because the truth is that the dossier was 100-percent funded by the Hillary Rodham Clinton campaign and no one else. This article is just another example of why the American public has lost faith in the news media to report the news without bias or slant. The entire gist and implication of this article is bogus. And yet, if you were to point this out to any of the reporters or editors involved with its production, they would tell you with absolutely no shame that the article is completely accurate. Well, yes, but that's not the point. People, even the choir you preach to, can see through this trite stuff. It may not be tomorrow and it may not be in a year, but I can pretty well assure you that this shameless course will not end well for the NYTimes.
15
Thankfully, we have Mueller on the job, and WHO begat the dossier will matter not at all.
Indictments are expected soon in multiple venues.
Trump and others, both R & D will fall in disgrace.
6
Indictments have already happened, Arrests to come on Monday.
6
The Beacon is a "front". The Editor-in-Chief of the Beacon is Bill Kristol's son-in-law. The Kristol family is bought and paid for by Paul Singer to promote neoconservative Republicanism with a strong dash of Israel First.
The Beacon doesn't make money, it burns Singer's cash to promote his interests. Singer supported Rubio because he promised more war and anything for Wall Street and Israel. And Rubio could be controlled with money. Singer really distrusted Trump because of Trump's anti-war talk during the primaries, which is ironic now, because Trump is doing everything Singer wants with Iran and Israel.
8
American politics, is there any ethics left in the system whatsoever? No wonder Americas are so down on their government which ultimately explains how a buffoon like Trump could actually get elected.
6
I still don't understand why the DNC -or- the Washington Free Beacon would willingly pay for "oppo research". Even Donald Trump Jr. knew that if you wanted dirt on your political opponents, all you had to do was ask the Russians and they would give it to you for free... so why are Democrats and anti-Trump conservatives so dumb they pay for it?
2
The Russians? I get your point, but why any would information they did or could have provided SHOULD have made any difference? All people really had to do was to listen to Trump - which apparently many Americans refused to do. I mean, really, anyone with an ounce of personal moral credibility should have been turned off by his behavior and statements.
Of course, if might have helped things that instead of wasting time chasing money from naughty Hollywood producers in California in August, one could have been campaigning in Michigan and Wisconsin . . .
And in the end this dossier is more believable than the Trump's birther movement, Trump building wiretaps, 9/11 conspiracies, Rafael Cruz aiding the JFK assassination, Mr Trump being really smart, or Mr Trump being really civil.
13
It's amazing how many comments there are here from Trump fans thinking that funding a report about ties between Russia and Trump is the same as having ties with Russia. The information didn't come from Russia, it's about Russia. Can't Trump supporters read, or is this what FOX news is saying?
16
I have read a few RWJN explaining that Steele paid the russian government for the dossier. Attempts to explain that Steele wrote the Dossier and it was what his investigating uncovered proved futile.
3
I can't see what's wrong with this. Both sides of politics pay for opposition research. If they paid for falsified results, and arranged for those to be made public, then that'd be another thing. Let's see whether the results are false, and whether the DNC disseminated them, before we make any assessments ourselves.
3
In a strange way , this reminds me of the The Pentagon Papers . It should be shared with the public
7
I am curious about a few points - who in the democratic campaign knew about whether they were paying for the dossier? And did democratic campaign staff tell the truth to the committees (house and/or senate) about knowing or not knowing about the dossier?
1
The dossier is a side show in the Trump collusion Russia fiasco, but will be used to negate Mueller by the inclined.
Some still believe that Watergate was a Democratic plot, and that Ollie North was a hero.
There's a Tooth Fairy too.
8
The Trumpians will end up claiming the part about Republicans beginning the funding of this project to be fake news. Why not? Trumpians like to claim that anything negative to Republicans and the golden-domed man-child is fake news.
Both parties have been involved in opposition research. That should come as no surprise to anyone. That's just something done at the highest levels of political campaigns.
I hope both parties will admit their involvement in this, although I doubt that Trump, the swampiest of all the swamp rats, could ever admit that a Republican would be involved in something that many would consider shady.
2
Dirt on Trump? "I Love It!" To quote Donald Trump Jr.
17
Meanwhile on Main Street..............
2
Here's the key news
“All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to The Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that The Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier,”
But but by innuendo, the Times is making think look like Republican dirty tricks. It seems to me that the story is more an example of NYT dirty tricks.
28
Amy you are 100% correct. The headline is pure editorial and is belied by the story itself which does not in the slightest refute Continetti's claim that the research that the Free Beacon paid for had no connection whatsoever to the production of the Steele dossier. The headline is at once illustrative of the Times' anti-Trump animus and is, alas, fake news, aimed at smearing Trump and generating much ado about very little. Sad. (And I write all this as someone who did not vote for Trump and as someone who thinks his presidency is a disaster.)
3
Republicans are doing backflips to say that they never funded Fusion GPS' research. not sure why. that it was all some highly unusual dem plot. because liars.
1
Well, if anything's been truthful so far, it has been that Steele Dossier. Enough said!
Now about Donald Duck's Yellow Rain addiction....
16
Again, I don't care who paid for the dossier, I care if it is true. The author was a longtime agent for British intelligence with a good reputation for veracity.
142
"a longtime agent for British intelligence with a good reputation for veracity."
A what?? Lordy, lordy, lordy, Barnum was so right.
The gist :
Hillary, thru Fusion GPS, colluded with Russia.
With each new revelation, Trump smells like a breath of fresh air.
America dodged a swampy quicksand.
18
Just because the information about Trump's dealings with Russians came from Russian sources does not mean that Hillary "colluded with Russia."
Colluded to do what? Make Trump win the election? What exactly are you talking about? Can you not understand the difference between colluding with the Russian state to influence the outcome of the American election and receiving info from Russian informants to find information about an American presidential candidate who has major business ties in Russia?
3
Flash from Dallas, Texas, the president has been exonerated for no real reason.
Trump Tower Meeting. Trump Tower Meeting. “Part of Russia’s support for Trump” “I love it.”
3
This article deliberately confuses apples and oranges. Washington Free Beacon was very clear in saying it paid for collection of publicly available information and that the made up salacious material of the dossier was solely performed at the instigation of the Clinton campaign and the DNC.
19
Mr. Trump said on Wednesday that it was a “disgrace” that Democrats had funded the dossier, calling it “a very sad commentary on politics in this country.”
Even if true and funded by Republicans, it is still a sad commentary.
Don't people know that Russian agents are the appropriate sources for opposition research on political opponents? Just ask Donald Trump Jr.
It's disgraceful to write about Trump's romps with incontinent prostitutes on his frequent trips to Russia.
Russian troll farms buying ads on social media stating emphatically that Secretary Clinton is running a sex ring from a pizza parlor in Washington DC is far more dignified and credible in the mind of Donald Trump and supporters.
26
Well put
2
As someone has already pointed out, we had the worst to candidates possible- a perfect storm. Democrats and Republicans, a plague on both their houses!
4
Hillary Clinton was the most experienced professional candidate to ever run for president in my lifetime, and as hundreds of millions of dollars in hostile investigations proved, is as honest as they come.
9
The unrelenting and ignoble smears of Hillary Clinton, which have been going on since her earliest days as First Lady, have invaded the Republican --- and some Democratic --- brains like prions. Never was any intentional wrongdoing proven; how Clinton kept her sanity under this rain of poison is a wonder to me.
It's amazing that the Left will believe anything negative on Trump. They would believe that Trump was KGB spy who colluded on the Kennedy assassination :)
They are no better than Trump in their credulity.
14
More amazing is that there are still a few people who cannot see Trump for the fraud he has always been.
11
yes terrible - here come the indictments
2
And Repubs chant that Hillary shot JFK.
2
Cole Porter.......delightful, it's delicious, it's de-lovely.
4
Establishment Republican. Establishment Democrats. Really they are one in the same. Oh sure, both have their dog whistles to call to their base: abortion, gun control, immigration, whatever they can do to turn your head while they pick your pocket for their enrichment. People still don't seem to get it, on either side. We have Trump because of them.
10
There is a reason we have two major parties. One of them wants huge budget busting tax cuts for the rich and the ultra rich, and voted 100% to keep experien and wells fargo from being sued. the other wants to make sure I have health care.
You don't seem to get it.
9
Yep, well said
So when Obama made the Bush tax cuts permanent and Hillary turned Libya into a failed state, and Obama almost turned Syria into a failed state, or when Obama sold arms to Saudi Arabia to bomb the civilians in Yemen, or when Chuck Schumer turned his back on blue-collar workers in western Pennsylvania for suburban Republicans in Philadelphia ("and you can repeat that in Ohio, Wisconsin, and Michigan"), or when not one banker was even charged for the fraud that caused the Great Recession. We are called by their dog whistles to get our bone and go back to sleep.
The Steele dossier was, of course, outrageously beyond the pale. Under normal circumstances, any reasonable person would reject the allegations out of hand, and the office of the President would not normally dignify the allegations with a response.
But we are living in strange times. The President does not seem capable of distinguishing truth from falsity. From trivial things (inauguration attendance) to big things (Russian connection), this President has established a pattern of brazenly lying to his party, his cabinet, and to the American public. Because of this, the President simply lacks the credibility to scoff at the Steele allegations. They must be investigated. Fully.
59
Let's see; by all counts the Steele dossier is a bunch of outrageous and unsubstantiated claims and smears, paid for by Hillary/DNC against Donald Trump, also possibly used by the past administration to launch unwarranted investigations and additional innuendos against Trump and by your logic this is somehow Trump's fault????
Yes we do live in strange times...............
3
Statement from the House Intelligence Committee spokesperson:
"The Washington Free Beacon has issued a statement asserting that it had no involvement with Christopher Steele or the dossier he compiled from Russian sources. The Beacon had agreed to cooperate with the House Intelligence Committee to help the Committee to verify this assertion."
7
It doesn't matter what the truth is anymore. Trump will say the opposite and his supporters will blindly believe him.
The dossier could describe an evening of golden showers, and Trump's tax returns could be released on Christmas morning, but none of it matters. He will still be President, and the country will be worse for it.
31
Why is this even considered news?
Of course opponents of political candidates, on any level, hire people to dig up dirt. That's not news. Of course Republicans opposed Trump in the months heading up to the convention--that's not news, either--and so would have paid for opposition research. Of course the Clinton campaign would have paid for oppo research.
Come on. The news isn't that oppo resarch happens and is paid for by obvious folks, which is exactly what's happened here. The news is whether the stuff they found is true. We still don't know that. Wake me up when there's a definitive answer. Otherwise, this is much ado about nothing.
14
Didn't Fusion GPS also work with Russia against Bill Browder and the Magnitsky Act?
4
The story seems to indicate that Washington Free Beacon somehow takes the heat off the DNC for trying to use these salacious accusations against Trump. All people had to do was watch Trump's real words on Access Hollywood footage to know Trump is a lecherous bad actor. That was real.
25
The problem with hiring mercenaries is that they can work for your enemies too.
18
The problem is not who the mercenaries worked for but who was doing the hiring and why. The leftist media were all super excited when they thought Trump had a Russia connection and could not stop talking about it. Now the reality becomes known and it turns out that Hillary, as anybody could have guessed based on her long history of fraud and criminality, had the Russian connection. Guess what. The fake media have all gone to sleep.
2
The problem is that Hillary's team did exactly what she accuses Trump of having done. They hired a foreign operator who paid and colluded with Russians to publish sketchy rumors in order to undermine the Republican nominee. If that dossier was used by the Obama justice department to obtain warrants to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign then now we have big trouble.
It sounds illegal, folks. It's not routine opposition research if it was provided by Russians (for money) and especially if any of it isn't true.
23
No, they hired Fusion, the same firm first hired by the Republican donor... they did not hire Steele.
3
"Fusion GPS is a commercial research and strategic intelligence firm based in Washington, D.C." -- Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_GPS
7
This may seem odd, but contracting with a law firm that contracts in turn with a reliable, allied spy don't make you Kim Philby.
Come to think of it, who do you work for?
8
If I had the money, I would have paid for the research. I'm glad someone had the money and was willing to use it for such purposes. This was an investigation. If it was all done legally (i.e., no one killed, no one cheated out of money, etc) is there really any harm? This is what detectives do. They use information that they can get, plus inferences, and come to interpretations. What's the big deal? And if someone wants to pay for that, well, that just drives the market for such things. I was willing to bet that Trump would fall on his own accord, but stupid me.
30
But now the Clinton Crime Foundation is implicated. Do you think this is proper for a 501 C3 charity.
6
That dossier must be some really fun reading. I'm envious. I could use a good laugh. I'm surprised the fake president isn't eager to read it. He could relive old memories. Is this a great (another word for stupid) country or what. No people as a group could be as clueless as the ones who put our future dictator in office.
29
Sounds like disgruntled republicans were working with democrats and a dotted line is connected to the Russians through Steele. I believe Bill Kristol is involved with this too.
1
Had I known all this on November 7, 2016 would it have persuaded me to not to vote for Hillary Clinton? No. Would have made no difference, simply because her policies, her potential cabinet picks, Supreme Court justice nominations, human rights advocacy and other issues of importance to me would be the deciding factors. Take a look at what's going on now --
(ps I am a daily reader of the NYTimes...even get home delivery. Not
quibbling with the "news" printed here, just responding.)
10
A quote from Evan Hunter's ' Blackboard Jungle ' : " The wind blew , the stuff blew , and for days the vision was bad. "
That applied to Mr. Hunter's inner city high school circa. 1954 and it is spot on regarding the nonsense emanating from inside the D,C, Beltway
The dossier was paid for by players on both sides of the political net. That renders the he said-she said accusations and obfuscatory smoke and mirrors
moot
What's left is a search to determine what truths the dossier discloses.. or not.
So far , there has been some corroboration of the facts stated and nothing else has been disproven to date
But the truth means very little to the Big Top Circus at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. these days and the thousands of prevarications documented by the 'failing' NYT and other ' fake news ' outlets such as CNN , MSNBC , and the Washington Post are dismissed out of hand by the very White House spokes persons that have earned hundreds , if not thousands , of the
Pinocchios awarded by fact checkers
The truth is no longer a valued commodity to Mr. Trump or his Congressional majority. They have spun a major tax cut at us disguised as health care insurance that would have deprived tens of millions of citizens of access to any health care
They are now in the process of spinning another tax cut proposal at us that is so weighted towards massive cuts for the super wealthy that it has been estimated some $4 Trillion will be needed to offset the loss in revenue
How nice for the 1%
20
Why is the MSM covering this story as if the hiring of private investigators in a national election is unusual or beyond the pale. Virtually every Senate and House race involves private investigators. It is not a big deal and not headline news. If an opposition candidate has extensive foreign interests of course a campaign is going to hire investigators where those interests are. Give it a rest.
21
If in fact the DNC / Hillary Clinton did such a thing with a foreign government it does have legal implications based on federal campaign laws & rules...
14
Where us the evidence that she or the DNC worked with Russia?
5
Steele is not a part of a foreign government.
4
But, but, but... they did it first!
7
There is nothing infamous about the dossier.
" British spy Christopher Steele to unearth dirt on Mr. Trump that would become the infamous dossier."
infamous
ˈinfəməs/Submit
adjective
well known for some bad quality or deed.
"an infamous war criminal"
synonyms: notorious, disreputable; More
wicked; abominable.
Nothing about the dossier suggests there is anything remotely "bad" about it.
Very poor choice of words
3
Hilarious. Hillary Clinton was behind the Russian dossier all the time, and did not admit it. There's nothing illegal about that, but it sure smells bad. In fact, it stinks. The whole Robert Mueller fiasco came out of that, and it turns out to be politically motivated. Shameful.
12
Nonsense. The dossier is opposition research -- something every campaign pays for. The only question is whether or not it's true. Steele was so disturbed by what he found he gave the dossier to the FBI. We've known Democrats paid for it. I wonder why they didn't make better use of it. But then I also wonder why Clinton forgot to campaign.
2
The Mueller investigation is politically motivated?
Your verifiable evidence?
4
What Mueller fiasco? Mueller was appointed as a result of Trump firing Comey because he was investigating his Russian connections with money laundering and other shady dealings.
1
Trump, himself, discussed how he bought a Florida property for about $40 million and then sold it to a Russiah for about $90 million. No doubt a mix of bribery & money laundering.
Trump Jr. told investors, a couple of years ago, that Trump Inc. was substantially financed by Russian.
Trump is in cahoots with Russia
26
I've long thought that the piece of real estate in Florida of which you speak will be the single thing that brings down Trump. It's a textbook case of money laundering. I believe that the money laundering of Russian mafia money is what kept the Trump organization solvent before Trump lucked into "The Apprentice."
9
Update for clarity: The Washington Free Beacon's Matthew Continetti, Editor in Chief, and Michael Goldfarb, Chairman, issued the following explanation this evening in a note to their readers on the website:
"All of the work that Fusion GPS provided to the Free Beacon was based on public sources, and none of the work product that the Free Beacon received appears in the Steele dossier. The Free Beacon had no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele. Nor did we have any knowledge of the relationship between Fusion GPS and the Democratic National Committee, Perkins Coie, and the Clinton campaign."
Continetti and Golbfarb further explained that "representatives of the Free Beacon approached the House Intelligence Committee today and offered to answer what questions we can in their ongoing probe of Fusion GPS and the Steele dossier."
The referenced note to the readers exhibits a demonstrable intention by the editorial staff to distance the Washington Free Beacon and its reporters from the 'Steele Dossier' and its contents.
To be continued.
10
I'm a little baffled as to why this is headline news now. This information was in mainstream media not that long after the report was made public.
14
Because the details are discovered as a result of the Senate Committee hearings into the Russian involvement and how they messed with us and our elections. We know they did it but not all the details. We knew the original project was initiated by a conservative group but not which one.
2
The best thing Democrats did was reject Hillary as their nominee in 2008. That decision gave us President Obama.
The worst thing Democrats did was nominate Hillary for President in 2016. That decision gave us President Trump.
Maybe the Democrats will stop trying to defend Hillary Clinton and just cut their losses. Hillary is poison for the Democratic Party and America. She will drag Democrats into her sewer of corruption and greed, and there is no upside for Democrats. Put her behind us as soon as possible and move on.
16
Trump lost the popular vote by about ten million, three of million of which were for Clinton. She’s been a lifelong public servant, never convicted of any crime, put children as the centerpiece of her health care initiatives, has excellent foreign policy experience, and is smart, educated, and knowledgeable.
And there is absolutely no proof whatsover that she and the DNC cheated Sanders out of anything. No email, no letter, no conversation, nothing. He got to campaign in every state, participate in every debate, and, to show his “gratitude,” he knocked on the door of the DNC and demanded more resources and for primary rules to change on his behalf.
Independents need to get off their whining duffs and do what Hill, Debbie, Nancy et al. have done: build your OWN committee. Good grief.
8
You prefer to live in Trump's sewer? On her worst day Hillary Clinton would have been 1000% better as President than Trump on his very best day.
9
A sewer is a sewer no matter who owns it.
The Washington Free Beacon is funded by Paul Singer. He endorsed Marco Rubio. What did little Marco know and when did he know it.
5
But but emails was all the media was interested in while Trump and his Kremlin gang played Treason with Russian. Chris Steele Dossier appeared in the Presidential Brief, that's proof enough for me that its true. Chris Steele has been a reliable partner with the National Security community for over 30 years. He has always been on point. When all of his contacts started to come up dead that was further indication that it was true and a massive cover up was taking shape in the Trump White House and at the Kremlin. You don't need classified information to connect the dots...its readily available in open source data that any good journalist could have put together. The election was stolen...it will be proven. However, we will have lost most of hard earn prestige at home and abroad when that happens. Shame on everyone who enabled this Trump presidency!
23
The Russians are in every closet and under every bed. Our political novice President who is much beloved by the working class is actually their personal Manchurian candidate. He "Colluded" with the Russians. (A McCarthy like accusation that proves and means nothing). Meanwhile the "Dossier" has been exposed as containing nothing but lies. The DNC apparently paid 10 million for that. This is pathetic and laughable. The political establishment on both sides have with these events revealed themselves to be desperate,inept,greedy,wasteful and unethical. They are lucky that Trump can only serve 2 terms. Because at this rate and with these phonies and fools opposing him he could easily get elected President for life.
7
Uh, pardon me for saying so, but nothing in the dossier has been "disproven". In fact, some of the content has been confirmed.
4
Hiring a spy to investigate the opposing candidate is a dirty trick, plain and simple. Spies don't play by the rules and they ignore the law. That's how they get covert information and that is surely why Steele was retained by Clinton. This alters the standard narrative of good guy vs. bad guy. A candidate willing to pay a spy to break the law is hardly the good guy. Those ignoring the obvious are just kidding themselves. The ends do not justify the means.
9
Secret meetings with former KGB Russians without disclosing such meetings to the FBI is actually a crime for any government employee, because Russia is considered a hostile foreign government.
The Democrats got their info from a British spy. Britain is an ally, not an enemy foreign government. The Republicans got their info from the KGB, and Russia is not an ally, but an enemy foreign government. Big difference.
7
This is true. And it casts the candidate in a bad light - if the prospect of Clinton's presidency was so great and could produce so much good for us, why go to these lengths? The answer is that the campaign could not convince themselves that what Clinton was selling was sufficiently palatable enough to get her elected so they needed to smear. Pathetic.
4
Hahahahahaha. You think anyone conducting opposition research is playing by the "rules"? It's all about winning. That is the only rule.
anti trump people were everywhere but did the FBI use a fake doc to spy on Trump and campaign staff? i.e Mueller should resign
6
The monitoring of the Russians was routine, and the document has many aspects that have turned out to be true.
The only things that are fake are Trump's intelligence, his sincerity, and his hair.
5
If, as Democrats are trying to insist, “what matters isn’t who paid for the dossier but whether the information it contains is true” then similarly it shouldn’t matter who - ie, Russia -exposed the Clinton campaign corruption (Podesta‘s email, etc.) given that they were true.
Right?
9
What about the corruption of hiring an enemy government to break into voter databases and disenfranchise Democrats so that Trump could "win" election to President? No wonder he claimed the election was rigged. He should know. He rigged it with the help of Russian hackers.
4
Except that the Podesta emails didn't expose any corruption. Also, they were obtained illegally. There is no evidence yet that Steele used illegal methods to obtain material for the dossier. Finally, there is a great big difference between paying a private firm to investigate a political opponent and conspiring with a hostile foreign state to smear one.
2
You have that headline a little wrong. You should have said "Establishment Donor hired to get dirt on the anti Establishment candidate so one of their owned and purchased Puppets could ascend to the White House and continue the practice of Fat-Cats pulling the strings of our political leaders."
Yeah, I know, that wouldn't fit as a headline. But that is exactly what happened.
That first attempt to smear came from one of the Big Donor Puppetmasters who run both the Democrat and Republican parties, as we all know. Trump wasn't supposed to get very far or even win a single primary. Yet, there he was, the people's choice (well, my working class people) - winning.
He won because we were FED UP with GOP Establishment Puppets, do-nothings who pocketed millions at the expense of the people, continuing to run our government. Whether it was the utterly corrupt Hillary Clinton, or the bought-and -paid for Jeb Bush, didn't matter.
Trump didn't need the donors. He financed his own campaign with his own money and the contributions of the 60 million (now about 80 million) loyal Trump voters who were energized by their anger at the GOP Milquetoasts. We saw how John "Left the POWs Behind" McCain got Defense appropriations way beyond what was needed, then held nobody to account, allowing planes to billow in costs. Trump outed this in his first week, and the plane contractor came back with the same plane costing millions less. That, my friends, is the Establishment we have fought.
5
We had to wait for Mueller. Everything else is distraction. Keep your eye off the birdie!
6
The FBI was already investigating before the dossier came out.
8
FGS's, what's important is the russians hacked the dnc and panetta emails and actually deployed them through Wikileaks to elect Trump, and the dossier was not used at all. The clinton campaign's lawyers contracted a company, they say for help in legal matters. That company independently contracted a British spy to gather info on Trump. He got info from confidential sources. The info was not used in the campaign.....there was absolutely no collusion between Clinton and the Russians to sabotage Trump because there was no sabotage. But there was actual sabotage done on behalf of the trump campaign by the russian government. Don't forget, Trump publicly solicited the Russians to hack Clinton's "lost" emails at one of his rallies! Trump was begging the Russians to collude some more, to help him more!
12
We have met the enemy and he is us.
3
Extraordinary charges need extraordinary proof.
1
Isn't all of this old news? It has been known for almost 6 months that a bunch of Republicans hired Fusion GPS to dig for dirt on Trump (opportunity research) and once the primaries were over the Hillary campaign contacted Fusion GPS and continued with the dirt digging. Why is each piece of this known news being "revealed" so loudly and shabbily by the media? Both the corporate and the right-wing wings.
3
I'm not a fan of Mr. Trump, but the chronology needs to be clear. The Free Beacon hired Fusion GPS but ended that relationship before Fusion teamed up with Steele. Fusion only hired Steele, and Steele only began working on the dossier, after the Clinton team hired Fusion (via Perkins Coie). Steele dug around Russia to find information, and much of what he committed to writing has been refuted as junk. Then we know the FBI considered paying Steele to continue his "work." Everyone on all sides comes out tarnished due to their apparent willingness to receive information from untrustworthy sources. And everyone appears to have let Russia (Putin) plant information that they happily used. To be sure, Mr. Trump's activities deserve much more scrutiny, but this article hardly absolves the Clinton campaign from bearing any taint from its association with the dossier.
5
Please show sources refuting the Christopher Steele report. We have seen the opposite including CNN's report that nine high-ranking Russian diplomats who would've been sources have turned up dead since our November election.
I cannot understand why this is in the news - Months ago, the Times and others reported that the Republicans were the first to hire this company and that later, after Trump won the Republican nomination, the Clinton campaign also hired this company. Why are we talking about this now - so that Trump can make it appear that someone else was to blame....
12
It is good that The New York Times, rather than dwelling on a false claim that Hillary Clinton had denied any role in authorizing opposition research regarding Donald Trump, now provides the full story – as far as it is known.
Mrs. Clinton did nothing wrong legally or morally, either by authorizing that the research be done or by not volunteering that fact later to the press. Mrs. Clinton, however, could have been smarter politically – once it became clear that news that her campaign had some involvement was being reported.
Mrs. Clinton should have acknowledged that her campaign had some research done, that she now knows the campaign lawyers contracted with the same company which Republicans had used earlier to investigate Trump and that she understands that many of the findings are proving to be true.
5
Hillary Clinton is guilty of what she accused Trump of doing....her hands are dirty , very dirty
6
The only thing I'm confused about here is why so many Trump supporters seem to think the recent info is some kind of home run. They seem to suggest (or wrongly assume) that it is illegal to investigate Trump's dealings with Russians, or that such research is somehow equivalent to direct coordination with Russia to influence the election.
Going to Russia and asking around about Trump's dealings is not the same as working with Russia to directly influence the American election. This is the usual false equivalence, which is all too familiar coming from the "right." If not, what am I missing?
904
Um, probably because those same Trump supporters think that Trump being president is a homerun. They're called "deplorable" for a reason.
4
Trump voters have to believe in the fantasy...they've got nothing else. A true evaluation of Trump & Republican policy efforts would force them to look in the mirror & acknowledge the real cause of this countries troubles.
4
Trump has been working overtime to dissemble; claiming anything and everything is fake news and accusing the press of being out to get him. The Breibart echo chamber and Fox News and Alex Jones -- plus Russian bots -- are all doing a great job of helping him. Russian collusion? Treason? Not a problem.
1
It is time to stop beating around the bush --opposition research is simply smart to do. The Free Beacon, and the Hillary Campaign certainly were doing what many others have done, and are doing right now.
What matters is that, uncorroborated or not, the substance of the report has not been proven false. On the contrary, it not only seems possible, but fits the modus operandi of Russian Kompromat, and certainly fits the puerile behavior and personal weaknesses of our President, a man known for his many marriages, his lack of fidelity, and his favoring young models in spite of his age. And fits what we know about what he says about women when he thinks nobody is listening in.
That is the issue, are the contents of the dossier real?
11
And how, may I ask, does any of this bring us closer to solving the problem of the madman in the Oval Office? All of this intrigue seems contrived. Opposition research was traded for money. Nothing that couldn't be, independently, verified was used. In a winner take all Presidential primary we shouldn't be surprised by the fact that research started by a presidential contender might be of interest to another presidential contender. Anyone banging the drum on this story has to contend with the fact that the more you protest the more intriguing the dossier gets. It's even called a "dossier" for goodness sake. This will serve to distract the average citizen from the fact that there is a madman in the Oval Office. That, still, remains a problem.
12
The comments are very disheartening. While it is certainly important to ascertain the accuracy of the information in the Fusion GPS work products, it is likewise important to know who commissioned this work product. It is vital to know if this work served as the basis for FISA warrants and unmaskings. It doesn't matter for whom one voted or how one feels about Trump or Clinton. It is possible that the integrity of our department of justice and our government has been compromised here. It may not have been but we all should want to know.
8
Let's keep the proper focus. It's not WHO hired the opposition research intelligence gathering firm Fusion GPS, nor necessarily WHEH Fusion GPS was hired. The more salient aspects of the Fusion GPS dossier is WHAT is contained WITHIN and WHETHER contents are FACTUAL.
Before Republicans get their underwear in a twist over this dossier, bear in mind if Donald Trump HAD RELEASED ALL TAX RECORDS, such content may have been moot, although I suspect Christopher Steele's revelations definitely carried a very salacious aspect to them. Salacious enough - my opinion - for Melania Trump's divorce attorneys to eviscerate Donald Trump financially. But I am willing to step back and let the FULL FACTS SPEAK.
My calcified position might be modified if Donald Trump releases ALL TAX RECORDS - as he has promised many times to Americans. Either way, Trump must divulge the facts and allow all Americans to make up their own mind about Trump's veracity and credibility. Up to you now, Mr. Donald Trump.
7
Just like Adelson and Saban, Singer too is a single issue vote. He puts his money to get a POTUS likely to support his issue.
1
A potentially interesting question for enterprising reporters is what the Free Beacon's charge was to Fusion GPS. Was the direction from HRC/DNC to Fusion GPS materially different from the direction from the
Free Beacon (and possibly others) to Fusion GPS? If we assume for the sake of argument that HRC/DNC directions to Fusion GPS are claimed by HRC/DNC to have been identical to the Pubs', a follow-up question would be whether the reactions of the Fusion clients to Fusion suggestions to the overlapping clients were different in significant ways. What made Fusion GPS not reveal the golden showers etc. until after HRC/DNC got involved, if such salacious details were in the mix as an historical truth instead of a pricey confection? And what explains why Fusion would have represented HRC/DNC in APRIL while simultaneously having been in representation of the Free Beacon into MAY? This is not adding up. Fusion is being set up as the political fall guy. Fusion does sound like a sleazeball group, but I personally doubt they'd represent both partisans simultaneously. That's a bridge too far.
My side question is whether the Times is up to this basic reportorial task. We shall see. The Times, as in institution, hangs in the balance. Doesn't look real promising at the moment, though these two reporters are naturally trying to save themselves, and probably will do so thanks to their understandable ire not just at their sources, I'm guessing, but their handlers.
Did we not know this information 6 months ago? I certainly did, and I could have sworn I read it in the NYTs and the Guardian. Why is the question of who paid for it becoming an issue again? It's really not that controversial. The accusations, on the other hand, are. Waiting on Mueller...
5
People are not aware any more of what it means to 'know' something because things are asserted, sometimes with sources that are unnamed, before they are verified. So while there may have been suspicion that the DNC and the HRC campaign funded the dossier, it was not verified until now when basically it had to be because of a court case. The law firm hired by DNC etc finally was released by its client Fusion GPS from its confidentiality obligation so that these things could be confirmed. So you did not 'know' these things 6 months ago, but you thought you did.
1
Yes a conservative site first hired Fusion. However, it did not hire Steele or contract that dossier while it worked for that conservative site.
That happened after the DNC and Hillary campaign took over the contract with Fusion. Then they were the ones shopping that dossier around DC.
They were the ones using Russian insider information obtained from shady Russian contacts they won't name (all via a foreign agent not disclosed as required) So, is all that okay when Democrats do it?
Does that change whether "collusion" is such a big deal?
I'm not suggesting one answer or the other, just gagging on the hypocrisy and special pleading.
13
Sorry, Mark, but the Conservative site gave a contract to Fusion. Nobody told Fusion to hire Steele.... You are trying to say that Clinton directed them to do so, but that is not supported by the evidence. Your strawman argument is a failure.
14
Opposition research is normal. The fact the DNC never used the dossier disproves your false facts. At the time they were using GPS they were concerned about Trump campaign collusion which I hope you are concerned about too.
3
Mark, let's take a step back. First and foremost, the issue of Russian interference in the 2016 election did not begin or end with the Steele Dossier. That's really only a sideshow. We know for a fact (really, a FACT) that the Russians ran a real and (evidently) very effective influence campaign through social media and other means, including quite a bit of evidence that Trump campaign staffers were complicit if not directly involved in that effort. (See Flynn & son, Manafort, Gorkha, Trump Jr., Kushner, Sessions, Page, Stone, Tillerson, etc., etc.)
On the one hand (Trump's), there's a Gordian knot of possible/probable Russian collaborators. On the other hand (Hillary's), there's an apparent high-priced effort at opposition research that involved Russian insiders (some of whom may have be intel agents, but who knows?). Careful with your false equivalences.
13
On July 13th this year, President Trump defended Don jr.'s, his son's, meeting with a Russian lawyer whom he believed had political dirt on Hillary Clinton – calling it a normal practice during a U.S. presidential campaign.
"It's called opposition research, or even research into your opponent," Trump said at a joint news conference with French President Emmanuel Macron in Paris. "Politics is not the nicest business in the world, but it's very standard where they have information and you take the information."
It doesn't matter who paid for the dossier.
President Trump and the Republicans are lying to and trying to distract the American people.
The bottom line:
Can the dossier be corroborated?
39
Meanwhile, the Trump campaign shrugs off meeting with Russians in an attempt to get dirt on Hillary Clinton. That went far beyond normal politics, as it involved an adversarial nation.
So no sympathy for Trump on anyone's having pursued incriminating information about him.
196
While the dossier issue isn’t who paid for it, but what it revealed that is substantiated. It’s unsettling that both Hillary Clinton and DNC officials allegedly denied knowledge of it.
2
JEB supporters paid money to Russians to dig up dirt on Trump. When establishment Republicans were unable to get any of their non-conservative RINOs nominated, they turned over their anti-Trump sources to Hillary forces. They preferred the election of the corrupt Hillary to Trump, despite the fact that she would block any conservative legislation.
The investigation into Trump involvement in Russian interference is turning up Democrat and RINO illegal behavior.
Your position is that Hillary supporters paying Russians to fabricate a false dossier on Trump is normal politics. But Trump Jr accepting an invitation from Russians offering dirt on Hillary is far beyond normal politics.
Your sense of right and wrong explains why your were able to vote for Hillary.
5
I'm not sure you realize how badly making up a statement based on no factual information like "Hillary supporters paying Russians to fabricate a false dossier on Trump" reflects on you though..
6
Not surprising, but in the end not all that important. I voted for Mrs. Clinton in the last election, and I recognize the fact that Donald Trump's presidency represents the greatest existential threat to our republic in generations. But with the DNC and Clinton's continued refusal to embrace their authorizing this completely normal opposition research they are both foolish and frustrating. It reminds me of the kind of disingenuous political responses to unpleasant accusations that the Democratic nominee and her staff made during the election ("I'll release the transcripts of my speeches to investment banks when the republicans release theirs." Gimme a break!). They typified the kind of old style, cheesy politics that the Democratic old guard still thought (think?) were necessary and effective. They were neither, and it seems that these folks still have not learned their lesson.
248
Yeah, she should have said "I'll disclose the speeches when Donald Trump discloses his income tax returns."
7
The people who follow and worship them still think the ends justify the means. Their reasoning, if we like somebody they could ,lie, steal or worse commit murder but so what we like them.
1
Have you looked at Fox or Breitbart? If you watch their coverage you might understand more about why nobody wanted to step forward and claim they paid for it, particularly Clinton. Gorka was on today saying that she needs to get the electric chair for being a traitor. If I was her, and hadn't really used the dossier anyway, I wouldn't have been rushing to say my campaign paid for it either. There is almost nothing she can say that isn't immediately warped, twisted, and formed into bullets to shoot at her, and then we wonder why she hates talking to the media about anything.
7
Pretty obvious that no one in either Party wanted Trump as a nominee or President, knowing it would be a disaster for the US. Everything that has transpired since his election by a minority of voters has proven the reality of Trump is even worse than imagined from his sordid background and erratic personality.
The 36% of the American public who continue to support Trump have a lot to overlook and ignore today, but some things to cheer as well, especially his attacks on the Federal government and evangelical agenda.
In a couple of years though, when Trump Administration Agencies are in court trying to defend their actions while their own Agency documents are submitted as evidence by plaintiffs, and when the top 10% of US households and many foreign investors are tallying up their big portfolio gains from massive corporate tax cuts, many Trump supporters will be wondering what happened to the big pay raises and cheap health care plans they were promised by their hero.
But we should really judge the Trump Administration on a longer term planetary scale. Has the US conceded global leadership to China? Is the planet spiraling into a vicious cycle of climate change? Are hundreds of millions of climate refugees overwhelming border controls? Has all of this combined with collapsing job markets in the US led to the support of a proto-fascist US government?
Let's hope the above is somehow interrupted by a less likely scenario.
206
Heck, people continued to support Nixon even after he left in disgrace...
2
Don't be so sure the top 10% will benefit. What we usually see is the rates go up for the top 9%, by lowering deductions, and go down for the top 1%. Convenient, isn't it, to attack the only class who can challenge the likes of the Kochs!
The issue isn't who paid for this research - opposition research is a constant in our current political system.
The issue is to what extent the information contained in the dossier are true.
623
"The issue is to what extent the information contained in the dossier are true."
The same for releases of information about Hillary and the DNC.
4
Well, you are overlooking the issue of whether the Clinton campaign lied about their role in the dossier.
2
Yep. But the Republicans know this is a blockbuster bomb coming their way and they are trying to spin it away.
7
It now seems quite clear that inquiry into "the Russian dossier" was neither more nor less than garden variety opposition research, first financed by GOP operatives opposed to candidate Trump, then by Democratic Party counterparts once Trump was presumed to be the GOP presidential standard-bearer.
The real issue involved is the degree to which the dossier depicts reality. Already certain elements have proven true. Whatever legal culpability emerges from full verification begs impartial discovery. This is all that matters about the dossier.
All the other mock outrage being pedaled about who funded what and when is just so much noisy deflection.
692
Can you point to any items in the dossier that are true?
You assume there is truth, but the reality is it was entirely fabricated.
The Democrats broke the law when they classified the spending as legal fees rather than as opposition research, so there's some legal liability on the Democrat side, if not also on the Republican side.
4
Six Russians "hinted at" in the dossier have met with untimely deaths.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-diplomats-deaths-t...
Scratch that, nine Russians met with untimely deaths
http://www.cnn.com/2017/03/24/europe/dead-russians/index.html
1
The noise about who funded the Steele dossier will shift when the indictments start coming down the chute from the Special Prosecutor. The Congressional committees are too wrapped up in politics to clearly define what is real and what is fantasy.
1
Given the dossier has been mostly corroborated, I fail to see how who paid for it is news at all.
Let's find out what parts the investigations have confirmed and then share that actual information, please.
368
Sarah says that "the dossier has been mostly corroborated." Where, when, by who? Nothing specific has in fact been proved, and the allegations are essentially based on judgments of Trump's character, rather than on hard evidence. One may not like Trump, but that does not prove he committed any of the acts attributed to him. And if Steele actually paid his informants, the credibility of the information is zilch.
2
Because it matters what motivated who gathered the information , in this case to find salacious material , since such a motivation necessarily biases the report - corroboration only means the some "evidence" suggests a potentially plausible relation of the reports to actual events , but to attain the facts and their viable interpretation requires an objective reporter , which describes neither the Fusion GPS reporters , nor Steele - The Enquirer "reports" corroborated stories , and "stands by them" , but with its motivation for sensational gossip NYT does not make any mention , ever it seems , of anything reported there , for based on the motivation , the NYT would not trust that even its corroborated reporting presents a true semblance of the events. If I claim my wife commits adultery and find a stranger's sock in our bed , I have corroborated my claim , but certainly not proven it , as there may be an entirely innocuous reason for that sock. Corroboration and proof are two entirely different things. Fusion GPS and Steele proved nothing.
3
Oops. Check your facts. The dossier has been proven to be fraudulent.
It is newsworthy, and disturbing, that in a supposedly two party system that Republicans turned over the opposition research to the opposition party.
5
Great to know the bots are out in force on this board. Many of us who have been on this board do a pretty good job identifying them. This is especially true when the story has anything to do with Russia. It was same right before the 2016 election.
21
The conservative site used Fusion GPS to conduct conventional opposition research.
Clinton/DNC used Fusion GPS and Steele (a foreigner) to collude with Russian spies to get dirt of Trump. The resulting "dossier" was then used as a pretext by Obama's FBI to open investigations and by Obama's NSA to spy on and unmask Trump team members.
41
Jumping a bit to conclusions - investigations were not based on the dossier from what has been reported so far. They were based on actual contacts, conversations and some of the actions of Messrs. Flynn and Manafort.
4
Proof? Evidence? Somebody put it out on Breibart?
5
The intelligence personnel involved refute this conspiracy theory:
"The dossier itself played absolutely no role in the coordinated intelligence assessment that Russia interfered in our election. That assessment, which was released in unclassified form in January but which contained much more detail in the classified version that has been briefed to Congress, was based entirely on other sources and analysis."
https://www.lawfareblog.com/irrelevance-trump-dossier
3
Who knows, apart from Fusion and Steele, if there was actually anything of value they had turned up by April, but I'm sure Fusion hyped the heck out of their investigation in getting the DNC to take over funding as Trump was rolling up the nomination and the Beacon was certain to withdraw funding. If the y had anything of great significance by Feb-Mar, the Beacon would have unloaded it to derail candidate Trump.
7
This makes it clear.
Fusion GPS did not have any engagement with high-level Russians until they were retained by the DNC/Clinton campaign.
Okay, so now the original GOP sponsor is off the hook. Now the full focus can be on who in the DNC/Clinton campaign knew about the work with the Russians and when did they know it. As importantly, once the subpoena is approved, we’ll know more precisely how much was paid to which Russians.
This becomes more interesting with each passing day.
33
I have seen no evidence Fusion GPS had any engagement with Russians. They engaged an ally, Steele, who had contacts with Russians who could gather information. We'll have to see what Mueller and his investigators uncover. All our intelligence services were convinced there was enough information to make Trump and his cohorts subject to blackmail by the Russians. It was by that time way beyond opposition research once it was in the hands of our intelligence services.
5
@John, So now the Russians are the bad guys again? I'm a little confused you don't want to know anything about collusion with the Russians when talking about the Trump campaign but when the Clinton camp is mentioned as a side issue, It's Lock Her Up time, again?
6
Rick:
I never thought that the Russians were that bad, aside from some relatively low level, run of the mill meddling. I still highly doubt that Trump had anything to do with them, but will wait for investigation to be completed.
But after reading the NYT and 90% of the commenters, I started to become brainwashed about the evil Russkies. And then Morgan Freeman told us that we are "at war" with the Russian Federation. And with a voice like that, who am I to disagree?
Liberals can't have it both ways. Either the Russian collusion would be an issue with both Trump and Clinton, or with neither.
I still prefer neither, but am willing to learn from all the liberal hysteria and hyperbole of the past nine months.
4
Both parties do this. See: this example. Not illegal, but it does show just how nauseating our political system is. And us little people will fight and fight and fight to no avail whatsoever. And the two party system with its "lobbyists" will continue to carve this place up a little more each day.
9
It was illegal for the DNC to report the expenditures as legal expenses rather than opposition research.
7
I work in a school; we tell the kids, "If you see something, say something." Who cares who was first or second. Find the criminals and prosecute them.
47
The criminal should be easy to find. Look no further than the big white house....or the gulf course. Approach with caution he's charmed and ludicrous.
2
Opposition research may be at least somewhat sleazy, but it's also fairly commonplace by both political parties. So that part of the Fusion GPS story is a non-event. However, given how commonplace this practice is I'm not sure why the Democrats and Clinton campaign were unwilling to acknowledge their involvement.
The bigger issues will be why Mr. Steele was hired and where he got the information for the dossier. If it came from Russian intelligence sources, did those paying for the research know who they were paying? Fusion seems to be working very hard to keep the House investigators from getting any information that may shed light on what they were doing and why.
The other issue is the FBI's involvement in the dossier and whether it was used to justify surveillance of the Trump campaign even though Comey himself described the dossier contents as "salacious and unverified."
I do hope the NYT and WaPo keep digging into the details of this story. There is much that we don't know and the truth needs to come out regardless of who is embarrassed or found guilty of criminal acts - including Trump.
206
What is coming out is that the Democrats are guilty of violating election financing law. It is the cover up that is going to do them in, just as it was with Nixon.
It was never established whether Nixon had knowledge or involvement in the Watergate break-in. It was established that he involved himself in the cover-up.
7
Ex-intelligence officials have said the dossier played no role in the surveillance of some Trump campaign members. Carter Page, one of those surveilled, had previously been under surveillance when Russian spies tried to recruit him as an asset and the FISA warrant was renewed after Page visited Russia to make anti-American speeches, met with Russians connected to Putin's regime while there, and routine surveillance of Russian officials revealed meetings between the Trump campaign, of which Page was a member, and Russian officials, which is extraordinary though it may no longer seem so after all the campaign to normalize it. Paul Manafort was under investigation by the FBI and Treasury for possible money laundering involving Russians, was hired by a Russian oligarch close to Putin to advance Putin's interests in the US, but failed to register as a foreign agent, and despite being in debt for tens of millions of dollars, to a Russian oligarch and others, volunteered to be Trump's campaign manager pro bono, actually fervently campaigned to get the job. Michael Flynn visited Russia and sat right next to Putin (a place of honor, those things aren't random) at a Russia Today event, was working as an unregistered foreign agent for both Russia and Turkey (Russia's ally) while working for the Trump campaign and as National Security Adviser to Trump, and was named by Russian officials in surveillance tapes as someone to exploit. That was more than enough to justify surveillance.
Well seeing that Trump's ability to save America is to lie I would say Trump himself may be still writing the worst pieces of the Fake News.
America should not be proud.
Thank goodness this revelation is out there now.
I'm tired of hearing all the Trumpite hypocrites wailing for sympathy because Hillary Clinton's campaign helped pay to conclude the "Steele dossier" (better known at the Times as the "salacious dossier") that reported allegedly scandalous ties between Trump and the Russians.
Every major political campaign and its followers do some sort of opposition research on rivals, which is what this dossier was. Everyone does it. It wouldn't be a true campaign without it. A campaign manager who skips this crucial step could be dumped for malpractice.
The conservatives who hired the researchers had no reason to see it conclude after Trump was the clear favorite to win the Republican nomination.
That Democrats helped pay for it to be finished with a completed dossier is not scandalous. It's the allegations that are. That's what makes this "salacious dossier" the subject of so much Trump bellyaching and twittering.
Now that the Times has named that original source who commissioned and initially paid for the research -- and that the source is now known to be a conservative website and not the Trump's leftist foes -- Trump should aim his ire closer to home. Aim at fellow Republicans. Or better yet, let him quit his disingenuous moaning altogether.
Unless of course, some central allegations are true. In which case, he will continue to protest way too much.
27
The dossier is 100% fraudulent. Democrats were trying to give it to the left wing media, and it was so implausible that even the leftists wouldn't touch it. But it was good enough for the Obama administration to put the resources of the federal government into investigating the Trump campaign. But the FBI investigation did not show up any negative evidence about the Trump campaign.
Hillary and the DNC lied on their campaign financing reports when they reported the expenditures.
The dossier was not created when the establishment Republicans were funding the project and funneling the money through a conservative media outlet.
10
The last thing I personally want is 'sympathy' from a someone who voted for Hillary. So, add that to your list of things you don't get alongside the 'Hillary can't lose' claims flooding the NYT comments section leading up to her entirely predictable defeat. I was certain she'd lose from the time I heard Trump open his vulgarian yap to shatter all the shibboleths venerated here and elsewhere. I have it from reliable media sources that there is a 98 percent chance that senior Trump aides will be arrested on Monday!!! Millionaire bubble-heads on my tee-vee told us so. Get it?
1
Thanks NYT for documenting what actually happened and not leave the voters to ponder Tweets.
Today, we find that Sarah Huckleberry Sanders claimed that the funding by the DNC or Clinton constitute "collusion" of Democrats with the Russians. I checked my dictionary. "Collusion" doesn't mean investigating and publicizing corrupt activities of an American Candidate for President.
Collusion does mean meetings between a Russian lawyer, shown today to have direct contact to the highest levels of the Kremlin, and the President's son to obtain "dirt" on Clinton. Similar contacts between Flynn, Manafort, and Sessions are exceptionally suspicious. Since there were no transcripts, we need to fully trust (Ha) Flynn, Manafort, and Sessions, and Trump Jr. that nothing untoward happened.
Another Trumpian coverup by attacking rather than addressing the question. Ms. Sanders appears to be just as mendacious as Sean Spicer, don't believe a word.
319
Give me a break. The DNC/Clinton working with a foreign agent to pay Russian spies to get dirt on Trump is not collusion, but when the Trump campaign wants to do the same it is collusion. This is typical Orwellian doublespeak.
13
It has been established that the dossier was fabricated and did not contain any actual facts. It was paid for and circulated by the DNC. Russian official were paid for the fabrications. Hillary and the DNC lied about their participation, which would not have been necessary had their participation been legal, particularly after she lost the election. Paying foreign government officials to fabricate false information on a political opponent and then using that false information to instigate and FBI investigation into your opponent is illegal collusion.
The information about Trump junior's meetings with Russians was not discovered as a result of the dossier or the FBI investigation. It was revealed by conversations the FBI had with Trump, Jr.
The NYT is attempting to conflate the two issues using the argument that everybody does it and somehow the winner is guilty of cheating.
8
They managed to make this no-news item be the first in my daily NYT email, and moved "Talking Points Brought to Trump Tower Meeting Were Shared With Kremlin" to the second. That also means the latter was not on the topic line of my email on a Saturday, when more people may not open the email to look at other headlines. Mission accomplished.
Is the sequence of events somehow blurry?
Was the dossier used in part to warrant surveillance of Carter Page?
Did the FBI in fact reimburse any of the expenses associated with Fusion GPS?
I am very much looking forward to less speculation and more forthright official statements of fact and timeline. Not a lot here beyond the usual red team/blue team emotional noise.
12
Crazy how it turns out that it was Hillary and the DNC colluding with the Russians, and not Trump. Sure, they worked with middle men, including Elias, Fusion, and Steele, but eliminate the middle men, and Hillary and the DNC effectively bought and paid for a "salacious and unverifiable" (Comey's description) dossier that was obtained directly from Russian sources.
32
If you think that Trump colluding with the Russians is a non- issue because of the dossier, then you are very much mistaken. Wait to see what Mueller says. After all he is a Republican.
9
Nope, that's not the how it turns out. Crazy spin is what is crazy.
8
LOL.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/357602-ex-cia-russia-ch...
> The former CIA chief of Russia operations on Friday implied Donald Trump Jr. was more willing than others to take information Russia wanted to distribute during the 2016 presidential election.
>
> Steven L. Hall compared the ex-British spy Christopher Steele's project compiling accusations of President Trump's alleged ties to the Kremlin favorably to Trump's meeting with a Russian attorney who had ties to the Kremlin.
> “The distinction: Steele spied against Russia to get info Russia did not want released; Don Jr took a mtg to get info Russians wanted to give,” Hall said in a tweet Friday.
1
Yet another attempt at mis-direction. The "Fusion GPS dossier story" is not a story about Op Research. It is a story about how parties conspired with the Russians to sway the election in the favor of their candidate.
The parties working with the Russians were the Democrats - the DNC and Hillary's campaign. They collectively paid Fusion GPS almost $10 million, an untold amount going to Steele to create this 30-page dossier. Steele colluded with the Russians to manufacture lies and provided that information to the Dem-financed Fusion GPS. Period.
Why do I say mis-direction? The Times, the Post before them, CNN, and others all leave out one important distinction when they shout "well, the Republicans hired Fusion GPS first!!!" That distinction? The reporting is all clear that Steele was hired only AFTER the Republicans quit funding Fusion GPS. But through obfuscation and clever editing, they leave that part unsaid. THEIR narrative is that Republicans and Democrats both hired Fusion GPS, and since Fusion GPS hired Steele (keeping silent the timing of Steele's assignment), both sides are equally to blame for the dossier.
Two more things:
1) no one pays $10 million for 30 pages of "dirt". There is more to the Fusion/Steele work product that needs to come out.
2) The DNC and Hillary's campaign did not pay $10 million without knowing what they were buying. People at the very top of both organizations signed off on this, you can be sure.
29
Too funny that you think that Hillary colluded with the Russians to get herself elected. For openers Putin has hated Hillary since the day he met her and was concerned that she not be president as she knew a lot more about governing and foreign policy than Trump, the real estate man. Too why would Hillary pay the Russians to release thousands of Posdesta's emails via WikiLeaks for over two months clear up until the day of the election. That was an attempt to embarrass her big time, although they were the DNC campaign manager's e-mails.
18
This is absurd! It really is!
The reason opposition to Trump from BOTH parties had an interest in Russia is simple - Trump has had dealings with very sleazy Russians for a long time now. He can't get funding from American banks because he's gone belly up so many times so he gets funding from Deutsche Bank but also, according to his own sons, from Russia. He has had Russian partners who are associated not only with Putin but with the Russian mob. These are dangerous individuals in case you weren't aware but also they have ties to an adversarial nation which we are sanctioning for aggressive actions in the Ukraine and also, killing people. Putin's modus operandi for quelling opposition isn't subtle. Therefore we have instituted sanctions which they want lifted.
When Trump took on Manafort to head his campaign the Russia angle became acutely interesting for political reasons. Manafort has worked for pro-Putin interests abroad including in the Ukraine. The Republican Party changed its platform to accommodate Putin.
This is of very great interest to any patriot.
You really should stop dissembling and look at the issues here. Russia attacked us. Why aren't you concerned about this but determined to blame Hillary Clinton for having been victimized by the people who hooked up with an antagonistic dictator, in whose interests Trump appears to be working?
Note: he has not implemented the sanctions regime passed almost unanimously by Congress. Why not?
17
Jumping to conclusions, "Steele colluded with the Russians to manufacture lies"
5
Hmmmmm. Let’s see. The DNC paid a foreign entity (a British spy-Steele) to obtain information to sink the Trump campaign. A political campaign paying a foreign entity for ANY campaign purposes is ILLEGAL according to federal election law. THAT’s collusion. There is NO evidence to date of ANY laws being broken by Trump, or his campaign (only poor judgement).
This is going to blow up in the Democrat’s face, setting them back years. Let alone the midterms.....
27
And that info came from shady Russian sources, some clearly faked and some maybe not.
6
The DNC funneled the money through a lawyer and claimed in their FEC reports that it was for legal fees. Add that to your list of corruption and jailable offenses.
8
And Hillary Clinton of course knew nothing about it when she reportedly “told all” in another money making deal for herself called “What Happened“.
[She also “knew nothing“ about Bill’s serial womanizing and harassment.]
17
Opposition research is as old as politics. It is not illegal.
Conspiring with a foreign leader and government, i.e. Putin and Russia, is illegal and borders on treasonous.
There is a "Yuuuge" difference between the two.
29
'Steele Dossier' Firm...
I’m sure the Clinton campaign rues the day they hired that law firm to look for “dirt“ on Trump.
9
It's getting confusing with the Russians, Singer, Trump, Hillary and Steele.
Sources say Colonel Mustard did it in the Conservatory with the revolver.
18
Pass the popcorn, please - got more butter ?
6
I wanted to know what the Steele dossier was a while ago, so I looked it up and read it. Salacious does not even begin to describe the allegations. They are downright disgusting.
That this is credible information about the President of the United States is endlessly troubling. That there are hangers on who let everything slide w/r/t Trump is despicable. The people around him are completely without a moral compass.
1007
Other than the golden showers, you didn't need to read the dossier to know Trump is despicable. It was all out there in reporting by NYT, WaPo, LATimes, some papers near Palm Beach, Boston, etc since 01/17.
But, virtually none broke through on TV, the medium that created Trump, and absolutely none was repetitive enough to compete with the LIVE! BREAKING NEWS! wall to wall, unedited cable news coverage of Trump's rallies & the rehashing of them by stables of pundits.
11
I am not a Trump "hanger on" but who says this salacious and disgusting report is actually true? Why would on anyone trust this ? Perhaps because the individual wants it to be true. Therein lies the difference.
9
Don't neglect to cite Trump, not just those he surrounded himself with, as someone without a moral compass. And we don't need the "Steele dossier to confirm that.
1
WWhoever republicans or democra, whoever was involved in this mess should be prosecuted. Russian intel received money for providing phony info to interfere with an American election... All of the liars should go to jail....
14
Including trump, who lies DAILY to the American people.
7
Phony info? Haven’t many of the allegations been corroborated?
12
Steele is not a Russian. Is there some evidence that he or Fusion paid Russians for information? And even if they did, why would this be illegal? I'm confused by this assertion. The Fox News crowd is so eager to make this a story of Russo-Clinton collusion, but it's all the usual wishful thinking akin to Benghazi(!) and the email server(!).
Let's assume (for sake of argument) that Trump really is/was mixed up in money laundering and bribery in Russia. Are you suggesting that it would be illegal for an opposition research firm to dig up that information? Why would the US have a law like that?
19
As a devoted Times loyalist there are moments when I wince. I just don't want the paper to get near words or phrases that could be deemed partisan. Unfortunately, this article contains such wording. This is how the article described the man who helped produce the dossier; the man then working for the Clinton campaign and the DNC: `... Fusion GPS retained a respected former British spy ...' A `respected' former spy? Let me concede the point. I'll take the Times' word that the gentleman was `respected'. But I'm still uneasy. The Times can label this guy a hero, a saint. But it doesn't change the fact that his mission was to dig up dirt. And by labeling this guy `a respected former British spy', the Times seems to be - how shall I say this? - making an effort to soften the Clinton and DNC role in this sordid mess. Or am I just being overly sensitive?
50
Did Hillary collude with the British government?
5
Isn't that what a spy does - dig up information - sometimes it's dirt alright, but that doesn't make it any less important.
10
Douglas Lowenthal -- No, she hired a retired British guy to collude for her with the Russian government.
9
Conservatives, Liberals...they all wanted to dump Trump. Only problem, the American people have their own idea on who they want to be President no matter how much the media, celebs and billionaires want otherwise.
18
"The American people have their own idea who they want to be President...."???
Absolutely right - and it was Hillary, by nearly 3 million votes! I blame our goofy Electoral College system.
140
The majority of Americans do not want Trump to be their president.
59
And it isn’t Trump. The electoral college does not represent the American people.
45
“Does anyone really believe that story?”
“I’m also very much of a germaphobe, by the way, believe me,”
Yes, I believe that story. Whenever someone ends a comment with "believe me", you should most definitely not believe them. Especially when that person is a pathologically compulsive liar, like Donny Trump.
519
@Jack: A germaphobe can hire prostitutes to do disgusting, degrading things to each other while he watches. This, in fact, is one of the allegations against Trump.
2
To be fair, Trump is a noted germaphobe. We are talking Howie Mandel territory. He detested the endless handshaking that went along with campaigning. I agree with him on the handshaking. A filthy habit that should end.
It amazes me to see this as news only now.
8
This is great the tables have turned and Hillary is now the one who colluded with the Russians
31
I forgot that HRC campaign manager's home was raided by the FBI @3am.
14
The former British spy was digging up info on Trump’s collisions and weirdo fetishes. Not sure how that that means HRC was colluding... the whole point was they were trying to prove Trump did not play fair. And he was handed the presidency by Vlad... à base that supports racism, misogyny and ignorance... as well as wealthy Republicans who want a tax break and care about “religious morality”.
3
I wonder what Paul Singer thinks of Rubio bowing to POTUS lately.
What a waste of money!
Mr Singer, I abhor DJT, maybe you could fund better causes than republicans?
22
Obviously The Free Beacon was just another cog in the Clinton machine
This must be the product of a great conspiracy, a conspiracy on a scale so immense as to dwarf any previous such venture in the history of man. A conspiracy of infamy so black that, when it is finally exposed, its principals shall be forever deserving of the maledictions of all honest men.
Sad!
3
Isn't it nice to know that candidates and their backers think so little (appropriately so) of the American voters' ability to capably discern which politician would best represent our country that digging up dirt on others has become more significant than our candidates' positions on important topics?
We have the president which THOSE people deserve!
18
Ok. Let me see if I have this right.
Things are much clearer now.
Paul Singer and Hillary Clinton colluded with Russia to prevent Trump from receiving the crown to which he was rightfully entitled. Russia wanted to help Hillary as pay back for her help in giving Russia all of our uranium. Of course, this seems like he Russians overpaid because wasn’t that what the $500k to Bill Clinton was for as was the contributions to the Clinton charity?
Apparently the collusion wasn’t necessary because Hillary won, right.
Hint to the NYTimes and mainstream media - the Steele Dossier is not what Mueller is using. Why are you chasing this bright, shiny bauble?
20
How utterly delightful! We're definitely winning now.
15
Who needed to pay for negative information? All any sane person had to do was listen to the man.
772
miscreant, not man
6
We've all have heard Trump speak and read his Tweets. Yet more than 30% of Americans still think he is doing a good job as POTUS. Explain that.
4
Well, the GOP are trying to spin this as a false = to possible collusion with the Russians by the Trump campaign. Opposition research is a normal and usual part of political campaigns. They plan on making enough noise to drown out that fact. This was not collusion with the Russians. It was opposition research that exposed Trump connections to Russia.
We don't yet have clear evidence of any collusion from anyone, but the smoke is billowing from the Trump campaign.
28
What does it matter? Our nation is no longer what it was. We've lost our greatness, and there is no real leadership in sight. We learned this lesson big time this past week, and can only hope that things will change at some point in the future.
28
The silence from the media was deafening, when it looked like it was going to be pinned on the DNC and Hillary. Now that there is a Republican in the mix, suddenly they can start reporting again. So can we say that the Republican elites and the DNC/Hillary were both in the wrong here? Of course not. Just resort to, "But the Republican's started it!"
13
I think this story was largely published in Mother Jones about a year ago. Suddenly it was a story again when Fox tv tried to spin it as a Hillary scandal. Now that its not a Hillary story, I'm sure there won't be a correction. Never the less, the charges of collusion with Russia and money laundering are still a serious issue for trump. As for prostitutes - who cares - thats between Trump and his wife.
142
Not unless the Russians/Putin actually do have a tape with which to blackmail/compromise the President of the US....that's why, I would think, it's included in the dossier.
8
"As for prostitutes....that's between [the so-called president] and his wife."
Sure it is. Just like Bill Clinton's "affair" with an intern was 'between [him] and his wife."
5
Who cares? What if there's a video of those sleazy actions? Do we want all the world to see the President doing stuff like that?
Well, it was obviously fine when a major Republican donor hired Fusion GPS to get oppo information on Trump, but when the Dems hired the same firm for the same reason, that was terrible. Let's all hold our breath and turn blue! Benghazi!! Investigations!! Fake news!! Republicans staged a minority coup and and are now doing all in their power to ram their agenda down our throats. The rest is just noise.
1030
Not to mention Republicans brushing off Trump Jr., Kushner and Manafort meeting with Russians who claimed to be working on behalf of the Russian government to get Trump elected and had damaging information on Clinton, and not refuting Trump's claim that the unprecedented and incomparable meeting was "normal, typical opposition research" which "everyone does, and that anyone else would've done the same." Yet are apoplectic over actual normal, typical opposition research (being done, not what it revealed), that a Republican initiated. And Trump claims it's "proof" that Clinton "colluded with Russia," despite the fact that no one in her campaign, the DNC, or the research firm actually met with Russians like Trump's campaign members did on numerous occasions, her campaign didn't have a glut of members with ties to Russia, she didn't have plans to build a tower in Moscow, Putin conspicuously hates Clinton, she supported Russian sanctions Trump opposed, US intelligence agencies, as well as several European ones, concluded the Russians wanted Trump to win and Clinton to lose, or if that didn't happen, to undermine her presidency, the Trump Jr. emails that clear state that the Russian government wanted Trump to win, many aspects of it have been verified, and she didn't actually use the dossier. So unless Hillary was colluding with the Russians to tank her own campaign, the "logic" behind Trump's claim, that Republicans are falling all over each other to support, escapes me.
3
Oh thaaaat's what it took to get this dossier thing back above the fold.
"Back to being something we can pin on the bad guys! All is well!"
10
This is a sad attempt by Trumpistas to gain a false equivalence between this legitimate opposition research (by a vile man's Republican and Democratic opponents) and collaboration with a foreign hostile government in a successful attempt to subvert our presidential election.
The Steele dossier was never "below the fold." It is some impressive research by a private citizen of one of our allies. Mueller (a Republican and a conservative) is using it as a road map to Tr*mp's impeachment, and rightly so. Enjoy the Trumpster fire while you can, Jim.
25
Any signs that Mr Singer was encouraged by the RNC to initiate this Oppo Report? Follow the money.
27
This is so convoluted that I'm having trouble reconciling it. The only immediate reaction to this is that fake news abounds and there's a lot of big money from both sides behind it. No wonder why there is so much confusion.
Too much of the Internet is in the wrong hands, with too many voices within it.
7
What I do with the internet voices is to sample the whole range of views from conservative to liberal. Twitter is a quick way to do it. After a while, I get a sense of how to take shortcuts. Then read some in-depth reports if the issue concerns you. For this issue, it may help to read the last section of the "Shattered," a book by two journalists sympathetic to the Clinton campaign.
Interesting. However, I recall reading about this over a year ago (before the election in Mother Jones.) http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-al...
Too bad the NY Times and other maistream media outlets didn't pick up on it then. Things might have turned out differently for the US and for the planet.
382
Agree! Isn't this all old news?
3
Exactly. This is old news. Don't recall where I read or heard it, but it was either the NY Times, NPR, or PBS.
4
Not the first time Mothers Jones has been ahead - sometimes years ahead - of the mainstream media. I agree. Investigative journalists need to support each other. Too few to go around as it is to ignore info if it isn;t your own scoop. Yes it does change the future.
13
But they were conspiring with the Clintons AND Obama, because, America.
And, E-mails and Benghazi. Please, give it a rest, GOP. PLEASE.
159
I am a little confused.
Does it really matter who had the information first? Isn't the important aspect whether any information contained is true or not?
1007
Exactly, and the same for the information about Hillary and the DNC. Let it all hang out. Discuss it all.
7
We no longer live in that world. Now all that matters is the messenger, not the message; it's the leaker, not the deed; it's the payor, not the dossier.
4
Mark Thomason - I cannot make this clear enough: To anyone who ACTUALLY read the Hillary and DNC emails it is readily apparent that outside of preferring Hillary and saying a few nasty things about Bernie (literally a total of around 8 emails) and Donna Brazile giving Hillary one debate question, there was no there, there. Every single political party has had a preferred candidate going back to the beginning of time. There is ZERO proof of illegal activity or rigging of any of the 50 state run primaries. Hillary beat Bernie by 4 almost 4 million votes out of only 30 million total. A true landslide by the Democratic voters. (btw, most people seem to forget that the RNC had a preferred candidate and definitely was not Trump and that Megyn Kelly said Fox gave Trump a question ahead of a debate.)
6
So everybody hated Trump? And he still one??
4
I believe one should be won. Or maybe in this case, with respect to Trump and his "Yuuuuge" ego, one is appropriate.
14
Three million more liked Hillary. :o)
2
Oh my!
But the meme will persist on the right that this was ALL Hillary's doing.
My goodness, we should even expect Maureen Dowd to take a swipe or two at Clinton to this effect, in total ignorance -- or denial -- of what the newspaper she files opinion pieces for has just reported.
But this is easy.
Produce the Steele report and let The Donald rail against it.
I mean, no ticket, no laundry.
Why would The Donald be so un-Presidential as to pay prostitutes to urinate on sheets symbolically linked to Hillary Clinton
A guy who, soi-disant, grabs crotches and kisses from young women? Why would he ever be engaged in such sleazy behavior?
252
The sheets you mention were linked to Obama. Supposedly, he and Michelle stayed in the same hotel room once.
That makes it more plausible, considering Trump's hatred for his predecessor. But the dossier contains other allegations against Trump which are far more damaging.
18
Yes it was Hillary's doing because as the story says, she and the DNC had the company hire Steele and create the dossier. The Repubs were out of the picture.
2
Yes, and Republicans have shown themselves to be immune from lying! Their leader has shown himself to be a man of the utmost honesty. The Republicans have no credibility when it comes to truth.
5
This isn't kindergarten anymore. it doesn't matter who started. the instant the DNC and Clinton campaign decided to pursue this avenue, regardless of right or wrong, one hopes it was after determining there was a sound basis for investigation.
A lot of money was disbursed. it's hard to believe no one at the top knew. if they didn't, there should be heck to pay if that much can be spent without the boss' approval.
What is troubling is that none of it was used while it would have been most effective, and that it got out well after the election, without anyone owning it. This kind of sloppiness is what gives Trump cover for calling it fake when a lot of it probably is real.
This is yet more lost opportunity.
---
www.rimaregas.com
71
"Troubling" in terms of election results, but I take comfort that it was not released because the Clinton Campaign had not independently verified the claims: ethics, not "sloppiness", I believe.
5
RW,
First, you misstate what I wrote. When I wrote "What is troubling is that none of it was used..." I mean the parts that made it a viable range of topics to continue investigating, since that process was one that others had started.
If none of it was validated, then the same ethics that barred them from putting the information out there during the campaign are the same ethics that would bar them from making the information public, through leaks or an official statement, after the election.
But everyone is denying they knew. So... what is a reasonable person to derive from that? We now know that real cash money was paid from two different entities whose leadership is denying knowledge.
It's either sloppiness or lack of ethics that is driving these denials and, either way, they now play into the hands of the opponent who claims he's the victim of fake news.
Leaders take responsibility for their actions, ethical or not.
3