FBI told opposition research group agianst Trump details of Trump investigation

a reply to: Grambler

I'll post this again, even though it was seen in the other thread:

"The law prohibits accepting contributions from foreigners or providing substantial assistance to foreigners in making independent expenditures," Hasen said. "It does not prohibit paying foreigners at market value to perform services." Jan Baran, an attorney and election law expert at Wiley Rein LLP who has argued several cases before the Supreme Court, said he also knew of no law banning campaigns from hiring foreigners.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

a reply to: introvert

Why are you even arguing on that point, that's immaterial.

What IS material, is that a foreigner, Steele, knew enough to forward his concerns directly to the FBI, where "citizens", the Trumps, did not.

a reply to: tadaman

Wrong. His business dealings, particularly in Khazkstan was long thought to be deeply nefarious. Trump's own damn kid has said that their business is very heavy Russian. There IS no heavy Russian business that doesn't go through Putin.

As soon as you can explain a Russian mobster paying $9o million for property in Florida valued at $45 million (nice round number, huh? 2x the amount? then you can explain to me how the Trump businesses were squeaky clean.

You guys bury your heads in the sand, listen to Hannity or Rush, over the British MI-6 Russian desk in Steele, write it off as a conspiracy against you guys, as everything, literally everything is a conspiracy against the Republicans who are trying to suppress all the evidence.

Why did Bannon confirm it all happened and is happening? The man who invented the term "Deep state" is now part of the conspiracy? Is there ANYONE you could hear from and believe? The answer is "no." Because if you won't believe Bannon, you won't believe anyone.

Why has Trump not once, ever, said boo against Putin? Tried to get the sanctions lifted against Russia without Russia giving up anything in the first week? Why? Why did he praise Putin for firing half our diplomatic staff? He ripped into the Aussia P.M. Ripped into NATO, ripped into the Paris Climate Accord, Ripped into China, Ripped into the UK, but not a single solitary time has he said anything at all that wasn't glowing about Putin.

Is that all just a coincidence, all of this.

Pathetic.

Party over country every time.

Or at least you'd be asking questions about all these coincidences.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grambler

I'll post this again, even though it was seen in the other thread:

"The law prohibits accepting contributions from foreigners or providing substantial assistance to foreigners in making independent expenditures," Hasen said. "It does not prohibit paying foreigners at market value to perform services." Jan Baran, an attorney and election law expert at Wiley Rein LLP who has argued several cases before the Supreme Court, said he also knew of no law banning campaigns from hiring foreigners.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

Answered on the other thread.

In short, your article says experts are split on rather hillarys team broke the law.

Oner of the two experts its cites saying they didnt say she broke a disclosure law instead.

By the same token, experts are split about rather don jr broke the law.

So given you think the possibility of him breaking the law warrants an investigation, why would you not think that hillarys team and the dnc potential breaking of the law should also warrant an investigation.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: introvert

Why are you even arguing on that point, that's immaterial.

What IS material, is that a foreigner, Steele, knew enough to forward his concerns directly to the FBI, where "citizens", the Trumps, did not.

Ok. How is that material?

originally posted by: Grambler
Props to Diane Feinstein for releasing the transcript!

So in it, here is this little tidbit from page 175.

2 intelligence. Essentially what he told me was they
3 had other intelligence about this matter from an
4 internal Trump campaign source and that -- that
5 they -- my understanding was that they believed
6 Chris at this point -- that they believed Chris's
7 information might be credible because they had
8 other intelligence that indicated the same thing
9 and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human
10 source from inside the Trump organization.

www.feinstein.senate.gov... cted.pdf

At first glance, it seems like good news for the anti trump crowd. This is referring to Papdopolous and the story the NYT broke a week ago.

The press is on to show that the dossier was not the impetus for the investigation or fisa warrants, and instead it was Papadopolous drunkenly telling an Australian that a Russian told him they had emails on Hillary. (this story even if true is an asinine reason to start and investigation and get Fisa warrants against people like Carter page but not Papadopolous, but thats for another thread).

So Simpson seems to be backing up that the FBI already had evidence before the dossier was presented to them.

But step back and think about this for a moment.

The FBI, which is supposed to be a non political entity, tasked with keeping our country safe, apparently was giving details of looking into election interference between Trump and russians to a former spy from another country that they knew to be getting paid by an oppo research firm working for Trumps opponent, Hillary.

That is appalling.

Imagine the outrage had this been done the other way. What if Trump paid a firm that the FBI contacted and said "Yeah we got all sorts of statements from hillary people about her email, like this guy Paul Combetta that was on message boards saying a VIP asked him to delete names off of emails, and then bleach bitted it the next day" How inappropriate would it be for the FBI to leak details of this ongoing investigation directly to hillarys opponent.

It would be unthinkable.

But the FBI doing this aginst Trump, no problem. I guess when you are having meetings in McCabes office about needing an insurance policy in case Trump wins, is makes sense.

Not only is this an outrage because it is the FBI acting politically, but also because it could have jeopardized the entire investigation into Trumps team.

Lets say for a minute that Trumps team did collude with russians illegally to steal the election.

Why in the world would the FBI leak to steele, who they knew was working with Fusion that was leaking info to the press to hurt Trump?

They had to know that there was a good chance that this info would get back to Trumps team.

Now if there was a chance of catching trumps team acting illegally, they knew there was someone within there own team that tipped someone off to the FBI, and they would clam up.

So the FBI put its interest in making trump look bad by telling an oppo firm against him details of the investigation before actually trying to keep our elections safe.

The oversight committee should immediately demand that the FBI release who it was that told Steele this info, and if they deny it, Simpson who claimed steele said that should be charged with lying to the committee.

How come you didn't put the part of the testimony in where he went to the FBI himself, and reported the information, thinking they would really want to know, and that's when they talked, FBI and Steele?

The FBI talked to the former MI-6 Russian desk agent when HE CAME TO THEM TO REPORT A CRIME, then they discussed details, and that is in the testimony and you didn't bring that up.

Moreover, how come you didnt put the part in about Steele pulling out of speaking to the FBI bc he thought the NYC FBI was stonewalling him, protecting TRUMP, because the NYC office is still so close with Guiliani? They weren't helping Clinton, why didn't you put that?

Steele said he believed they never forwarded the information to Comey. Why aren't you putting that in?

At least you are addressing the testimony, instead of simply yelling "What a load of crap" like many, not wanting to look at all.

a reply to: Grambler

I believe it is being investigated.

What is your point?

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: introvert

Why are you even arguing on that point, that's immaterial.

What IS material, is that a foreigner, Steele, knew enough to forward his concerns directly to the FBI, where "citizens", the Trumps, did not.

Ok. How is that material?

Because it is what is directly at the heart of the matter...otherwise the entire investigation is merely academic.

originally posted by: alphabetaone

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: introvert

Why are you even arguing on that point, that's immaterial.

What IS material, is that a foreigner, Steele, knew enough to forward his concerns directly to the FBI, where "citizens", the Trumps, did not.

Ok. How is that material?

Because it is what is directly at the heart of the matter...otherwise the entire investigation is merely academic.

The investigation in to Steele, Fusion and their connections/actions with the DNC may be just that...academic.

a reply to: Scrubdog

Because all of that is irrelevant to what the OP is about, and is being discussed on other threads.

So if I go report a crime, you think its appropriate for the FBI to then fill me in about sources they have inside the team who I am reporting?

Of course niot.

Again, the FBI jeopardized the investigation by giving out info that could have got to trumps team about a source inside their team.

And as I answered earlier in this thread, I am more concerned about FBI politiczation and corruption than any one candidate.

So if steele has evidence that the FBI was acting corruptly for Trump, by all means present that.

a reply to: Grambler

All comes back to the spending. They haven't let up from the clip induced by the financial meltdown of 2008. That extra money buys a lot of cowards, sycophants, and traitors.

a reply to: Scrubdog

How people can read this and still think,

“This is a witch hunt! There is absolutely no evidence against him!!”

I have no idea..

In fact imho it is atleast boarderline dishonesty...

Good morning Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin. What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly? I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first. Best Rob Goldstone

I mean that literally spells out the collusion theory, minus what the trump camp would have been doing in return..

How this isn’t instantly considered the smoking gun by everyone.. I have no idea.

a reply to: Grambler

So did you ever provide any evidence that the fbi gave him info????

You keep talking about it like it is a known quantity , rather than just your personal theiry that has no evidence to back it up...

That drives me crazy...

Any evidence against trump is a conspiracy and a witch hunt.. no matter how many republicans and law enforcement officials are involved..

Yet any speculation about the Clintons or obama is the gospel truth.. without one shreds of evidence..

The hypocrisy is just deep enough to need waders..

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Yes I provided evidence.

You are literally the only one arguing that isn't the case.

Even other people making other criticisms like introvert have admitted that the transcript shows that this is the case.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Yes I provided evidence.

You are literally the only one arguing that isn't the case.

Even other people making other criticisms like introvert have admitted that the transcript shows that this is the case.

Actually, I admitted that it shows it may be the case. As I said, we are hearing this from a second-hand account and we do not know the exact proper context. Surely you can admit that yourself.

As for my original point, you still have not provided evidence that the FBI did anything in this case with the intent of harming Trump.

So in the end, I'm not sure what you really think you have in this case.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Scrubdog

How people can read this and still think,

“This is a witch hunt! There is absolutely no evidence against him!!”

I have no idea..

In fact imho it is atleast boarderline dishonesty...

Good morning Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting. The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father. This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin. What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly? I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first. Best Rob Goldstone

I mean that lirally spells out the collusion theory, minus what the trump camp would have been doing in return..

How this isn’t instantly considered the smoking gun by everyone.. I have no idea.

What Trump did in return was attempt to lift sanctions immediately, then not reaffirm the promise to NATO, and then recently float pulling our troops back from Germany leaving Europe far more exposed to Russian troops.

Trump's always played like a nice boy for Russia and hated the Democrats and Clinton.

It is part over country and putin over dems. Get used to saying it because all the people protecting the Russian asset in the oval office are going to come to regret it at some point.

As to how they willfully ignore it? There's an ex-CIA analyst newspaper article in the Washington Post saying that if he were Russian he would spend "tremendous resources" in Fox News, to alter both the policy of the United States and to ensure the rabid right doesn't see a wit of any of this.

That's why people here are shocked by all the evidence and act like it can't possibly be true.

Spell it out slowly for the conservatives: Steve Bannon Just Confirmed Collussion and Money Laundering, he has not walked those comments back at all.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Scrubdog

Because all of that is irrelevant to what the OP is about, and is being discussed on other threads.

So if I go report a crime, you think its appropriate for the FBI to then fill me in about sources they have inside the team who I am reporting?

Of course niot.

Again, the FBI jeopardized the investigation by giving out info that could have got to trumps team about a source inside their team.

And as I answered earlier in this thread, I am more concerned about FBI politiczation and corruption than any one candidate.

So if steele has evidence that the FBI was acting corruptly for Trump, by all means present that.

They were exchanging information over a grave security threat.

If you reported a crime and you were one of the finest DNA evidence specialists in the world and they had some DNA evidence in your crime, I fully do expect they might well speak to you in an attempt to better understand what was happening.

The person reporting the crime isn't just any old witness as the OP makes him sound like, the crime and happened to be the former MI-6 head of the Russian desk, he brings in his evidence and his sources in an attempt to help this country, and they review sources and methods to get to the truth, that actually does happen, and when national security is at issue, I think they'd want to work with an ally, and a person they'd worked with previously.

Steele himself broke off the relationship with the FBI after he got the sense that information wasn't being passed up the chain of command. He worried he was tipping his hand toward the investigation, rather than providing the country essential intel.

a reply to: Scrubdog

You ignore verifiable facts, state non issues in nefarious light, refuse to accept information until it is undeniable and then move the goal posts,

Then you have the balls to call people like us pathetic and partisan.

You should be Crucifying the DNC and Clinton right along with us even IF you absolutely disliked Trump.

Why? Because we are fellow citizens. Our preferred presidential candidates dont change our being beholden to the same laws that our leaders are.

You cant get over your hatred long enough to have character enough to take care of your own when they mess up or act badly, the same way you "take care of your own".

So stay in your ignorance. I will always be happier than you it seems. THATS pathetic, all things considered...*Blinks at "FML."

So I am right there with you. Only difference is I am laughing or taking it in strides.

I was told to wait and see what came of the investigations. That evidence would surface that would point undeniably to a CRIME by Trump and co.

We said that was fine since we suspected that the evidence discovered would point to the DNC and Clinton being behind this whole mess.

Turns out, again, that we Trumpets were correct and you never Trumpers were wrong.

Again.

a reply to: tadaman

I am upset that the DNC, have been for a long time, because they clearly were in the tank for Hillary and against Sanders, but that's not a crime, that's an issue in the Democratic party.

Hiring GPS Fusion, as Hillary did, is not a crime, and every candidate since forever had done oppo research on the other side, so I fail to see the issue in that? Can you explain to me why you think that has any bearing at all? If it were the only evidence out there, I could see why it would make one look with a discerning eye, very much.

But the evidence comports with what the FBI already had from their source in the campaign (or they both pointed in the general direction, that Trump was fully compromised by Russia.

I can read the emails myself which proves that the Trumps were dealing with Russia and comports with what Steele found and GPS testified to.

I can point to Bannon's statements as affirming that it all happened, the money laundering and collusion.

I can point to the fact that Grassley attempted to suppress this for six months and it required having the CEO of Fusion to demand it be released that caused Feinstein to release it. The CEO of Fusion cannot help Hillary now, the demand can come only because of a sense of duty and danger to the nation about what they found. I am horried.

I can point to the really odd fact that Trump has hired Manafort, Flynn, Page and Tillerson, all people having had a deep relationship with Russia, not the U.K. not China, not spread around many countries, it's always always Russia.

I can point to Nunes' bizarre behavior at misdirection as fully comporting with Trump knowing he needed to protect himself.

I can point to firing Comey, having a letter drafted saying it's bc of how he handled the Hillary mess, and then Trump confirm the next day it's because of the Russian probe.

All of this is seamless undisputed evidence and it all aligns with what we've all been hearing all along. You can cite some sort of political interest and maybe that works to make someone skeptical before the election, but the fact that it was never released, and it is now after the election really makes it kind of silly to think that it's all a conspiracy against Trump.

I am sorry, but I do find it pathetic that the right continues to cover for a man who is clearly a Russian asset and is clearly doing Russian business within U.S. foreign policy. I think it is the ultimate in party politics at this point.

Why is Pence or Ryan not good enough?

I'll tell you the answer but it's the idea that Pence or Ryan isn't good enough that I'm asking about.

I apologize that my computer cursor is jumping around and there are misspellings in that answer and my look confusing.