Just as the police go to bad guys for information. Of course they consider the source. And thus they wouldn't buy anything stupid, like the fake pee-tape story.
Of course I'm sure. Andy McCabe just explained that any candidate can, provided that the candidate uses a cut out law firm like Clinton did. Trump's advantantage is that under the "five eyes" compact he can access dirt collected by the participating nations. Pelosi just tried to pass a bill on oppo research because Trump threatened to use a DNC dirty trick to his party's advantage. Pelosi's bill got laid to rest in McConnell's graveyard. ::
Oh, for crisakes! https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6637d5210008
This has been an interesting threat to watch. It has followed a typical pattern. For a long time, it was the only thread on this explosive subject. Right wingers avoided it like plague, and refused to even acknowledge it elsewhere. That changed after about 12 hours, when the first right wing spin pieces started appearing. The BS about opposition research,and various attempts to parse what Trump said. These were dutifully parroted by the usual Trumpsters, and just as quickly discredited, and exposed for the weak spin that they are. Trumpsters responded with the usual. They repeated their talk radio slogan louder and started with Clinton whataboutism (never far from the Trumpster mind). Trump added some more fuel to the fire with a non walk back walk back. Now the White House is waiting for the full interview to air, dreading what other idiotic nonsense Trump almost certainly blurted out on the fly will make the next headline.
Of course the LW ignores foreign involvement in the corrupt origins of the Russia collusion hoax, hypocrites. Stephanopolous acts like he's never heard of opposition research, irrelevant if it comes from outside US borders. What country are we at war with that we have to avoid such information?
I read the Mueller report. I didn't see anywhere in it that it said that Trump accepted help from a foreign government. In fact it states that Trump rejected their help. Perhaps you can point to where it says that he accepted their help? Please provide a link along with the page and paragraph number to prove your assertion.
Really, show me where the FBI has ever spied on an 'opposition' campaign. The FBI isn't supposed to have an opposition party.
Hillary is quite on topic to the ongoing investigation on the corrupt origins of the Russia collusion hoax. She was very involved in it.
Perhaps because there was nothing to contact about? They're supposed to report that some lawyer they met with, all she wanted to talk about was adoptions?
Which is not the topic or the title of this thread. But it is the standard, knee jerk Trumpster response, and is used to try and deflect every single story about Trump. Boring and tiresome. Oh, BTW, where exactly is this Horowitz report,anyway?
Russians, identifying themselves as agents of a foreign power, reach out to one of the Candidate’s sons, promising dirt on an opponent, and there is nothing to report????? The very fact that they reached out, should have been reported. But then, it was routine in the Trump campaign by then. Russians had already reached out several times. Indeed, Trump’s campaign manager was trying to sell information to the Russians at the same time. Nothing to see here!
Yeah, it doesnt’ matter of a Canddate for President of the United States signals his willingness to collude with the intelligence services of a rival power that is waging a cyber attack against the United States. It was improper for any American law enforcement to show the slightest curiousity about these matters!!!!! That’s the Trump and Trumpster defense.
Duh, opposition research isn't done by the FBI, that's only a hyper-inflated fear of the "deep state" that Trump has filled your brain with. Wikipedia explains this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_research Information gathering can be classified into three main categories: open-source research enabled by the Freedom of Information Act, covert operations or "tradecraft, " and maintenance of human systems of informants. Increasingly, data-mining of electronic records is used. Information is then stored for future use, and disseminated in a variety of ways. A local election sometimes has a staff member dedicated to reading through all of the opponents' public statements and their voting records; others initiate whisper campaigns that employ techniques of disinformation or "black ops" to deliberately mislead the public by advancing a pre-determined "narrative" that will present the opponent in a negative light. Another technique is to infiltrate the opposition's operations and position a paid informant there. "Gray propaganda" techniques are often used to release damaging information to news media outlets without its source being identified properly, a technique inherited from disinformation tactics employed by intelligence agencies such as the Office of Strategic Services during World War II. File-sharing between operatives of political parties is quite common. In the 2008 presidential election, a dossier of opposition research against Republican Vice-Presidential nominee Sarah Palin was posted in its entirety on a political blog site, Politico.com. The file was compiled by the staff of her opponent in the 2006 Alaska gubernatorial race, Tony Knowles. "Oppo dumps" are used by political campaigns to systematically supply files of damaging information to press outlets, including matters of the public record, video footage from party archives and private collections, as well as private intelligence gathered by operatives. Many prime time television and radio news commentaries rely on this supply of party-generated material because it is free, and therefore more cost-effective than paying investigative reporters.
So your saying Christopher Steele was a private citizen staring in 2009.......so he WASN”T a foreign agent ? Hmmmmmm....... Thanks for proving my point TRFjr
Golstone made a misrepresentation and admitted it. Jr's lack of urgency suggests Golstone wasn't convincing, or seen as credible. Natalia as it turns out was a nobody, who had nothing. Was Jr supposed to report Golstone for lying to him?
Again, if you dont see the difference between a private British citizen, and the current government of a hostile foreign nation, then thats on you But I think you do. So keep that in mind in 2020 when all these new rules the right now says are OK get used. PS. Put the flag down. You dont get to use it anymore.