The Russia Dossier

[LA Ute]

For me, one result of the Trump upheaval has been additional clarity regarding politics. I'm much more skeptical than ever about everyone involved -- Republicans, Democrats, the news media, bloggers, twitterers, you name them. I'm willing to call Trump the indecent, out-of-control manchild that he is. I'm willing to call the GOP Congress feckless. I'm willing to see scoundrels wherever they are, of whatever political persuasion. And scoundrels are everywhere in this story:

Clinton Campaign and Democratic Party Helped Pay for Russia Trump Dossier

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/us/politics/clinton-dnc-russia-dossier.html?smid=fb-share&referer=http://m.facebook.com

It's hard for me to see the good guys in this story. Fools and scoundrels everywhere. It's very dispiriting. Don't tell me Clinton or Trump or the Republicans or the Dems are victims. They're all just trying to victimize each other as they all roll around together in a giant mosh pit.

Not that I feel strongly about this or anything.

[LA Ute]

Here's the Washington Post story that broke this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-for-research-that-led-to-russia-dossier/2017/10/24/226fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_dossier-630pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e3e97b304deb

And just for balance here's the Washington Examiner:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-after-trump-dossier-revelation-fbi-is-next/article/2638540

[LA Ute]

New York Times reporters tweeting that they are shocked -- shocked! -- that Clinton campaign people lied to them about the Russia dossier.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/new-york-times-reporters-cry-foul-over-trump-dossier-pushback/article/2638531

[Diehard Ute]

Here's the Washington Post story that broke this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-for-research-that-led-to-russia-dossier/2017/10/24/226fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_dossier-630pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e3e97b304deb

And just for balance here's the Washington Examiner:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-after-trump-dossier-revelation-fbi-is-next/article/2638540

As a funny aside, Sarah Huckabee told reporters she wouldn’t use the Washington Post as a source.....4 hours later she tweeted the above article as a source haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[U-Ute]

It was given to Hillary and the DNC by Jeb Bush's people.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/report-trump-russia-dossier-originated-with-jeb-bush-super-pac

[LA Ute]

It was given to Hillary and the DNC by Jeb Bush's people.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/report-trump-russia-dossier-originated-with-jeb-bush-super-pac

Makes no difference, IMO. All campaigns do opposition research. The guys who paid the Perkins Coie law firm over $12 million during the campaign were the Clinton campaign and the DNC. They’re the ones who used the dossier and made it what it became.

[Rocker Ute]

Ah, Talking Points Memo, the InfoWars of the left.

Pro-tip: Wondering if your news source is faulty look at the ads they serve up (they are the same ones for the right and left sites). For instance at the bottom of this article: One easy trick to get 20/20 vision, Amazing cure for Alzheimer’s, one easy trick to avoid traffic tickets...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[U-Ute]

Ah, Talking Points Memo, the InfoWars of the left.

Pro-tip: Wondering if your news source is faulty look at the ads they serve up (they are the same ones for the right and left sites). For instance at the bottom of this article: One easy trick to get 20/20 vision, Amazing cure for Alzheimer’s, one easy trick to avoid traffic tickets...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just did a quick search to find it. There have been discussions on Twitter about it all year.

I am curious though, does it really matter who funded it? Like LA said, everyone does oppo research. I'm not sure why my dad is stroking out with glee over this new bit of information.

[LA Ute]

I am curious though, does it really matter who funded it? Like LA said, everyone does oppo research. I'm not sure why my dad is stroking out with glee over this new bit of information.

What fries me is not who funded it, but that they all lied about it. Maggie Haberman says the Clinton campaign lied to her about this for a year, “with sanctimony.” What were they hiding?

[sancho]

Pro-tip: Wondering if your news source is faulty look at the ads they serve up (they are the same ones for the right and left sites). For instance at the bottom of this article: One easy trick to get 20/20 vision, Amazing cure for Alzheimer’s, one easy trick to avoid traffic tickets...


I see those kinds of ads in the Washington Post and on SI.com. I think those are more or less everywhere.

[LA Ute]

A good piece by the always thoughtful David French:

The Russia Dossier Story: A Perfect Storm of Clinton Deception, Media Irresponsibility, and Democratic Moral Blindness
(http://The Russia Dossier Story: A Perfect Storm of Clinton Deception, Media Irresponsibility, and Democratic Moral Blindness Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453104/russia-dossier-story-clinton-lies-media-irresponsibility-democratic-moral-blindness)
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453104/russia-dossier-story-clinton-lies-media-irresponsibility-democratic-moral-blindness

[Rocker Ute]

I just did a quick search to find it. There have been discussions on Twitter about it all year.

I am curious though, does it really matter who funded it? Like LA said, everyone does oppo research. I'm not sure why my dad is stroking out with glee over this new bit of information.

Yeah, I don't get why it is a big deal. The bigger question is whether any of the items in the dossier are true. Seems yet another attempt to distract from that and discredit it. As my business partner likes to joke when he states something he'll add, "And it has the ADDED benefit of being true."

[LA Ute]

Yeah, I don't get why it is a big deal. The bigger question is whether any of the items in the dossier are true. Seems yet another attempt to distract from that and discredit it. As my business partner likes to joke when he states something he'll add, "And it has the ADDED benefit of being true."

I really don't think we know enough yet to know why it might be a big deal. That the Clinton/DNC camps lied about it for so long tells me that we need to dig into it more.

[U-Ute]

A good piece by the always thoughtful David French:

The Russia Dossier Story: A Perfect Storm of Clinton Deception, Media Irresponsibility, and Democratic Moral Blindness
(http://The Russia Dossier Story: A Perfect Storm of Clinton Deception, Media Irresponsibility, and Democratic Moral BlindnessRead more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453104/russia-dossier-story-clinton-lies-media-irresponsibility-democratic-moral-blindness)
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453104/russia-dossier-story-clinton-lies-media-irresponsibility-democratic-moral-blindness

Good thing she's not President. We wouldn't tolerate such blatent lying from our highest office.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Just imagine the outrage if Hillary's campaign used any of that info!

[Ma'ake]

I'm not surprised Hillary and the DNC lied about the Russia Dossier. They're politicians.

On the other side, what's happening under the GOP tent, the purification process underway that elevates a Roy Moore, while throwing Jeff Flake to the curb, is more concerning.

(Flake sensed that criticizing Trump would cost him his tenure as a Senator, but he felt he had to do it, to be able to sleep at night, kind of like LA Ute here, who seems to genuinely be aghast - or at least mildly concerned - about a lot of Trump's behavior.)

The rest of the GOP seems extremely averse to speaking about many of the morals they've historically championed, with Flake / Corker / Ryan / McConnell / Price / Spicer, et al, being examples of what can easily occur if you cross - or even appear to have crossed - Trump. "The Emperor has the most fantastic wardrobe, ever!"

For example, watch how meager the rhetoric will be under the GOP tent about the need for tax reform to not add to the debt. What do the Tea Partiers who didn't want to add to the debt ceiling think today? (Crickets.)

Republicans are increasingly unrecognizable from where they were just a year ago.

[LA Ute]

Getting back to the dossier, I'll repeat what I said a few months ago: If Trump or his team did collude with the Russian government to influence the US election, then the people should go to jail, including Trump. If it's fake, it's the most cynical political ploy in US history.

Ma'ake, I think the Democrats have a lot to worry about in their own party. By catering to the hard left they are destroying their own chances for electoral success and they are making Trump and the alt-right more successful.


The truth about the dossier is a reminder of what was and what was not at stake in last year's presidential contest. Ever since Trump's election, the moral posturing by some of America's sleaziest liars has become nearly unbearable.

In the time since the election, the Left has taken up the banner of "Resistance." Each time Trump makes another false, crude, bizarre, or offensive comment, they point back to the choice in November and frame the election as if falsehood conquered truth, darkness overpowered light, and an evil empire overcame good.

In the real world, however, the 2016 campaign was nothing like that. It was a contest between Trump's obvious and extensive disconnection from facts and Clinton's conniving, calculated, and self-serving lies that fit snugly into her 40-year career of corruption and falsehood.

Both Clinton's involvement in this sleazy dossier, and her team's coverup of wrongdoing, are par for the course she set back in Arkansas in the 1980s. Last year marked its latest chapter, when she evaded lawful FOIA requests and congressional inquiries by illegally hiding all of her work correspondence on a private server. But it was never just about the emails. It was about her belief that she is above the law, and about how this translated into action that was in keeping with all the mendacity of her long career to that point.

Not long before Clinton was heroically warning the nation about the threat posed by Russia, her husband was taking $500,000 from a Kremlin-tied bank for a single speech in Moscow. Long, long before that, she made a 10,000 percent profit trading cattle futures over a 10-month period, a feat impossible to achieve honestly that she still insists was no big deal. Somewhere in between those two events, she was seen enabling her husband's predations upon women, making the world safer for her dear friend and donor, Harvey Weinstein.

If you wonder why voters chose not to elect Clinton, even though it meant something as extraordinary as choosing Trump, you need look no further.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-trump-dossier-like-so-much-else-is-due-to-the-corruption-of-the-clintons/article/2638644

A plague on on all their houses, I say.

[NorthwestUteFan]

.

Ma'ake, I think the Democrats have a lot to worry about in their own party. By catering to the hard left they are destroying their own chances for electoral success and they are making Trump and the alt-right more successful.
.



The DNC is systematically marginalizing and refusing to fund progressive candidates and anybody who strays to the left of the DNC's right-of-center corporatist platform. Today's DNC is 1980s/1990s centrist Republican party, but with a bit of social libertarian support for LGBT right, minority rights, pro-choice, far less jingoistic nationalism, and with dramatically better economic policies. Hillary had more in common with Bob Dole than with FDR.

The DNC only seems to be 'hard left' because the beliefs and stances that several decades ago were so far-right radical that only 5%of Republicans espoused them, are now considered Mainstream. And they are following the Republicans rightward every day.

[Ma'ake]

Ma'ake, I think the Democrats have a lot to worry about in their own party. By catering to the hard left they are destroying their own chances for electoral success and they are making Trump and the alt-right more successful.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-trump-dossier-like-so-much-else-is-due-to-the-corruption-of-the-clintons/article/2638644

A plague on on all their houses, I say.

I completely agree on the Democrats pulling hard left, and setting themselves and the rest of up for either ongoing movement to an authoritarian dictatorship, a civil war, or something not good.

I tried to tamp down the anger among the Bernie supporters among the youth in my circles, talk them into accepting a highly imperfect moderate, and they pretty much all stayed home on election day. (This is all in Utah, so it's just an academic exercise, but probably not far off from what happened elsewhere.)

On the Dossier, my sense is as Republicans cower in not wanting to cross Trump, both the Senate and House investigations will whither, and Mueller will be fired, no later than February. McCain will keel over soon, so that obstacle will disappear, as quickly as Arizona can vote in a true patriot to replace the weak, misguided POW.

Early December might be a good time to axe Mueller and deep-six the investigation, with a condition to indict Hillary immediately "or else", and Trump will tell America the War on Christmas needs to be defeated, like ISIS, this year. "To defeat Islam, we need to defeat the enemies of Christmas here, first!"

Further out, if the polls look ugly for 2020, I give it at least a 1/3 chance Trump finds sufficient pretexts to suspend the elections, especially if the economy goes into recession and there are rumblings of unrest. Romney would fade into a pleasant past-tense "save the nation" wish, for what used to be mainstream Republicans and a lot of us Democrats.

Trump is 71 and may not make it that far, but by then the unraveling of the nation - including some of the things Bannon predicted in SoCal a few weeks ago to the Cali GOP convention - will be much further underway and maybe not reversible.

I wish I could be more optimistic about America.

(Now, hopefully the Utes can pick up a win in Eugene, but if they don't, it's just Ute nation that suffers, just a small fraction of what is actually important.)

[LA Ute]

I completely agree on the Democrats pulling hard left, and setting themselves and the rest of up for either ongoing movement to an authoritarian dictatorship, a civil war, or something not good.

I tried to tamp down the anger among the Bernie supporters among the youth in my circles, talk them into accepting a highly imperfect moderate, and they pretty much all stayed home on election day. (This is all in Utah, so it's just an academic exercise, but probably not far off from what happened elsewhere.)

On the Dossier, my sense is as Republicans cower in not wanting to cross Trump, both the Senate and House investigations will whither, and Mueller will be fired, no later than February. McCain will keel over soon, so that obstacle will disappear, as quickly as Arizona can vote in a true patriot to replace the weak, misguided POW.

Early December might be a good time to axe Mueller and deep-six the investigation, with a condition to indict Hillary immediately "or else", and Trump will tell America the War on Christmas needs to be defeated, like ISIS, this year. "To defeat Islam, we need to defeat the enemies of Christmas here, first!"

Further out, if the polls look ugly for 2020, I give it at least a 1/3 chance Trump finds sufficient pretexts to suspend the elections, especially if the economy goes into recession and there are rumblings of unrest. Romney would fade into a pleasant past-tense "save the nation" wish, for what used to be mainstream Republicans and a lot of us Democrats.

Trump is 71 and may not make it that far, but by then the unraveling of the nation - including some of the things Bannon predicted in SoCal a few weeks ago to the Cali GOP convention - will be much further underway and maybe not reversible.

I wish I could be more optimistic about America.

(Now, hopefully the Utes can pick up a win in Eugene, but if they don't, it's just Ute nation that suffers, just a small fraction of what is actually important.)

OK. I’m moving to Costa Rica. Nice, advanced democratic contrary with good weather. Short hop to the States, if it’s safe to return. Plus, I speak the language. (My wife will Just have to learn it.)

[Rocker Ute]

OK. I’m moving to Costa Rica. Nice, advanced democratic contrary with good weather. Short hop to the States, if it’s safe to return. Plus, I speak the language. (My wife will Just have to learn it.)

You speak Costa Rican? How is that different from Puerto Rican?

[LA Ute]

You speak Costa Rican? How is that different from Puerto Rican?

It’s kind of like Austrian.

[Ma'ake]

OK. I’m moving to Costa Rica. Nice, advanced democratic contrary with good weather. Short hop to the States, if it’s safe to return. Plus, I speak the language. (My wife will Just have to learn it.)

Estoy de accuerdo contigo que CR es alguno paiz muy interesante porque la clima, escuelas, una comunidad de otras norte americanos, etc. Mi madre fue ala Cape Bretton, Canada 3 semanas pasado, donde alguno parte de su familia vive antes van al Estados Unidos. Clima mas frio, pero Hermosa, sociedad pacifica.

Para tu esposa, estas de accuerdo conmigo que aprendiendo Espanol is mas facile que Ingles porque los leyes y escribiendo de la idioma hay mas consistense? (Lo siento para mi pobre Espanol, yo lo estudiaba en escuela, a la U, pero es facile para practicar lo porque hay mucha gente que hablar lo.)

[LA Ute]

WSJ editorial board calls for Mueller's resignation and accuses Clinton and DNC of collusion

http://www.businessinsider.com/wsj-mueller-trump-russia-dossier-collusion-clinton-2017-10

[UTEopia]

Estoy de accuerdo contigo que CR es alguno paiz muy interesante porque la clima, escuelas, una comunidad de otras norte americanos, etc. Mi madre fue ala Cape Bretton, Canada 3 semanas pasado, donde alguno parte de su familia vive antes van al Estados Unidos. Clima mas frio, pero Hermosa, sociedad pacifica.

Para tu esposa, estas de accuerdo conmigo que aprendiendo Espanol is mas facile que Ingles porque los leyes y escribiendo de la idioma hay mas consistense? (Lo siento para mi pobre Espanol, yo lo estudiaba en escuela, a la U, pero es facile para practicar lo porque hay mucha gente que hablar lo.)

Bueno. Necesitamos un lugar para los que hablan español. El super secreto sanctuary.

[UTEopia]

WSJ editorial board calls for Mueller's resignation and accuses Clinton and DNC of collusion

http://www.businessinsider.com/wsj-mueller-trump-russia-dossier-collusion-clinton-2017-10

Punch - counter-punch. If they just keep investigating everyone and everything, maybe the distraction will keep them from doing more things that are very harmful.

[LA Ute]

In my experience reading him, this writer is a conservative lawyer, but very careful with the facts. The timeline he lays out is important.


A Bipartisan Dossier of Collusion

http://amp.nationalreview.com/article/453205/steele-dossier-democrats-collusion-russia

[LA Ute]

Yes, I am posting a lot about this because I’m as angry about it as I’ve ever been about any political issue. Not because I like Trump — I don’t — but because if what this dirty trick on steroids has done to the country.

Sen. Susan Collins calls for DNC, Clinton campaign members to re-testify on dossier

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/sen-susan-collins-calls-for-dnc-clinton-campaign-members-to-re-testify-on-dossier/

The last time I was even close to this angry was when Nixon betrayed everyone who supported him and the entire country by engaging in the Watergate cover-up.

[LA Ute]

Last post on this today. I promise. This is from Carl Cannon, the Washington bureau chief for Real Clear Politics. He’s a reporter, not an op-ed writer:


Here’s the hell of it. The Russian government was interfering in the U.S. election. Among other scams, Russian Internet trolls spread anti-Hillary rumors and fake news. Yes, the DNC trolled Bernie Sanders, but this was a vastly more sophisticated effort. And while Russians are no more monolithic than Americans, if any part of the Steele dossier is accurate, Russia was playing both sides of the fence. But why?

It was while trying to discern Russia’s motives—and future course of action—that Winston Churchill invoked his “riddle wrapped in mystery inside an enigma” line. That’s the famous part of the quote. There was more, however. “But perhaps there is a key,” Churchill added. “That key is Russian national interest.”

In the end we may learn that Vladimir Putin’s goal is simply setting Americans at one another’s throats. If so, he seems to have succeeded. Yet, one wonders: to what aim? Is Russia such a basket case that Putin and his minions can only feel superior by watching us hammer away at each other? If so, perhaps Republicans and Democrats can be induced not to cooperate.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/10/29/how_hillary_and_the_democrats_played_russia_card_1 35395.html

[LA Ute]

I lied. This is from the Washington Post’s fact checker, Glenn Kessler:

The ‘dossier’ and the uranium deal: A guide to the latest allegations

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/10/29/the-dossier-and-the-uranium-deal-a-guide-to-the-latest-allegations/

A good breakdown of a complex situation.

[Rocker Ute]

So help me to understand this LA.

Republicans or Democrats of course are doing research on all of their political opponents, in any form. This is as old as Democracy where you are trying to find information about your opponent so you can defeat them.

So everybody is hiring firms to dig up dirt. I’m sure every presidential candidate did this.

Along the way comes a rumor or request to look into Trump’s involvement with Russia. This would be a natural question for Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton. It is no secret that Trump had business dealings with Russians. So those digging up dirt hire former British Intelligence with connections to Russia to dig up dirt.

As one article put it, a dossier is basically high grade gossip. So this guy finds some salacious gossip on Trump that was intended or should have become the basis for more investigation.

But to make matters more interesting the dossier alleges that there was collusion with Trump and Russians which matches what is basically indisputable evidence that the Russians did interfere in the election.

Further, Comey as FBI director briefed Trump about the dossier and the allegations in it.

So what I don’t understand is why is there controversy on who hired the investigation? The question still remains: Are any of the allegations in the dossier true?

It doesn’t appear that the dossier had any benefit for Dems in the election, as it wasn’t known about until after the election.

So are you mad at the DNC over this? If so, why?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

So help me to understand this LA.

Republicans or Democrats of course are doing research on all of their political opponents, in any form. This is as old as Democracy where you are trying to find information about your opponent so you can defeat them.

So everybody is hiring firms to dig up dirt. I’m sure every presidential candidate did this.

Along the way comes a rumor or request to look into Trump’s involvement with Russia. This would be a natural question for Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton. It is no secret that Trump had business dealings with Russians. So those digging up dirt hire former British Intelligence with connections to Russia to dig up dirt.

As one article put it, a dossier is basically high grade gossip. So this guy finds some salacious gossip on Trump that was intended or should have become the basis for more investigation.

But to make matters more interesting the dossier alleges that there was collusion with Trump and Russians which matches what is basically indisputable evidence that the Russians did interfere in the election.

Further, Comey as FBI director briefed Trump about the dossier and the allegations in it.

So what I don’t understand is why is there controversy on who hired the investigation? The question still remains: Are any of the allegations in the dossier true?

It doesn’t appear that the dossier had any benefit for Dems in the election, as it wasn’t known about until after the election.

So are you mad at the DNC over this? If so, why?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This guy lays it out.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453205/steele-dossier-democrats-collusion-russia

[LA Ute]

The Trump Dossier Dam Is Breaking

A U.S. political party applied to a hostile power for lurid stories about a domestic opponent.

By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.
Oct. 27, 2017 6:37 p.m. ET


’Tis the season of tossing out nondisclosure agreements. Victims and employees of Harvey Weinstein clamor to be released from their NDAs so they can talk about his abuse. Perkins Coie, the Washington law firm for the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton campaign, showed the way by voluntarily releasing Fusion GPS from its duty to remain mum on Democrats who funded the notorious Trump dossier.

May the example catch on.

Journalists who investigated the Trump dossier now say their Democratic sources lied to them. That’s already a start. Please, Democrats, release journalists from their confidentiality agreements so they can tell us more about your lying.

The revelations provide new context for Harry Reid’s “October surprise,” his attempt 10 days before Election Day to lever the dossier’s allegations into the press with a public letter to then-FBI Director James Comey accusing him of withholding “explosive information.”

Mr. Reid knows how the responsible press works. Implausible, scurrilous and unsupported allegations are not reportable, but a government official making public reference to such allegations is reportable.

Mr. Reid, though, failed to mention his party’s role in concocting the allegations, much less that the manner of its doing so left him no reason to suppose the charges were anything but tall tales spun by Russian intelligence officials in response to danglings of Democratic money.

This is a completely novel tactic in U.S. politics, applying to a hostile foreign power for lurid stories about a domestic opponent. Mr. Reid, please tell us more about your role.

Let’s also hear from Adam Schiff, top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

He claimed on TV to have “circumstantial” and “more than circumstantial” evidence of Trump collusion with Russia. In the event, what he delivered in a committee hearing was a litany of routine, innocuous business and diplomatic contacts between Trump associates and Russian citizens, interspersed with claims from the Trump dossier.

He failed to mention, though, that the Trump dossier was manufactured by Democrats paying a D.C. law firm to pay a D.C. “research” firm to pay a retired British spook to pay unknown, unidentified Russians to tell stories about Mr. Trump, in reckless disregard for whether the stories were true.

Mr. Schiff, a Harvard Law graduate, will know the phrase is not our coinage. “Reckless disregard” is the standard by which the Supreme Court says, even in a country that bends over backward to protect the press at the expense of public figures, the press can be held liable for defamatory untruths about a public figure.

Even so, journalists are presumed to know their sources, not to have paid a long chain of surrogates to elicit sensational claims from perfect strangers, let alone anonymous agents of a foreign regime with a known habit of disinformation. It is impossible to exaggerate how reckless Democrats have been under this standard. If they found the Trump dossier on the sidewalk, they’d be in a better ethical position now. Let’s hear what Mr. Schiff knew and when he knew it.

Finally, let us hear from James Comey.

The Trump dossier was reckless and irresponsible in the extreme, but only consequential after Election Day. It didn’t prevent Mr. Trump from becoming president.

In the new spirit of non-non-disclosure, it’s time for Mr. Comey to tell us about the Russian intelligence scam that may really have changed the election outcome.

In closed hearings, he reportedly acknowledged that his intervention in the Hillary Clinton email case was prompted by what is now understood to have been planted, fake Russian intelligence. The fake Russian intelligence purported to discuss a nonexistent email between then-DNC chief Debbie Wasserman Schultz and George Soros-employed activist Leonard Benardo.

This led directly to Mr. Comey’s second intervention, reopening the case 11 days before Election Day, a shocking development that appears now to have moved enough votes into Mr. Trump’s column to account for his win.

At the time, the press was all too happy to blame Bill Clinton for his wife’s loss when Mr. Comey, for nonclassified consumption, cited Mr. Clinton’s tarmac meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch as the reason for his intervention.

The press is silent now. The new story satisfies nobody’s agenda, and only makes the FBI look foolish. Mr. Trump is not eager to hear his victory portrayed as an FBI-precipitated accident. Democrats cling to their increasingly washed-out theory of Trump-Russia collusion.

And yet, if Mr. Comey’s antic intervention in response to Russian disinformation inadvertently led to Mr. Trump becoming president, this was the most consequential outcome by far.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-dossier-dam-is-breaking-1509143847

[Rocker Ute]

Did the incredibly long Trump thread get killed or are my site navigation skills being exposed?

Either way, as expected Manafort and Gates get arrested in what is likely an attempt to get them to roll on higher ups in the Trump campaign. The actual relevance of the dossier may never matter (trying to bring it back on topic). Then Papadopoulos pleads guilty to lying about his involvement with Russian officials.

[LA Ute]

Did the incredibly long Trump thread get killed or are my site navigation skills being exposed?

Either way, as expected Manafort and Gates get arrested in what is likely an attempt to get them to roll on higher ups in the Trump campaign. The actual relevance of the dossier may never matter (trying to bring it back on topic). Then Papadopoulos pleads guilty to lying about his involvement with Russian officials.

Whenever a special prosecutor is appointed, you can bet that he or she will find someone to charge with a crime. Usually at a minimum there is someone who lies to the FBI during the investigation. This is often about something totally unrelated to the underlying crime being investigated. Scooter Libby, for example. Federal prosecutors have tremendous power. It’s actually pretty scary.

[Two Utes]

Whenever a special prosecutor is appointed, you can bet that he or she will find someone to charge with a crime. Usually at a minimum there is someone who lies to the FBI during the investigation. This is often about something totally unrelated to the underlying crime being investigated. Scooter Libby, for example. Federal prosecutors have tremendous power. It’s actually pretty scary.


So, so true. if there is a special prosecutor, someone is going to get charged. And if you get charged, you are going to plead out or go to trial. There are no withdrawals of all charges by the federal government. They don't make mistakes. Ever. Ask them.

If the feds are coming after you, you are not going to be in a happy place. It is frightening for those charged.

[LA Ute]

Here are all the Papadopoulos papers.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/george-papadopoulos-stipulation-and-plea-agreement

It will be interesting to see where this leads. In the legacy news media and on lefty sites (sorry for repeating myself) there’s breathless anticipation of higher-ups being charged based on this guy’s testimony. (Also, the Clinton and DNC involvement in the Russia dossier, and all their lying about it, are described as absolutely meaningless. That can’t be true.)

On the other hand, on conservative commentary sites the Papadopolous plea agreement is a big nothing burger. That can’t be true either.

This is by a a former DOJ career prosecutor who now writes for conservative publications:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/453264/donald-trump-george-papadopoulos-indictment-exculpatory-trump

He makes some good points but you know what they say about putting lipstick 💄 on a pig.

:snacking:

[Irving Washington]

Yes, I am posting a lot about this because I’m as angry about it as I’ve ever been about any political issue. Not because I like Trump — I don’t — but because if what this dirty trick on steroids has done to the country.

Sen. Susan Collins calls for DNC, Clinton campaign members to re-testify on dossier

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/sen-susan-collins-calls-for-dnc-clinton-campaign-members-to-re-testify-on-dossier/

The last time I was even close to this angry was when Nixon betrayed everyone who supported him and the entire country by engaging in the Watergate cover-up.
Ah, Watergate, the good old days. I don't remember you being angry as it was unfolding.

[LA Ute]

Ah, Watergate, the good old days. I don't remember you being angry as it was unfolding.

I was mad at that point, but at the mean old Democrats who were trying to do poor Nixon in. He resigned while I was on my mission. When I got back in 1975 I read Theodore White’s “Breach of Faith” and felt very betrayed by Tricky Dick. I had been a true believer.

[Ma'ake]

Fusion GPS calls for full disclosure of their firm's testimony to Congress about the Steele Dossier.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/first-read-s-morning-clips-fusion-gps-speaks-out-n834231

We're all in the dark about exactly what Mueller is up to - understandably, he's a prosecutor working his way up the food chain - but is there any good reason why Congress is sitting on much of what they've found out? Especially if the Republicans decide to wrap up their investigation?

[LA Ute]

Fusion GPS calls for full disclosure of their firm's testimony to Congress about the Steele Dossier.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/first-read-s-morning-clips-fusion-gps-speaks-out-n834231

We're all in the dark about exactly what Mueller is up to - understandably, he's a prosecutor working his way up the food chain - but is there any good reason why Congress is sitting on much of what they've found out? Especially if the Republicans decide to wrap up their investigation?

I think everything should come out. Everything. What do you think about the FBI's refusal to cooperate in providing information about the Russia dossier?

A Moment of Contempt (https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-moment-of-contempt-1514939617)

Justice and the FBI continue to flout House subpoenas.


I personally am sick of all the gamesmanship and would love to see all the information, not matter how ugly it is for anyone. The people deserve to know.


The House Intelligence Committee has set a deadline of Wednesday for the Department of Justice and FBI to turn over documents related to the Christopher Steele dossier purporting to investigate ties between the Trump campaign and Russia. If they fail to comply, Speaker Paul Ryan will need to back up Congress’s institutional prerogatives and hold the individuals responsible to contempt proceedings and possible impeachment.

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray have had the subpoenas since Aug. 24, but they have responded with excuses, delays and misdirection. The Justice Department has refused to provide Congress with the most basic documents demanded under the subpoenas. These include reports detailing the FBI’s interactions with sources such as Mr. Steele, who was hired by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which was funded by associates of the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Justice also refuses to make available crucial witnesses, including FBI agent Peter Strzok (a lead investigator in the Trump-Russia probe), former Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr (whose wife worked for Fusion GPS) and FBI attorney James Baker (former FBI Director Jim Comey’s right-hand man). Justice is also still sitting on months of anti-Trump text messages between Mr. Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

This isn’t acceptable, and neither Justice nor the FBI has offered a valid reason for their resistance. Senior Intelligence Committee members and staff are cleared to read classified information, and Congress has the constitutional authority to oversee the executive branch whose offices it funds. The excuse that such requests interfere with a Justice Department Inspector General probe wouldn’t pass a middle-grade separation-of-powers exam.

A contempt brawl would not be fun, but Congress has already abandoned too much power to the executive. Mr. Ryan risks turning oversight into a power without enforcement ability. A Republican Congress holding Republican office-holders responsible for flouting subpoenas would send a useful signal across the government. And it might give President Trump or White House Counsel Don McGahn new incentive to intervene with Justice and order compliance.

Appeared in the January 3, 2018, print edition.