General Discussion

Kablooie

(18,637 posts) Tue Dec 26, 2017, 02:21 PM Dec 2017

If the dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign that suggests truth, not falsehoods.

Why would a campaign pay good money to have someone invent fake stories about the opposition?
Those could be exposed and the money wasted.

You would want true information that would hold up under scrutiny if it was to be truly damaging.

Trump obsessively invents fake stories so assumes that's what everyone else does too.

His claims that since Hillary's campaign paid for the dossier, the dossier is bogus is total horse crap coming out of the biggest horse's ass in the world.

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If the dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign that suggests truth, not falsehoods. (Original Post) Kablooie Dec 2017 OP

It started out with (RUBIO?) who quit it in his usual spineless way. UTUSN Dec 2017 #1

If so, why isn't more made of his part in it? Sophia4 Dec 2017 #7

Like the truth in the Dan Rather story, it's there but is pushed aside UTUSN Dec 2017 #8

If She Had the Dossier itcfish Dec 2017 #2

Good question. I wonder more about the story that Hillary funded it Sophia4 Dec 2017 #4

Probably because she couldn't independently verify it. pnwmom Dec 2017 #9

They could have leaked itcfish Dec 2017 #10

Hillary has principles -- leaking unverified, defamatory information would not be her style. pnwmom Dec 2017 #11

Campaigns pay for fake oppo stories all the time. Orsino Dec 2017 #3

It doesn't matter if Bozo the Clown paid for it, facts are facts. Vinca Dec 2017 #5

Republicans accusing others of things of which they themselves are guilty unblock Dec 2017 #6

It is irrelevant how much was paid or who paid it... kentuck Dec 2017 #12

I thought Jeb Bush started it Corgigal Dec 2017 #13

UTUSN

(70,721 posts)

1. It started out with (RUBIO?) who quit it in his usual spineless way.

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 02:25 PM

Dec 2017

They keep saying that "parts" of it have been solidly substantiated. It's *ALL* true, just like Dan RATHER's Shrub-National Guard story.

Sophia4

(3,515 posts)

7. If so, why isn't more made of his part in it?

Reply to UTUSN (Reply #1)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 02:36 PM

Dec 2017

UTUSN

(70,721 posts)

8. Like the truth in the Dan Rather story, it's there but is pushed aside

Reply to Sophia4 (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 04:42 PM

Dec 2017

Why? For the bigger target.

itcfish

(1,828 posts)

2. If She Had the Dossier

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 02:27 PM

Dec 2017

Why didn't she use it before the election?

Sophia4

(3,515 posts)

4. Good question. I wonder more about the story that Hillary funded it

Reply to itcfish (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 02:35 PM

Dec 2017

than the contents of the dossier.

"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.

. . . .
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."

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?utm_term=.f8cbb3d885e2

So which Republican originally commissioned the thing and why?

pnwmom

(108,989 posts)

9. Probably because she couldn't independently verify it.

Reply to itcfish (Reply #2)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 07:30 PM

Dec 2017

That has been a time consuming process.

itcfish

(1,828 posts)

10. They could have leaked

Reply to pnwmom (Reply #9)

Thu Dec 28, 2017, 04:51 PM

Dec 2017

some information, just like the FBI leaked information about her investigation.

pnwmom

(108,989 posts)

11. Hillary has principles -- leaking unverified, defamatory information would not be her style.

Reply to itcfish (Reply #10)

Thu Dec 28, 2017, 04:54 PM

Dec 2017

And Bernie wouldn't have done it either.

Orsino

(37,428 posts)

3. Campaigns pay for fake oppo stories all the time.

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 02:29 PM

Dec 2017

The phrase "paid for by" is commonly used in media spin to suggest falsehood.

Vinca

(50,299 posts)

5. It doesn't matter if Bozo the Clown paid for it, facts are facts.

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 02:35 PM

Dec 2017

unblock

(52,280 posts)

6. Republicans accusing others of things of which they themselves are guilty

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Tue Dec 26, 2017, 02:36 PM

Dec 2017

They pay people to lie about democrats all the time

Remember the swift boaters, for example?

kentuck

(111,106 posts)

12. It is irrelevant how much was paid or who paid it...

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Thu Dec 28, 2017, 05:24 PM

Dec 2017

What is relevant is whether or not it is true.

Corgigal

(9,291 posts)

13. I thought Jeb Bush started it

Reply to Kablooie (Original post)

Thu Dec 28, 2017, 05:28 PM

Dec 2017

since his Dad use to run the CIA, they knew who to hire. When Jeb dropped out, Hillary picked up what was left of the tab. Makes sense to me. Anyone in charge of a campaign would have done the same.

Reply to this discussion