Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 17:01     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:Seems Bruce Ohr was feeding information to the FBI from Steele to get the FISA warrant after he was fired by the FBI. Simpson was in on it too. The FBI knew it as well. We have the emails.

Who’s “we”? I’m sure you have a lovely conspiracy all coked up.
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 16:33     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Seems Bruce Ohr was feeding information to the FBI from Steele to get the FISA warrant after he was fired by the FBI. Simpson was in on it too. The FBI knew it as well. We have the emails.
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 16:00     Subject: Re:Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:OP here. As usual this conversation has turned into "Clinton is just as bad" vs. "No she isn't!"

Though I have strong feelings on the above, I'd like to bring it back to the initial question, which is, you think the Russians helped Trump for free/ for nothing? No way. Nobody believes that. So, what are they getting or have they gotten in return? And what does that mean for Americans, and our allies?

To me, this is the worst part of all. Breaking the law is inherently bad, especially for a President, yes. But WORSE is breaking a law and selling out your country in the process.

You answered your own question. He’s sold us out. He’s tried to get rid of sanctions imposed by Obama on Russia (cue the exhausted one line that Obama said on a hot mic). He’s tried to scuttle new sanctions. I think he gave back those two Russian compounds. He’s try to get us out of NATO, he’s tried to wreck any post-WWII alliance in which the absence of such an alliance would create a wonderful chance for China and Russia to fill the void. He’s sold visas. He’s allowed Russian intelligence into the Oval Office. And we all saw him giving Putin a lap dance in Helsinki. And that’s a partial list. He’s a traitor. As the GOP has done NOTHING to meaningfully stop him, they too, are traitors.
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 15:18     Subject: Re:Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:Interesting piece in The Hill.

This part is pertinent to this discussion:

If the Russians had evidence of criminal conduct by Hillary Clinton, her campaign or her family foundation, the Trump campaign had every reason to want to know about it. That is precisely what the Clinton campaign spent millions to do, talking to Russians and other foreigners investigating Trump. Indeed, under this interpretation of federal election laws, Clinton and her surrogates would be equally guilty in using a former foreign spy to gather information on Trump from foreign sources, including Russians.


http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/400609-if-trump-meeting-is-illegal-then-clinton-dossier-is-criminal-too#.W2nR54gpbYU.twitter


Splitting hairs, but FusionGPS was paid for research and it paid for Steel. Steel was not giving anything to FusionGPS for free and didn't expect anything in return except for compensation for time spent. Even if ultimately, the Clinton Campaign paid for the research, there was nothing other than a straight business relationship.

The Russians were GIVING (for free) stolen material to the Trump Campaign. In return, Russia expect(s/ed) the lifting of sanctions.

The actions of Trump and Russia were specifically noted in the Steel Dossier. The Rosneft deal went through and to this day, there is no public accounting for any of the ownership or fees associated with the transaction. We do know that Trump has not implemented the sanctions on Russia as passed by the Congress; we do know Trump has tried to lift sanctions on Russia and we do know that Trump has conducted a foreign policy that has been entirely beneficial to Russian interests.

See the difference?
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 14:38     Subject: Re:Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:OP here. As usual this conversation has turned into "Clinton is just as bad" vs. "No she isn't!"

Though I have strong feelings on the above, I'd like to bring it back to the initial question, which is, you think the Russians helped Trump for free/ for nothing? No way. Nobody believes that. So, what are they getting or have they gotten in return? And what does that mean for Americans, and our allies?

To me, this is the worst part of all. Breaking the law is inherently bad, especially for a President, yes. But WORSE is breaking a law and selling out your country in the process.


Your post assumes so much and you just want to discuss assumption. We are providing facts
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 14:31     Subject: Re:Why accepting help from Russia is bad
OP here. As usual this conversation has turned into "Clinton is just as bad" vs. "No she isn't!"

Though I have strong feelings on the above, I'd like to bring it back to the initial question, which is, you think the Russians helped Trump for free/ for nothing? No way. Nobody believes that. So, what are they getting or have they gotten in return? And what does that mean for Americans, and our allies?

To me, this is the worst part of all. Breaking the law is inherently bad, especially for a President, yes. But WORSE is breaking a law and selling out your country in the process.
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 14:22     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How do you explain the many cash payments the FBI gave Steele during the campaign?

Because Steele provided intel to the FBI over the years after her left the British government.

How do you explain the many Russian connections in the Trump and GOP spheres? How do you explain that a Republican started the dossier? How do you explain that a Republican got it into the FBI’s hands? Why are you cool with GOP treason?


The payments were made during the campaign.
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 14:10     Subject: Re:Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Interesting piece in The Hill.

This part is pertinent to this discussion:

If the Russians had evidence of criminal conduct by Hillary Clinton, her campaign or her family foundation, the Trump campaign had every reason to want to know about it. That is precisely what the Clinton campaign spent millions to do, talking to Russians and other foreigners investigating Trump. Indeed, under this interpretation of federal election laws, Clinton and her surrogates would be equally guilty in using a former foreign spy to gather information on Trump from foreign sources, including Russians.


http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/400609-if-trump-meeting-is-illegal-then-clinton-dossier-is-criminal-too#.W2nR54gpbYU.twitter
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 13:59     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:How do you explain the many cash payments the FBI gave Steele during the campaign?


Steele received money because he assisted the FBI with various investigations over the years, including the FIFA investigation, after he left British intelligence. It's right there in the NBC article you posted. And, in any case, Steele getting paid for providing useful information to law enforcement has nothing to do with whether or not someone else took information from a foreign national or government in violation of US law.
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 13:50     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:How do you explain the many cash payments the FBI gave Steele during the campaign?

Because Steele provided intel to the FBI over the years after her left the British government.

How do you explain the many Russian connections in the Trump and GOP spheres? How do you explain that a Republican started the dossier? How do you explain that a Republican got it into the FBI’s hands? Why are you cool with GOP treason?
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 13:45     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:cite evidence proving that the FBI made cash payments to Steele. Actual evidence, not Alex Jones/Sean Hannity BS.


NBC news good enough?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/fbi-releases-documents-showing-payments-trump-dossier-author-steele-n897506?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

https://investigaterussia.org/media/2018-08-03/fbi-releases-steele-payment-documents

Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 10:43     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
cite evidence proving that the FBI made cash payments to Steele. Actual evidence, not Alex Jones/Sean Hannity BS.
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 10:29     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:That’s easy.

Because it’s illegal. Full stop.

No matter how many false alanlogies you make to what Hillary did, which was different and legal, it does not make the Trump Tower meeting any less illegal.


What happened that was illegal? Genuinely need an explanation...





It is illegal for a campaign to receive a contribution or something of value from a foreign individual or entity.

Here’s what the FEC says: https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate-taking-receipts/who-can-and-cant-contribute/


Court have clearly stated information (like opposition research) is something of value. This should be obvious. A campaign would and campaigns do pay big bucks for people to conduct opposition research. You can donate money used for oppo research. Or, you can cut out the middleman, and just give him the research.

Don Jr. went to the Trump Tower meeting. He know it was with a foreign national, with ties to a foreign government. And now Trump says he went with the purpose of getting oppo research from a foreign government.

Even if he got nothing (which is not a given, because of the timing of Wikileaks), Don Jr, attempted to violate campaign finance law.

The attempt does not have to be successful to be illegal. Just like someone does not have to die for you to be charged with attempted murder.

Game, set, match. Mueller.

HRC/the Steele Dossier was different because it was paid for at fair market value. And because Steele was a CIA asset. But even if the dossier was also illegal, it does not make Don Jr (and Kushner and Manafort) innocent. It just means Hillary was guilty too.


Also, Steele was not working on behalf of the British (or any other foreign government) when he produced the dossier. He was initially hired by someone on the R side, and then the D campaign paid him for the dossier. But he was acting as a private citizen when he produced it--he has his own consulting business. And yes, it would have been illegal to accept the dossier for free from Steele.


How do you explain the many cash payments the FBI gave Steele during the campaign?
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 10:02     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:That’s easy.

Because it’s illegal. Full stop.

No matter how many false alanlogies you make to what Hillary did, which was different and legal, it does not make the Trump Tower meeting any less illegal.


What happened that was illegal? Genuinely need an explanation...





It is illegal for a campaign to receive a contribution or something of value from a foreign individual or entity.

Here’s what the FEC says: https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/candidate-taking-receipts/who-can-and-cant-contribute/


Court have clearly stated information (like opposition research) is something of value. This should be obvious. A campaign would and campaigns do pay big bucks for people to conduct opposition research. You can donate money used for oppo research. Or, you can cut out the middleman, and just give him the research.

Don Jr. went to the Trump Tower meeting. He know it was with a foreign national, with ties to a foreign government. And now Trump says he went with the purpose of getting oppo research from a foreign government.

Even if he got nothing (which is not a given, because of the timing of Wikileaks), Don Jr, attempted to violate campaign finance law.

The attempt does not have to be successful to be illegal. Just like someone does not have to die for you to be charged with attempted murder.

Game, set, match. Mueller.

HRC/the Steele Dossier was different because it was paid for at fair market value. And because Steele was a CIA asset. But even if the dossier was also illegal, it does not make Don Jr (and Kushner and Manafort) innocent. It just means Hillary was guilty too.


Also, Steele was not working on behalf of the British (or any other foreign government) when he produced the dossier. He was initially hired by someone on the R side, and then the D campaign paid him for the dossier. But he was acting as a private citizen when he produced it--he has his own consulting business. And yes, it would have been illegal to accept the dossier for free from Steele.
Anonymous
Post 08/07/2018 08:56     Subject: Why accepting help from Russia is bad
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Here is a link to the documents gotten via lawsuit through FOIA re: FBI/Steele that shows multiple cash payments to Steele from the FBI.



https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-fbi-records-show-dossier-author-deemed-not-suitable-for-use-as-source-show-several-fbi-payments-in-2016/

Why is this being buried? The FBI paid Steele, who in turn worked with Russians to create an anti.Trump dossier, which was paid for by the Clinton team, in order for the FBI to get a warrant to spy on Trump?

Seems like what Hillary did was worse.



False. But even if it were true, it wouldn’t matter. What matters is whether the dossier is correct, not where the information came from. So far NOTHING in the dossier has proved to be untrue and much of it has proven out. Christopher Steele will one day be recognized as an American hero. One of many who will emerge from this Russia cesspool for doing the right thing.