valleyview
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,816
Jun 27, 2014 18:41:26 GMT
|
Post by valleyview on Oct 25, 2017 1:09:28 GMT
They say that Clinton's campaign and the DNC paid for it.
I'm saddened by what our politics have become. I guess that this is a report that will not be called fake by Fox.
Gloat away, those who will, but at least you can't say the news is being ignored.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 25, 2017 1:25:48 GMT
It didn't start with Clinton campaign or the DNC--
(From the article)
"Fusion GPS's work researching Trump began during the Republican presidential primaries, when the GOP donor paid for the firm to investigate the real estate magnate's background.
Fusion GPS did not start off looking at Trump's Russia ties but quickly realized that those relationships were extensive, according to the people familiar with the matter.
When the Republican donor stopped paying for the research, Elias, acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC, agreed to pay for the work to continue. The Democrats paid for research, including by Fusion GPS, because of concerns that little was known about Trump and his business interests, according to the people familiar with the matter.
Those people said that it is standard practice for political campaigns to use law firms to hire outside researchers to ensure their work is protected by attorney-client and work-product privileges.
The Clinton campaign paid Perkins Coie $5.6 million in legal fees from June 2015 to December 2016, according to campaign finance records, and the DNC paid the firm $3.6 million in "legal and compliance consulting'' since November 2015 — though it's impossible to tell from the filings how much of that work was for other legal matters and how much of it related to Fusion GPS.
At no point, the people said, did the Clinton campaign or the DNC direct Steele's activities. They described him as a Fusion GPS subcontractor."
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Oct 25, 2017 1:27:59 GMT
Why does it matter who paid for it the research? So the DNC and Clinton campaign paid a law firm to do opposition research, as literally every major political candidate does. Help me understand why this is something to be concerned about. And if it is, are we equally concerned that (according to the WaPo article), an undisclosed Republican candidate began paying this law firm for research first, and the DNC/Clinton campaign only took over when the Republican dropped out of the race? Oppo research, digging up dirt on an opponent, is as old as the hills.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Oct 25, 2017 1:38:41 GMT
I don’t (and never did) care about who paid for it. Of course all sides do oppo research. What I care about is what it says and that it is accurate. ETA to clarify the above for mom26, I would most certainly care if the information was sought illegally. It is a given (or should be) that I don't care who paid for the dossier, assuming it did not involve Russians or other non-U.S. operatives with whom it would illegal to collude.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,006
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Oct 25, 2017 1:47:45 GMT
If it wasn't Jeb Bush who initiated that research or someone related to the Bush family/campaign, I'll eat my hat (that I'm not wearing btw.) Why exactly does it matter who paid for the opposition research? Does that somehow make the contents of the dossier less true?
If Fusion was paid for by the forced labor of a thousand tiny blue smurfs toiling away in diamond mines in Mozambique which diamonds were then sold to finance poppy fields in Afghanistan before the profits were laundered through weapons trade benefiting ISIS in Yemen all before hitting the fake designer purse market in Chinatown, it wouldn't change anything about whether or not Donald Trump is compromised by the Russian government because of his reprehensible and criminal conduct. You should ask yourself, very seriously, why anyone is trying to get you to focus on how this information was paid for vs. whether or not this information was accurate.
|
|
jayfab
Drama Llama
procastinating
Posts: 5,584
Jun 26, 2014 21:55:15 GMT
|
Post by jayfab on Oct 25, 2017 1:56:29 GMT
I too don't care who paid for it. I'd rather know of the accuracy.
|
|
|
Post by mellyw on Oct 25, 2017 2:02:27 GMT
I'm not clear on why this is a breaking story with WaPo, and honestly didn't bother to read it when they sent me the alert.
It's been known for months that the dossier started as GOP opposition research. And like Sarah, I've always suspected Jeb Bush/Bush family ties. Just taking into account the years the Bush family was in office, what they may have heard/seen in relation to the Trump family, add in Poppy Bush the old spymaster, don't think it's a stretch to suspect them.
Honestly, the question to me would be, why the hell wouldn't the Clinton campaign have picked up where the GOP left off? Wouldn't seem prudent. And for you old timers like me, your welcome for the Poppy Bush reference there.
|
|
|
Post by mom26 on Oct 25, 2017 2:02:49 GMT
I don’t (and never did) care about who paid for it. Of course all sides do oppo research. What I care about is what it says and that it is accurate. I'm happy to see this sentiment expressed. When Don Jr went through the wringer for oppo research, I couldn't figure out what the issue was. Now I see it should never have been one and that left and right agree on that. Whew!
|
|
|
Post by sabrinae on Oct 25, 2017 2:06:17 GMT
I don’t (and never did) care about who paid for it. Of course all sides do oppo research. What I care about is what it says and that it is accurate. I'm happy to see this sentiment expressed. When Don Jr went through the wringer for oppo research, I couldn't figure out what the issue was. Now I see it should never have been one and that left and right agree on that. Whew! . The issue isn’t opposition research. The issue with Don Jr is colluding with a foreign government for opposition research
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 16, 2024 10:06:41 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2017 2:09:47 GMT
It started w/a GOP - rumored to be Jeb, as stated above - and then was picked up and carried on by the DNC and HRC as "oppo research" as is done in any high-stakes campaign.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,006
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Oct 25, 2017 2:10:49 GMT
Because you are somehow confused about the difference between opposition research and collusion with an enemy government? Easy mistake I guess.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 25, 2017 2:13:23 GMT
Because you are somehow confused about the difference between opposition research and collusion with an enemy government? Easy mistake I guess. You silly liberal--you know it's okay if you're a republican!!
|
|
rodeomom
Pearl Clutcher
Refupee # 380 "I don't have to run fast, I just have to run faster than you."
Posts: 3,670
Location: Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma
Jun 25, 2014 23:34:38 GMT
|
Post by rodeomom on Oct 25, 2017 2:13:37 GMT
I don’t (and never did) care about who paid for it. Of course all sides do oppo research. What I care about is what it says and that it is accurate. I'm happy to see this sentiment expressed. When Don Jr went through the wringer for oppo research, I couldn't figure out what the issue was. Now I see it should never have been one and that left and right agree on that. Whew! Your kidding right?
|
|
|
Post by mom26 on Oct 25, 2017 2:14:36 GMT
I'm happy to see this sentiment expressed. When Don Jr went through the wringer for oppo research, I couldn't figure out what the issue was. Now I see it should never have been one and that left and right agree on that. Whew! Your kidding right? Nope. I am truly happy.
|
|
|
Post by mom26 on Oct 25, 2017 2:15:30 GMT
I'm happy to see this sentiment expressed. When Don Jr went through the wringer for oppo research, I couldn't figure out what the issue was. Now I see it should never have been one and that left and right agree on that. Whew! . The issue isn’t opposition research. The issue with Don Jr is colluding with a foreign government for opposition research And the difference is....?
|
|
|
Post by sabrinae on Oct 25, 2017 2:21:03 GMT
. The issue isn’t opposition research. The issue with Don Jr is colluding with a foreign government for opposition research And the difference is....? If you don’t or can’t see the problem with colluding with a foreign government, including the fact that it is illegal, then I don’t know what to say to you.
|
|
|
Post by mom26 on Oct 25, 2017 2:28:16 GMT
And the difference is....? If you don’t or can’t see the problem with colluding with a foreign government, including the fact that it is illegal, then I don’t know what to say to you. Oh, I totally get the problem with colluding with a foreign government. I just believe some are refusing to see that their side does it too. Using the excuse that 'as long as it's accurate' is both humorous and alarming.
|
|
rodeomom
Pearl Clutcher
Refupee # 380 "I don't have to run fast, I just have to run faster than you."
Posts: 3,670
Location: Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma
Jun 25, 2014 23:34:38 GMT
|
Post by rodeomom on Oct 25, 2017 2:36:16 GMT
If you don’t or can’t see the problem with colluding with a foreign government, including the fact that it is illegal, then I don’t know what to say to you. Oh, I totally get the problem with colluding with a foreign government. I just believe some are refusing to see that their side does it too. Using the excuse that 'as long as it's accurate' is both humorous and alarming. You have evidence that Hillary colluded with a enemy foreign government? I'd like to see that.
|
|
|
Post by busy on Oct 25, 2017 2:40:11 GMT
I don’t (and never did) care about who paid for it. Of course all sides do oppo research. What I care about is what it says and that it is accurate. I'm happy to see this sentiment expressed. When Don Jr went through the wringer for oppo research, I couldn't figure out what the issue was. Now I see it should never have been one and that left and right agree on that. Whew! There is a big difference between standard oppo research and "oppo research" that is the result of collaboration with a foreign government.
|
|
|
Post by busy on Oct 25, 2017 2:46:55 GMT
If you don’t or can’t see the problem with colluding with a foreign government, including the fact that it is illegal, then I don’t know what to say to you. Oh, I totally get the problem with colluding with a foreign government. I just believe some are refusing to see that their side does it too. Using the excuse that 'as long as it's accurate' is both humorous and alarming. The Clinton campaign and the DNC hired US firms to conduct the research. They did not collude with a foreign government. Have you even read the article? Research which, by the way... The FBI deemed the information being collected important enough to continue to pay for it after the campaign.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Oct 25, 2017 2:48:27 GMT
Oh, I totally get the problem with colluding with a foreign government. I just believe some are refusing to see that their side does it too. Using the excuse that 'as long as it's accurate' is both humorous and alarming. The Clinton campaign and the DNC hired US firms to conduct the research. They did not collude with a foreign government. Have you even read the article? Research which, by the way... The FBI deemed the information being collected important enough to continue to pay for it after the campaign. Hmmmm. I’m sure that had nothing to do with Comey’s firing.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Oct 25, 2017 2:57:27 GMT
If you don’t or can’t see the problem with colluding with a foreign government, including the fact that it is illegal, then I don’t know what to say to you. Oh, I totally get the problem with colluding with a foreign government. I just believe some are refusing to see that their side does it too. Using the excuse that 'as long as it's accurate' is both humorous and alarming. Do you seriously not understand the difference? I know the others have said the same thing already, but I’m the one you quoted. Do you need me to explain the difference between oppo research and collusion with a foreign government to you? Otherwise, you can giggle about the whole thing all you like, but it just kind of makes you look foolish.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 25, 2017 3:08:57 GMT
If you don’t or can’t see the problem with colluding with a foreign government, including the fact that it is illegal, then I don’t know what to say to you. Oh, I totally get the problem with colluding with a foreign government. I just believe some are refusing to see that their side does it too. Using the excuse that 'as long as it's accurate' is both humorous and alarming. It's hilarious that you think that's what happened. Where exactly did the HRC campaign collide with a foreign government to get her elected/meddle in the election. What's alarming is that you gaslight your way into "both sides did it too"....um, no, they did not! I'm not aware that Chelsea Clinton arranged meeting with Russians to get her mom elected.
|
|
|
Post by mom26 on Oct 25, 2017 3:17:44 GMT
Oh, I totally get the problem with colluding with a foreign government. I just believe some are refusing to see that their side does it too. Using the excuse that 'as long as it's accurate' is both humorous and alarming. You have evidence that Hillary colluded with a enemy foreign government? I'd like to see that. I, personally, do not have evidence. There are, however, some interesting findings in the Mueller investigation regarding Hillary and the Uranium One deal with Russia.
|
|
|
Post by mom26 on Oct 25, 2017 3:21:07 GMT
Oh, I totally get the problem with colluding with a foreign government. I just believe some are refusing to see that their side does it too. Using the excuse that 'as long as it's accurate' is both humorous and alarming. Do you seriously not understand the difference? I know the others have said the same thing already, but I’m the one you quoted. Do you need me to explain the difference between oppo research and collusion with a foreign government to you? Otherwise, you can giggle about the whole thing all you like, but it just kind of makes you look foolish. Trust me, I am not 'giggling'. I am both bemused and alarmed at the purposeful blindness and hypocrisy, though. In the end, you may find the ones looking foolish are not going to be who you expect.
|
|
|
Post by busy on Oct 25, 2017 3:21:31 GMT
You have evidence that Hillary colluded with a enemy foreign government? I'd like to see that. I, personally, do not have evidence. There are, however, some interesting findings in the Mueller investigation regarding Hillary and the Uranium One deal with Russia. I think you're getting your conspiracy theories screwed up. If you're going to make Breitbartian accusations, at least don't mix the narratives.
|
|
rodeomom
Pearl Clutcher
Refupee # 380 "I don't have to run fast, I just have to run faster than you."
Posts: 3,670
Location: Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma
Jun 25, 2014 23:34:38 GMT
|
Post by rodeomom on Oct 25, 2017 3:29:33 GMT
Oh I see you have been watching fox. And the source that said that Manafort was working with the Podesta group who were in collusion with Russia. And that thats really what Mueller is investigating.
|
|
|
Post by mom26 on Oct 25, 2017 3:32:30 GMT
I, personally, do not have evidence. There are, however, some interesting findings in the Mueller investigation regarding Hillary and the Uranium One deal with Russia. I think you're getting your conspiracy theories screwed up. If you're going to make Breitbartian accusations, at least don't mix the narratives. Yes ma'am. Whatever you say.
|
|
rodeomom
Pearl Clutcher
Refupee # 380 "I don't have to run fast, I just have to run faster than you."
Posts: 3,670
Location: Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma
Jun 25, 2014 23:34:38 GMT
|
Post by rodeomom on Oct 25, 2017 3:33:51 GMT
Fox is also reporting that the Dossier has info in it that has been proven to be lies.
|
|
|
Post by busy on Oct 25, 2017 3:35:43 GMT
I think you're getting your conspiracy theories screwed up. If you're going to make Breitbartian accusations, at least don't mix the narratives. Yes ma'am. Whatever you say. Mueller isn't investigating the Uranium One business AT ALL. He is part of what's being investigated.
|
|