The Infamous Russian Dossier

[Aglaopheme]

You're still skipping over "solicit".

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...russia-law-may-be-reviewed-moscow-lawyer-says

A Russian lawyer who met with President Donald Trump’s oldest son last year says he indicated that a law targeting Russia could be re-examined if his father won the election and asked her for written evidence that illegal proceeds went to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, said in a two-and-a-half-hour interview in Moscow that she would tell these and other things to the Senate Judiciary Committee on condition that her answers be made public, something it hasn’t agreed to. She has received scores of questions from the committee, which is investigating possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Veselnitskaya said she’s also ready -- if asked -- to testify to Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Veselnitskaya said she went to the New York meeting to show Trump campaign officials that major Democratic donors had evaded U.S. taxes and to lobby against the so-called Magnitsky law that punishes Russian officials for the murder of a Russian tax accountant who accused the Kremlin of corruption.

‘If We Come to Power’

“Looking ahead, if we come to power, we can return to this issue and think what to do about it,’’ Trump Jr. said of the 2012 law, she recalled. “I understand our side may have messed up, but it’ll take a long time to get to the bottom of it,” he added, according to her.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

You're still skipping over "solicit".

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...russia-law-may-be-reviewed-moscow-lawyer-says

A Russian lawyer who met with President Donald Trump’s oldest son last year says he indicated that a law targeting Russia could be re-examined if his father won the election and asked her for written evidence that illegal proceeds went to Hillary Clinton’s campaign.

The lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, said in a two-and-a-half-hour interview in Moscow that she would tell these and other things to the Senate Judiciary Committee on condition that her answers be made public, something it hasn’t agreed to. She has received scores of questions from the committee, which is investigating possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. Veselnitskaya said she’s also ready -- if asked -- to testify to Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

Veselnitskaya said she went to the New York meeting to show Trump campaign officials that major Democratic donors had evaded U.S. taxes and to lobby against the so-called Magnitsky law that punishes Russian officials for the murder of a Russian tax accountant who accused the Kremlin of corruption.

‘If We Come to Power’

“Looking ahead, if we come to power, we can return to this issue and think what to do about it,’’ Trump Jr. said of the 2012 law, she recalled. “I understand our side may have messed up, but it’ll take a long time to get to the bottom of it,” he added, according to her.

No, I'm not. You're stretching it. "Our side may have messed up, but it’ll take a long time to get to the bottom of it" falls WAY short of a solicitation to me.

Far more importantly, what you view as a quid pro quo (that Trump Jr. NEVER guaranteed), was obviously insufficient to secure a deal that never was.

So far, the Trump Jr. meeting and one campaign flunky's lie to the FBI is the only "meat" in the whole Russian collusion investigation. And it ain't worthy of the table scraps you'd feed a stray cat.

 

[capri31]

Inbred, over-funded "intelligence" services create falsified and salacious Dossiers on political figures, as a matter of routine course. It's what they do all day.

 

[Aglaopheme]

No, I'm not. You're stretching it. "Our side may have messed up, but it’ll take a long time to get to the bottom of it" falls WAY short of a solicitation to me.

Far more importantly, what you view as a quid pro quo (that Trump Jr. NEVER guaranteed), was obviously insufficient to secure a deal that never was.

So far, the Trump Jr. meeting and one campaign flunky's lie to the FBI is the only "meat" in the whole Russian collusion investigation. And it ain't worthy of the table scraps you'd feed a stray cat.

“This is obviously very high-level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” Goldstone wrote. Trump Jr. replied: “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”

 

[daimoniotica]

Fusion GPS official met with Russian operative before and after Trump Jr. sit-down

The co-founder of Fusion GPS, the firm behind the unverified Trump dossier, met with a Russian lawyer before and after a key meeting she had last year with Trump’s son, Fox News has learned. The contacts shed new light on how closely tied the firm was to Russian interests, at a time when it was financing research to discredit then-candidate Donald Trump.

The opposition research firm has faced renewed scrutiny after litigation revealed that the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign paid for that research. Congressional Republicans have since questioned whether that politically financed research contributed to the FBI’s investigation of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign – making Fusion’s 2016 contacts with Russian interests all the more relevant.

The June 2016 Trump Tower meeting involving Donald Trump Jr. and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya occurred during a critical period. At that time, Fox News has learned that bank records show Fusion GPS was paid by a law firm for work on behalf of a Kremlin-linked oligarch while paying a former British spy Christopher Steele to dig up dirt on Trump through his Russian contacts.

But hours before the Trump Tower meeting on June 9, 2016, Fusion co-founder and ex-Wall Street Journal reporter Glenn Simpson was with Veselnitskaya in a Manhattan federal courtroom, a confidential source told Fox News. Court records reviewed by Fox News, email correspondence and published reports corroborate the pair’s presence together. The source told Fox News they also were together after the Trump Tower meeting.

Simpson’s presence with Veselnitskaya during this critical week in June -- together with revelations about Fusion’s simultaneous financial ties to the DNC, Clinton campaign and Russian interests -- raise new questions about the company’s role in the 2016 election.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ative-before-and-after-trump-jr-sit-down.html

 

[Colonel Hogan]

“This is obviously very high-level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump,” Goldstone wrote. Trump Jr. replied: “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer.”

And I'm not suggesting that they SHOULD have done it. I'm simply suggesting that even if they HAD, it probably would not have been criminal given both the spirit of the laws as written AND the FEC rulings on volunteer contributions which I cited before.

And since they, in FACT, apparently DID NOT solicit such information but rather merely affirmatively responded to a request FROM the Russians for a meeting which produced no agreement or subsequent cooperation, I'm pretty damn well certain nothing illegal transpired.

Unlike the Democrats who apparently contracted with a foreign "agent" for the very purpose of producing opposition candidate intelligence.

That's all I'm saying. Every morsel, quote, meeting or scenario you and others construct fails to rise to the level of criminality.

So far.

 

[about_average]

You would hope, but an even better source of knowledge is the FEC, who's past policies and DECISIONS on campaign volunteering by foreign persons are the ones I cited.

So far, there is no evidence that anyone in the Trump campaign obtained such "illegally obtained" information. Whether such arguably illegal receipt of information was considered (and rejected) in a meeting that someone subsequently lied about to the FBI is a separate criminal matter which ONLY implicates the person(s) who lied to the FBI or to Congress under oath.

No one else in the meeting who heard or even expressed an opinion on a "crime" that never took place is going to be criminally liable for anything.

I don't disagree.

However, if someone admits that they twice attempted to commit a crime and/or collude, is it too far fetched to think maybe those weren't the only two times and it's worth investigating?

Especially when there are numerous others in their circle with ties to the same people they were attempting to enter in to an arrangement with.

Unlike the Democrats who apparently contracted with a foreign "agent" for the very purpose of producing opposition candidate intelligence.

Don't forget that contract was initiated by the GOP.

 

[snugglestruggle]

Democrats step in web of their own making.

There has been so much media hype and alt left spin over alleged Russian ties to Trumps campaign , it can be a pain just trying to sort out truth from fiction. This is the best article I have read to date on it. Excerpt and link below.

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.


The last paragraph sums it up nicely. Now we need a special council to investigate everyone involved in pushing this fraudulent story. Hey Trump, Chris "Flintstone" Christie doesn't have a job. Just saying

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-dossier-dam-is-breaking-1509143847?mod=djcm_OBV1_092216

 

[daimoniotica]

The 35-page Steele Dossier, wholly financed by the Clinton campaign and the DNC (and perhaps even Obama's OFA) via Fusion GPS, is not investigatively connected in any way to the opposition research Fusion previously did for the Washington Free Beacon.

They are totally separate efforts.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

I don't disagree.

However, if someone admits that they twice attempted to commit a crime and/or collude, is it too far fetched to think maybe those weren't the only two times and it's worth investigating?

Especially when there are numerous others in their circle with ties to the same people they were attempting to enter in to an arrangement with.

Don't forget that contract was initiated by the GOP.

Not far fetched at all, and I've never been an opponent of the investigation. I'm just reacting to people who, because they object to various political behaviors, believe something is criminal simply based on their personal degree of outrage. It doesn't work for the Left any better than it does for the Right.

 

[snugglestruggle]

The 35-page Steele Dossier, wholly financed by the Clinton campaign and the DNC (and perhaps even Obama's OFA) via Fusion GPS, is not investigatively connected in any way to the opposition research Fusion previously did for the Washington Free Beacon.

They are totally separate efforts.

I would not bet on that. This was a $ for dirt effort, even fake dirt. These kind of bad actors know each other. Money and info often rides on the same merry go round.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

........... dp

 

[daimoniotica]

It's beginning to look like Glen Simpson of Fusion GPS, financed by the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and possibly Obama's OFA, collaborated with Russian foreign agents to entrap members of the Trump campaign, including Donald Trump, Jr.

 

[Hypoxia]

It's beginning to look like blah blah

In other words, there's plenty of accusations but no evidence. Noted.

 

[dontbackdown]

It's beginning to look like Glen Simpson of Fusion GPS, financed by the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and possibly Obama's OFA, collaborated with Russian foreign agents to entrap members of the Trump campaign, including Donald Trump, Jr.

Possibly. A 'false flag' operation. The female Russian atty. that approached Jr. had ties to Fusion GPS.

Fusion was quite clever in some respects and would have gotten away with it had Hillary won. For example, they made the dossier available to the FBI before they took it to the press. This gave them the ability to make the legitimate statement that "federal officials were looking into the matter." They created their own self-fulfilling prophecy so to speak.

 

[daimoniotica]

Possibly. A 'false flag' operation. The female Russian atty. that approached Jr. had ties to Fusion GPS.

Fusion was quite clever in some respects and would have gotten away with it had Hillary won. For example, they made the dossier available to the FBI before they took it to the press. This gave them the ability to make the legitimate statement that "federal officials were looking into the matter." They created their own self-fulfilling prophecy so to speak.

Fusion GPS official met with Russian operative before and after Trump Jr. sit-down
http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=88263944&postcount=105

 

[about_average]

Simpson sounds like an opportunist.
Who Is Glenn Simpson

 

[daimoniotica]

Simpson and Fusion GPS were hired by BakerHostetler, which represented Russian firm Prevezon through Veselnitskaya.

...NBC News first reported that Veselnitskaya and Simpson were both at a hearing centered around another Fusion client, Russian oligarch Denis Katsyv. His company, Prevezon Holdings, was sanctioned against doing business in the U.S. for its alleged role in laundering more than $230 million. Fox News obtained audio records from that hearing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

The wrongdoing had been uncovered by Russian lawyer and whistleblower Sergei Magnitsky, who was beaten to death in a Russian prison in 2009 after being arrested for probing Prevezon and other companies with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In December 2012, the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act was passed into U.S. law, freezing Russian assets and banning visas for sanctioned individuals. Fusion’s Simpson is believed to have been working with Veselnitskaya and Rinat Akhmetshin, a former Soviet counter-intelligence officer turned Russian-American lobbyist, to overturn the sanctions.

Akhmetshin also attended the June 9 Trump Tower meeting, along with about a half-dozen others including Trump Jr., Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, publicist Rob Goldstone, Natalia's Russian translator Anatoli Samochornov and Ike Kaveladze from a Russian-American real estate agency.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ative-before-and-after-trump-jr-sit-down.html

So, Fusion GPS (Glen Simpson) was working with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya to get US sanctions against their client, Russian oligarch Denis Katsyv and his company, Prevezon, altered, which is also why Veselnitskaya set up the June 9, 2016, meeting with the Trump gang: to pre-lobby against those same sanctions to a Republican Party presidential candidate who would become his Party's nominee a month later.

Recall that the Clinton campaign/DNC first retained Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Trump two months prior, in April, and that Fusion GP retained foreign agent Steele sometime in June, and he wrote the first memo of his now infamous dossier on June 20 - just 11 days after the meeting noted above.

That first memo, btw, is the piece which alleged the most sensational allegations against Trump: that he used prostitutes during a visit to Moscow in 2013 and that the Kremlin was blackmailing him with the evidence. It also alleged that the Trump campaign was engaged in a well-orchestrated collusion campaign with Russian operatives.

Also remember that the Steele Dossier's final, overall conclusion asserted that Trump was highly susceptible to Russian blackmailing because all of this kind of "evidence" they had on him.

I need to see some actual evidence that Trump was, indeed, being blackmailed by Russia.

 

[Aglaopheme]

And I'm not suggesting that they SHOULD have done it. I'm simply suggesting that even if they HAD, it probably would not have been criminal given both the spirit of the laws as written AND the FEC rulings on volunteer contributions which I cited before.

And since they, in FACT, apparently DID NOT solicit such information but rather merely affirmatively responded to a request FROM the Russians for a meeting which produced no agreement or subsequent cooperation, I'm pretty damn well certain nothing illegal transpired.

Unlike the Democrats who apparently contracted with a foreign "agent" for the very purpose of producing opposition candidate intelligence.

That's all I'm saying. Every morsel, quote, meeting or scenario you and others construct fails to rise to the level of criminality.

So far.

Really? I would have thought you, of all people, could see the difference.

So much has already come to light about what was said in the dossier. I had never considered that what was published was not the entirety of Steele's raw data. I makes sense to me now having read it. I posted a bit, but this article covers a lot more from the dossier that have been proven to be true. Keep in mind, this was published back in early September.

https://www.justsecurity.org/44697/steele-dossier-knowing/

The most obvious occurrence that could not have been known to Orbis in June 2016, but shines bright in retrospect is the fact that Russia undertook a coordinated and massive effort to disrupt the 2016 U.S. election to help Donald Trump, as the U.S. intelligence community itself later concluded. Well before any public knowledge of these events, the Orbis report identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to discuss the receipt of stolen documents. Mr. Steele could not have known that the Russians stole information on Hillary Clinton, or that they were considering means to weaponize them in the U.S. election, all of which turned out to be stunningly accurate. The U.S. government only published its conclusions in January 2017, with an assessment of some elements in October 2016. It was also apparently news to investigators when the New York Times in July 2017 published Don Jr’s emails arranging for the receipt of information held by the Russians about Hillary Clinton. How could Steele and Orbis know in June 2016 that the Russians were working actively to elect Donald Trump and damage Hillary Clinton? How could Steele and Orbis have known about the Russian overtures to the Trump Team involving derogatory information on Clinton?

We learned that when Carter Page traveled to Moscow in July 2016, he met with close Putin ally and Chairman of the Russian state oil company, Igor Sechin. A later Steele report also claimed that he met with Parliamentary Secretary Igor Divyekin while in Moscow. Renowned investigative journalist Michael Isikoff reported in September 2016 that U.S. intelligence sources confirmed that Page met with both Sechin and Divyekin during his July trip to Russia. What’s more, the Justice Department obtained a wiretap in summer 2016 on Page after satisfying a court that there was sufficient evidence to show Page was operating as a Russian agent.

Admittedly, Isikoff’s reporting may have relied on Steele himself for that information. Isikoff, however, also reported that U.S. intelligence officials were confident enough in the information received about Page’s meeting Russian officials to brief senior members of Congress on it. There are also other indicia that are also consistent with the Orbis report but only developed or discovered later. In early December 2016, Page returned to Moscow where he said he had “the opportunity to meet with an executive from” Sechin’s state oil company. In April 2017, Page confirmed that he met with and passed documents to a Russian intelligence officer in 2013. Court documents include an intercept in April 2013 of conversations between the Russians discussing their effort to recruit Page as “as an intelligence source.” A Russian intelligence officer said of Page: “He got hooked on Gazprom … I don’t know, but it’s obvious that he wants to earn lots of money … For now his enthusiasm works for me. I also promised him a lot … You promise a favor for a favor. You get the documents from him and tell him to go fuck himself.” In late December 2016, Sechin’s chief of staff, Oleg Erovinkin “who may have been a source for ex-British spy Christopher Steele’s Trump dossier,” according to multiple reports, was found dead in the back of his car in Moscow.

The Orbis documents refer repeatedly to Paul Manafort’s “off-the-books” payments from ousted Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych’s pro-Russian party, and Russian concerns that it may be a vulnerability that could jeopardize the effort. According to the Orbis report, the Russians were concerned about “further scandals involving Manafort’s commercial and political role in Russia/Ukraine.” And, indeed, there have been further scandals since the Orbis reports were written. Those include Manafort being compelled in June 2017 to register retroactively as a foreign agent of a pro-Russian political parties in Ukraine, and Mueller and New York Attorney Generals’ reported investigation of Manafort for possible money laundering and tax evasion linked to Ukrainian ventures.

Consider, in addition, the Orbis report saying that Russia was utilizing hackers to influence voters and referring to payments to “hackers who had worked in Europe under Kremlin direction against the Clinton campaign.” A January 2017 Stanford study found that “fabricated stories favoring Donald Trump were shared a total of 30 million times, nearly quadruple the number of pro-Hillary Clinton shares leading up to the election.” Also, in November, researchers at Oxford University published a report based on analysis of 19.4 million Twitter posts from early November prior to the election. The report found that an “automated army of pro-Trump chatbots overwhelmed Clinton bots five to one in the days leading up to the presidential election.” In March 2017, former FBI agent Clint Watts told Congress about websites involved in the Russian disinformation campaign “some of which mysteriously operate from Eastern Europe and are curiously led by pro-Russian editors of unknown financing.”

 

[PrincepsCyberius]

To put things in context:

....

I have heard it repeated several times from various sources on both sides of the political spectrum, most recently in context of the Donna Brazile article in POLITICO establishing that by that time Hillary had taken full control of the DNC and co-opted all its resources for just her campaign, that the DNC, and probably the Clinton Campaign, paid for and employed the phony dossier.

In light of that, how is it a "misunderstanding" that the Clinton campaign violated the federal law you cite by colluding with a foreign agent to create the phony dossier, and then disseminating it, "in connection with" the presidential election?

Phony?

Haven't parts of it been independently confirmed?

Correct. The only thing that hasn't been is the Russian prostitutes peeing on the bed.

The dossier is factual.

Okay. That is not what I have read or heard on the news, but I will admit I have not studied it that closely.

I tend to lean right on more issues these days, but am certainly not a fan of Trump. So far, however, all the complaints I have seen leveled against him seem either to end up being false, or very petty, and certainly never a basis for impeachment (no "high crimes [or] misdemeanors"). On the other hand, I think the country might be better off if Trump were forced from office.

So now you have me curious: What are the damaging facts in this dossier?

I asked that question sincerely, and no one has replied. I find this curious. If this dossier is so full of damaging facts to Trump (I have even heard people say it's a basis for impeachment), wouldn't people here want to crow about it?

Or is this another case where the left claims something but, when asked for verifiable specifics, cannot produce them?

So far, I have to agree with DawnoDay. The only established major act of collusion between a campaign and some Russians to affect the election is the DNC's funding of this at least partially (totally, perhaps, based on the lack of response to my question) false dossier.

 

[dontbackdown]

Really? I would have thought you, of all people, could see the difference.

So much has already come to light about what was said in the dossier. I had never considered that what was published was not the entirety of Steele's raw data. I makes sense to me now having read it. I posted a bit, but this article covers a lot more from the dossier that have been proven to be true. Keep in mind, this was published back in early September.

https://www.justsecurity.org/44697/steele-dossier-knowing/

You have a problem here.

From the quote you posted;

The most obvious occurrence that could not have been known to Orbis in June 2016, but shines bright in retrospect is the fact that Russia undertook a coordinated and massive effort to disrupt the 2016 U.S. election to help Donald Trump, as the U.S. intelligence community itself later concluded. Well before any public knowledge of these events, the Orbis report identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to discuss the receipt of stolen documents. Mr. Steele could not have known that the Russians stole information on Hillary Clinton, or that they were considering means to weaponize them in the U.S. election, all of which turned out to be stunningly accurate. The U.S. government only published its conclusions in January 2017, with an assessment of some elements in October 2016. It was also apparently news to investigators when the New York Times in July 2017 published Don Jr’s emails arranging for the receipt of information held by the Russians about Hillary Clinton. How could Steele and Orbis know in June 2016 that the Russians were working actively to elect Donald Trump and damage Hillary Clinton? How could Steele and Orbis have known about the Russian overtures to the Trump Team involving derogatory information on Clinton?

If Russia undertook a concerted effort to aid Trump, why was Russia the source of all the 'damning" 'evidence' in that dossier? Wasn't that, in fact, an aid to Clinton?

I am not even going to argue the fact that Russia did indeed attempt to fuck with our election. To one degree or another they've been trying to fuck with our elections since the 1930's so except for a brief period post the collapse of the Soviet Union I see no change in their MO.

I propose to you that they were attempting to create chaos, and it appears that they've done so quite effectively. I also believe that they're sitting there in Moscow tossing their vodka and laughing their ass off at how effective they actually were.

I further suspect that the subsequent investigations are going to blow up in BOTH parties faces and that in the long run that is going to be good for us and bad for them. I also think that those politicians, businessmen, and influence peddlers that get caught being sprayed by the shit storm that's going to result may not be exactly who you would desire to be shit splattered.

 

[Disgustipated]

You have a problem here.

From the quote you posted;



If Russia undertook a concerted effort to aid Trump, why was Russia the source of all the 'damning" 'evidence' in that dossier? Wasn't that, in fact, an aid to Clinton?

I am not even going to argue the fact that Russia did indeed attempt to fuck with our election. To one degree or another they've been trying to fuck with our elections since the 1930's so except for a brief period post the collapse of the Soviet Union I see no change in their MO.

I propose to you that they were attempting to create chaos, and it appears that they've done so quite effectively. I also believe that they're sitting there in Moscow tossing their vodka and laughing their ass off at how effective they actually were.

I further suspect that the subsequent investigations are going to blow up in BOTH parties faces and that in the long run that is going to be good for us and bad for them. I also think that those politicians, businessmen, and influence peddlers that get caught being sprayed by the shit storm that's going to result may not be exactly who you would desire to be shit splattered.

I agree with most of all of this and will add that 45 was the perfect Russian patsy. The Russians helped 45 much more than they helped the other idiot.

 

[dontbackdown]

I agree with most of all of this and will add that 45 was the perfect Russian patsy. The Russians helped 45 much more than they helped the other idiot.

Well Penis Gazer, I don't think that they particularly cared one way or the other. Someone was going to win the election and you, me, anyone else, can say that, "they helped the winner more than the loser." That's a subjective no brainer.

Had Hillary won much of the information we now know would have still come out just further inflaming the losing side. And in that instance the republicans could make the same assessment you did, "they helped her more."

Based on their achievements no matter who won would have to put up with a shit storm of delegitimization. Hence my statement that they succeeded far beyond their expectations.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Huh? Do we not know how spying or intelligence works?

 

[dontbackdown]

Huh? Do we not know how spying or intelligence works?

Why don't you explain it to us?