The Coming Russia Bombshells
« prev   misc   next »

1
0

The Coming Russia Bombshells

By anonymous following x   2017 Oct 27, 12:51pm 714 views   26 comments   watch   quote     share    


The confirmation this week that Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee paid an opposition-research firm for a “dossier” on Donald Trump is bombshell news.

More bombshells are to come.

The Fusion GPS saga isn’t over. The Clinton-DNC funding is but a first glimpse into the shady election doings concealed within that oppo-research firm’s walls.

The answers are in Fusion’s bank records. Fusion has doggedly refused to divulge the names of its clients for months now, despite extraordinary pressure.

Because there’s something Fusion cares about keeping secret even more than the Clinton-DNC news—and that something is in those bank records. The release of the client names was a last-ditch effort to appease the House Intelligence Committee, which issued subpoenas to Fusion’s bank and was close to obtaining records until Fusion filed suit last week.

FBI bombshells are also yet to come.

The bureau has stonewalled congressional subpoenas for documents related to the dossier, but that became harder with the DNC-Clinton news.

We may learn the FBI knew the dossier was a bought-and-paid-for product of Candidate Clinton, but used it anyway.

There’s plenty yet to come with regard to the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Every senior Democrat is disclaiming knowledge of the dossier deal, leaving Perkins Coie holding the bag. But while it is not unusual for law firms to hire opposition-research outfits for political clients, it is highly unusual for a law firm to pay bills without a client’s approval.

Somewhere, Perkins Coie has documents showing who signed off on those bills, and they aren’t protected by attorney-client privilege.

And there are still bombshells with regard to unmasking of Americans in surveilled communications.

If the Steele dossier reports (which appear to date back to June 2016) were making their way into the hands of senior DNC and Clinton political operatives, you can bet they were making their way to the Obama White House. This may explain why Obama political appointees began monitoring the Trump campaign and abusing unmasking.

No, this probe of the Democratic Party’s Russian dalliance has a long, long way to go. And, let us hope, with revelations too big for even the media to ignore.



https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-coming-russia-bombshells-1509059214
1   HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Oct 27, 2:40pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
More bombshells are to come.


,when Mueller releases the results of his investigation.

How the mighty will fall.

For those that choose to DIE DUMB! All opposition research is paid for or is it free for Republicans.
2   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 27, 2:41pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
The confirmation this week that Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee paid an opposition-research firm for a “dossier” on Donald Trump is bombshell news.


How exactly is that a bombshell?

Every campaign since the dawn of time has gotten oppo research.

The hilarious thing is how the Trumpcucks have jumped all over this--what do we have a dozen threads on it now?--to try to distract from the coming news from Mueller. When it turns out that this dossier is all confirmed, I'm going to laugh my butt off.
3   Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Oct 27, 2:45pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

joeyjojojunior says

Every campaign since the dawn of time has gotten oppo research.


Are we still continuing with that smokescreen, or are just trolling as usual?

joeyjojojunior says
When it turns out that this dossier is all confirmed, I'm going to laugh my butt off.


Didn't read the article at the OP, did you?
4   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 27, 3:31pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says

Didn't read the article at the OP, did you?


It's behind a paywall so no, I didn't read it all. It's an opinion piece though so I'm relatively certain it contains nothing that would affect anything I wrote.
5   lostand confused   ignore (0)   2017 Oct 27, 3:35pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

The hypocricy of the dems-jaw dropping. Russia, Russia, Russia, treason, traitor-oh it is just opposition research when it was Hilalry that pays the Russians.
7   HEY YOU   ignore (7)   2017 Oct 27, 4:42pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Watch the idiots scatter like a frightened covey of quail.
8   anonymous   ignore (4)   2017 Oct 27, 5:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Trump collusion with Russia to influence elections: nothingburger.

Clinton campaign gathers info on Trump collusion: get a rope!
9   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 27, 5:30pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

PCGyver says
So who funded that dossier?


Mark Elias of Pekins Coie, Hillary for America's General Counsel paid Fusion GPS for the dossier. It's coming out in Discovery, so there's no sugarcoating it. Not disclosing it earlier may be a Campaign Finance Reporting violation.
https://www.perkinscoie.com/en/professionals/marc-e-elias.html
A Republican Donor, believed to be on Jeb!'s team, did pay Fusion GPS for Oppo Research but stopped funding after Jeb!!!! dropped out, months before the Dossier was finalized.

It's not at all unusual for one camp to leak to internal enemies of a candidate in the other party. For example, the famous "Obama in a Turban" photo was leaked to various Republican Pundits in 2008 by the Hillary Campaign. A similar thing happened with the Democrats and McCain.

It's all coming out in a lawsuit, no dodging this train.

At the very, very, least, the Dems co-paid for the Dossier. If there is another payee, it was Trump's GOPe foes.
11   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 27, 7:00pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

lostand confused says
The hypocricy of the dems-jaw dropping. Russia, Russia, Russia, treason, traitor-oh it is just opposition research when it was Hilalry that pays the Russians.


I think you're confused. The oppo research that was partially funded by Clinton and the Dems did not pay anything to the Russians. She paid a UK company.

There is no hint of collusion with respect to the dossier.
12   anonymous   ignore (4)   2017 Oct 27, 7:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

This looks much more like a desperate attempt to get Trump out of the news to me. No one is even alleging any actual crimes except for the alt-lunatics.
13   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 27, 7:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
At the very, very, least, the Dems co-paid for the Dossier. If there is another payee, it was Trump's GOPe foes.


I'll ask again. So what? Please tell me a candidate that didn't pay for oppo research?

I'm 100% certain Trump did.
14   bob2356   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 27, 7:12pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Mark Elias of Pekins Coie, Hillary for America's General Counsel paid Fusion GPS for the dossier.


So where are the russians? If there are no russians does this mean piggy has to go back to fantasizing about animals in barns to get his dick hard?
15   Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Oct 27, 7:53pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

joeyjojojunior says
I'll ask again. So what? Please tell me a candidate that didn't pay for oppo research?


Wasn't your team SCREAMING for indictments, felonies, collusion, etc. when Trump Jr. received emails and had a meeting with a "Russian" lawyer for possible oppo research?

Why is doing oppo research NOW not a big deal?
16   Sniper   ignore (8)   2017 Oct 27, 7:54pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

bob2356 says
fantasizing about animals in barns to get his dick hard?


Telling us about your night time activities again?
17   joeyjojojunior   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 27, 8:25pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Sniper says
Wasn't your team SCREAMING for indictments, felonies, collusion, etc. when Trump Jr. received emails and had a meeting with a "Russian" lawyer for possible oppo research?

Why is doing oppo research NOW not a big deal?


Glad you brought this up. Let me help to educate you as to why they are different situations:

1. The Russian lawyer was seemingly a representative of the Russian Government.
2. There was no evidence of a payment. It appeared to be a quid pro quo with Trump agreeing to do favors in the future for this information.
3. The information that the Russian lawyer was set to provide was likely obtained by the Russian Government illegally.
4. Paying for oppo research is exceedingly normal. Doing quid pro quo with foreign governments to obtain oppo research is not normal and is likely illegal.
19   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 28, 8:46am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

joeyjojojunior says
I'll ask again. So what? Please tell me a candidate that didn't pay for oppo research?


I'm sure he did.

However:

1. He didn't pay a foreign spy
1b. Who in turn used Democrat Money to pay Russian Spies
2. He didn't hide the transaction and indeed tell the media the Campaign had nothing to do with it. (Per Haberman and others)
3. He didn't have the oppo research Spy paid AGAIN by the FBI with tax dollars (this is a neglected part of the story)
4. He didn't see the FBI get a FISA warrant with help from the Obama DOJ using the Oppo Research by a Foreign Spy as an excuse..
5. Resulting in a Patriot Wiretap of a the Political Campaign Opposition

Unprecedented. We cannot normalize using foreign spies to allow a Political Party to justify Patriot act spying against their opponents.
20   CBOEtrader   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 28, 9:10am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

But oppo research? Right guys? Right...

How many times over does the DNC and team Hillary need to prove they are the most dangerous facet in politics today? Stealing primaries, employing thieves to spy on its members, misappropriating donated money, and now financing political hit-pieces on political opponents. Watch team left #buttrump their way around reality.

TwoScoopsMcGee says
I'm sure he did.

However:

1. He didn't pay a foreign spy
1b. Who in turn used Democrat Money to pay Russian Spies
2. He didn't hide the transaction and indeed tell the media the Campaign had nothing to do with it. (Per Haberman and others)
3. He didn't have the oppo research Spy paid AGAIN by the FBI with tax dollars (this is a neglected part of the story)
4. He didn't see the FBI get a FISA warrant with help from the Obama DOJ using the Oppo Research by a Foreign Spy as an excuse..
5. Resulting in a Patriot Wiretap of a the Political Campaign Opposition

Unprecedented. We cannot normalize using foreign spies to allow a Political Party to justify Patriot act spying against their opponents.
21   Quigley   ignore (0)   2017 Oct 28, 2:17pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

joeyjojojunior says
The Russian lawyer was seemingly a representative of the Russian Government.
2. There was no evidence of a payment. It appeared to be a quid pro quo with Trump agreeing to do favors in the future for this information.
3. The information that the Russian lawyer was set to provide was likely obtained by the Russian Government illegally.
4. Paying for oppo research is exceedingly normal. Doing quid pro quo with foreign governments to obtain oppo research is not normal and is likely illegal.


1-4. Neither the research details nor the transaction details of its cost to the Trump campaign were either revealed or even discussed! So nothing was “paid for.” No payment was even discussed! No deal was made or even come close to being made! There was only a Russian lawyer misrepresenting her intentions to get access to Trump’s campaign. Once this was clear, all parties cancelled talks and walked away. THATS the very definition of a NOTHINGBURGER!!!!!!!!!!
22   TwoScoopsMcGee   ignore (1)   2017 Oct 28, 3:22pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
3. He didn't have the oppo research Spy paid AGAIN by the FBI with tax dollars (this is a neglected part of the story)


I'm withdrawing the "FBI Paid Steele a second time" claim ... turns out the source for that story in the WaPo was something like "According to sources familiar with the story." which is goddamn low energy. That's even more shady than "High ranking government official" or "Intelligence Official". Anybody could be "Familiar with the story" including random CTR trolls on Twitter.

No standards in the media, sad.

Comment as anon_85f9f or log in at top of page: