Clinton and DNC Paid For Research That Led To Russian Dossier

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: pavil

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

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

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

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

I actually agree with much of this post.

I dont think the Don Jr. meeting was that big of a deal, although it was very stupid of him. However, I do think Manafort is guilty, and others could be, whoch is why I want to see the results of Muellers investigation.

Similarly, I don't think under normal circumstances that hillarys team paying foreign agents, even russians would be that big of a deal.

The problems lie in the fact that first the dems and media have gone totally nuts about Russian interference including don jr.s meeting, which is very hypocritical . Also, they then lied about paying for it, which is more hypocrisy.

Although the above is shady and should warrant a comporable investigation with Trumps team, I don't think this is an epic revelation.

However, if this dossier was the used to help get Fisa warrants, that is a scandal of epic proportions, which again, is worse than anything russia is accused of. This is nothing short of weaponizing the intel community against political opponents in the most arrogant and egregious way.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Because you notice someone has several posts on each page with absolutely no substance and you want to know how long that has been going on for.

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Gryphon66

Because you notice someone has several posts on each page with absolutely no substance and you want to know how long that has been going on for.

So you make a comment with even less substance?

Fair enough.

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
a reply to: DBCowboy

There is DEFINITIVE proof Hillary/DNC PAID FOR THE HOAX DOSSIER.

And?

What GOP Nominee or ORG originally funded it?

And how does either make the Dossier less or more factual.

Some of the information in the Dossier is also reported by multiple international intelligence agencies.

Corroborated/confirmed info from the dossier was used to get a FISA warrant on Carter Page, who has now refused to testify and taken the 5th.

The Dossier claimed Trump agreed minimize US opposition to Russia's invasion in Ukraine and that was confirmed when JD Gordon and Manafort, presumably at Trump's direction, stripped US Opposition to the invasion from the RNC platform statement.

Apart from that, at least one source for the Dossier has turned up dead, with several other murders suspected of being linked to the Dossier.

We will see, but much of the Dossier appears valid enough to be continued to be investigated.

a reply to: Grambler

However, if this dossier was the used to help get Fisa warrants, that is a scandal of epic proportions, which again, is worse than anything russia is accused of. This is nothing short of weaponizing the intel community against political opponents in the most arrogant and egregious way.

This has been speculated from the time the fisa warrants were announced in the NYT.
This type of behavior from our government, leo community, and military should scare the crap out of everyone.
If this is true it will hang around the neck of the former potus and will define him.

originally posted by: [post=22803187]Grambler

However, if this dossier was the used to help get Fisa warrants, that is a scandal of epic proportions, which again, is worse than anything russia is accused of. This is nothing short of weaponizing the intel community against political opponents in the most arrogant and egregious way.

It was used tog et a FISA warrant on Carter Page and AFTER the information was investigated and corroborated.

Carter Page was the subject of an FBI investigation before Trump and had been caught giving sensitive documents to two Russian spies who were convicted.

Nothing scandalous about hunting traitors.

a reply to: Grambler

The Don Jr. meeting was a distraction ...

You have this perception, whether it has been established by the RW media or not, that "Dems and media have gone totally nuts" about Russian interference. Perhaps, but my question is why aren't all Americans concerned about Russian interference in our Election?

The known facts of this interference range from hacking backend election systems to manipulating us through social media.

First of all ... have we grown so stupid and so divided as a nation that a few Russian trolls on the internet can push us even further apart? And, as we've seen here in this thread and several others ... the two "sides" bat friendship with Russia around like a beach ball.

Are we serious in this? Is it really going to be that easy to bring down the USA?

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
a reply to: DBCowboy

There is DEFINITIVE proof Hillary/DNC PAID FOR THE HOAX DOSSIER.

And?

What GOP Nominee or ORG originally funded it?

And how does either make the Dossier less or more factual.

Some of the information in the Dossier is also reported by multiple international intelligence agencies.

Corroborated/confirmed info from the dossier was used to get a FISA warrant on Carter Page, who has now refused to testify and taken the 5th.

The Dossier claimed Trump agreed minimize US opposition to Russia's invasion in Ukraine and that was confirmed when JD Gordon and Manafort, presumably at Trump's direction, stripped US Opposition to the invasion from the RNC platform statement.

Apart from that, at least one source for the Dossier has turned up dead, with several other murders suspected of being linked to the Dossier.

We will see, but much of the Dossier appears valid enough to be continued to be investigated.

What a ridiculous post.

So when Hillary gets millions form groups connected to russia to help push through the uranium one deal, and her assistant votes for it, nothing to see here.

But an unverifiable dossier discussing pee stories with parts we know to be absolitely false like Cohen attending a meeting in prague says Trump os going soft on russia, and then Trumps platform happens to be to be softer on Russia (note this was not a policy or deal like with Hillary) this is proof the dossier is worth investigating?

Unbelievable.

And then you want to talk about mysterious deaths? Are you sure you are not discussing Hillary?

a reply to: face23785

Right, but that raises questions about equal justice and justice in general.

By accepting pay-offs, do women put other women at risk? Could future victims sue earlier victims for not prosecuting and potentially heading off the criminal trend?

Also the general idea that people with Millions can buy their way out criminal charges.

We should expect or hope for better "equal" justice IMO.

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: [post=22803187]Grambler

However, if this dossier was the used to help get Fisa warrants, that is a scandal of epic proportions, which again, is worse than anything russia is accused of. This is nothing short of weaponizing the intel community against political opponents in the most arrogant and egregious way.

It was used tog et a FISA warrant on Carter Page and AFTER the information was investigated and corroborated.

Carter Page was the subject of an FBI investigation before Trump and had been caught giving sensitive documents to two Russian spies who were convicted.

Nothing scandalous about hunting traitors.

You have a source for this?

a reply to: Grambler

You have evidence that Clinton “pushed” the U1 deal through?

Please share.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

The Don Jr. meeting was a distraction ...

You have this perception, whether it has been established by the RW media or not, that "Dems and media have gone totally nuts" about Russian interference. Perhaps, but my question is why aren't all Americans concerned about Russian interference in our Election?

The known facts of this interference range from hacking backend election systems to manipulating us through social media.

First of all ... have we grown so stupid and so divided as a nation that a few Russian trolls on the internet can push us even further apart? And, as we've seen here in this thread and several others ... the two "sides" bat friendship with Russia around like a beach ball.

Are we serious in this? Is it really going to be that easy to bring down the USA?

The social media thing is a joke and barely worth mentioning.

I am concerned with all attempts at subverting our elections, rather it be Russia, Israel, China, the UK, or private coporations.

Yet for some reason the bulk of the discussion has centered aroun only russians and only their influence with Trump.

If we are going to look into russia, fine. But it should be on all sides.

I have said for a while now that Manafort seems shady. I would like all foreign agents operating clandestinely like this to be outed.

But to me an even better threat to our elections is weaponizing the intel community to attack political opponents.

Not only does this mean that foreign agents like Russia will be able to be more successful because we have an inept or corrupt intel community, but it means that a political party from our own country is blatantly breaking the law in an attempt to steal an election.

This is 50 times worse than watergate if true.

Everyone of us should be deeply concerned if we find out the odssier paid for by Hillarys team to foreign agents was used to get fisa warrants.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Grambler

You have evidence that Clinton “pushed” the U1 deal through?

Please share.

We have proof that the podesta group, which not only was founded by Hillarys campaign manager John but whose leader Tony had vast connections to Hillary, lobbied extensively for the Uranium one deal. We know that Hillarys assistant voted for the deal.

Well now the WSJ is weighing in...
www.wsj.com...

The agency, when Mr. Mueller headed it, soft-pedaled an investigation highly embarrassing to Mrs. Clinton as well as the Obama Russia reset policy. More recently, if just one of two things is true—Russia sponsored the Trump Dossier, or Russian fake intelligence prompted Mr. Comey’s email intervention—then Russian operations, via their impact on the FBI, influenced and continue to influence our politics in a way far more consequential than any Facebook ad, the preoccupation of John McCain, who apparently cannot behold a mountain if there’s a molehill anywhere nearby. Which means that Mr. Mueller has the means, motive and opportunity to obfuscate and distract from matters embarrassing to the FBI, while pleasing a large part of the political spectrum. He need only confine his focus to the flimsy, disingenuous but popular (with the media) accusation that the shambolic Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin.

Kind of a big deal when the WSJ is calling for Mueller to step down.

a reply to: Grambler

Not sure what to say there.

Your thinking seems not well premised, full of straw men, red herring, distraction and unproven claims.

Parts of the Dossier have been verified. None of it has squarely disproven, even Cohen in Prague, though evidence suggests it was different Cohen.

a reply to: Grambler

Well before the furor over Clinton’s email server ... it was well-known that the world was jacking our email systems at State, Defense etc. anytime they wanted.

The one thing that Comey said that did bother me is that the emil systems at State were old an unsecured.

I originally thought Clinton was smart for securing her own emails out of these compromised systems.

a reply to: shooterbrody

A Murdoch property is weighing in to foster the narrative along?

Truly shocking.

a reply to: Grambler

What were the vast links between Clinton and Tony Podesta again?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: shooterbrody

A Murdoch property is weighing in to foster the narrative along?

Truly shocking.

Guess we will see.
I didn't realize the leftists scorned the WSJ.
I thought the WSJ was one of the few places that still employed actual journalists.
As usual no comment on the substance of the WSJ story; as if you actually had time to read it before crapping on it.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: shooterbrody

A Murdoch property is weighing in to foster the narrative along?

Truly shocking.

Guess we will see.
I didn't realize the leftists scorned the WSJ.
I thought the WSJ was one of the few places that still employed actual journalists.
As usual no comment on the substance of the WSJ story; as if you actually had time to read it before crapping on it.

Murdoch raped the Gray Lady in 2007.

What comment do you want? It’s the same dreck that has been propagating for days.


ETA: sorry the New York Times is the Gray Lady ... my bad.