That is a factually incorrect description of events. The Clinton campaign did not use that information.
Even if it was, what you’re saying is basically equivalent to “the FBI is guilty of every crime they pay an informant to uncover.” Which is laughable.
The reason you’d hire someone like Steele to do the investigating is that he has contacts that he can have casual conversations with. Presumably, he could call people that he knew and trusted, and get information that wasn’t a vetted statement from the Kremlin. And Steele would have the expertise where he would likely know if he were being handed Kremlin-directed propaganda.
I don’t really see them as equivalent at all.
I don’t think it’s correct to view the Russian government as monolithically reflecting Putin’s preferences, any more than the US Government reflects Trump’s views. All governments are composed of individuals, some of who do not agree with the views of the person in charge.
Sure, there’s evidence for it. There’s also evidence for some corruption involving the sale of uranium to Russia under Obama with Clinton as Secretary of State.
The more pertinent question is, why should I care?
Clinton is gone… the only governing she’s going to be doing in the future is over small groups of people at book-signings.
If she ever registers to run for office again, by all means, attack… until then it seems like a lot of navel-gazing (or in the case of Fox News and the GOP, a lot of “See! Both sides do it!”).
Hillary’s master plan was to buy dirt on Trump, not release it, lose the election and then have it be exposed a year later. Genius. It’s Three Dimensional Chess People.
Or, she had campaign staff. Someone on that campaign staff took over the funding for the dossier from the RNC. The dossier was created, and they decided that with no attributions it really didn’t have that much use, so never bothered to use it. Later, whether through campaign staff or dogged journalism, it got leaked, and ended up in the hands of the media.
Hoo, boy.
I suggest you learn a lot more about Putin’s government. It’s nothing like ours. At all.
Look, I well understand that Putin is a real-life megalomaniac. But at the same time, there must be people, like Garry Kasparov, who recognize Putin as a danger to democracy.
Yeah. And there’s also a person, name of Putin, who recognizes people like Garry Kasparov as a danger to him.
After something like 18 years of Putin holding power, rather few such people are found in the Russian government.
No there isn’t.
Yep. And an awful lot of them are dead now, or in fear of losing their lives. Putin is the government in Russia. Nothing of significance happens there without his knowledge. Or his consent. The government is not a democracy there.
Looks like the FusionGP oppo research was funded by NeverTrumpers associated with Rubio and Bill Kristol.
Imho We began to think of Russia as a trading partner. Big companies started investing there. We were developing a relationship very similar to countries in Europe.
Naturally that meant routine contact between businessmen, political strategists and politicians. Just like they have contact with people in other countries.
That is the entire point in making China and Russia trading partners. We WANTED normal relations.
Now we suddenly want to treat Russia as the “evil empire” all over again. Any prominent person that has prior connections to Russians is suspect.
This could easily snowball into the Red scare of McCarthyism. The finger pointing is getting pretty pathetic. The Russians influenced our election! Trump’s campaign colluded with them! Hillary’s campaign met with them. No wait! Don jr. met with them. They are even harassing Jeff Sessions for meeting with Russians.
People need to stop and take several deep breaths. These are normal contacts that happen every day with people from other countries. We live in a global market. Of course we take meetings with our counterparts in other countries.
I understand Putin has a dangerous agenda. We may need to revert back to treating Russia with suspicion. I hope that isn’t necessary. It would be a monumental step backwards. I certainly don’t want to see the Cold War revived.
^ This.
The McCarthyism 2.0 crap is almost as dangerous as Trump intentionally poking Iran and North Korea in the eyes just for kicks.
There are far too many talking heads framing this as “Russia attacked us” and we need to respond.
Trump getting elected was a travesty, but ressurecting the Cold War certainly isn’t going to help matters.
If the Russians actively affected our elections or colluded with a campaign, that’s a legitimate Big Deal no matter how bored or filled with ennui you are from hearing about it. Trump’s kids and Sessions got grilled not just for meeting with people but for lying about it. When you’re asked about your contacts with the Russian government and you say “No such thing” and then later, when it’s being investigated “Oh, uh, I forgot about this time and this time and that time…” that’s also a legitimate Big Deal.
Anyway, the first criminal charges in the Mueller investigation have been approved and it’s expected someone will be in custody as early as Monday so get ready for the big barrel of “But Clinton!” and false equivalences.
I’m looking forward to it.
Anyone seen my tweezers? I need to tune my violin.
We didn’t “suddenly” want to treat Russia as the evil empire again.
The Cold War was revived when Russia invaded and annexed Crimea, and then began to make moves against Ukraine. Ukraine – a sovereign nation – remains an unsettled and dangerous place as a result. Russian aggression now again poses a real threat to Europe. I notice your post makes no mention of these developments whatsoever.
Further, Russia has worked to control Syria. You may not like it, but there are more parallels to the Cold War than you seem to understand.
Moves that were made by the US as you described to normalize relations with Russia took place before these events occurred. We would be foolish to ignore the meaning of these events or the threat they pose to our traditional, long-standing allies in Europe. It doesn’t mean a measured response leads to “McCarthyism.” Who is hyperventilating here? We imposed sanctions. They were merited. Putin responded by subverting and influencing our election.
Putin is a thug who represses his own people through intimidation and filthy tactics. He kills his opponents. Ten minutes of research will show you this.
Now he has turned his gaze on influencing and invalidating our own electoral process. It is not something we should take lightly or simply shrug off.
Why is it that the people who worry the most about McCarthyism 2.0 seem to be the ones who thought McCarthyism 1.0 was no biggie?
The U.S. is not so innocent.