Umm, maybe they didnât.
Has Perkins Coie said who paid? Not as far as I have seen. Maybe it was Tom Steyer or some other deep-pocket Democrat.
My thoughts exactly. Or perhaps they even intentionally walled off senior campaign personnel from the knowledge. Either explanation is plausible and neither indicates any misdeed.
Here we go again. Rolling out the same old cast of iconically and chronically suspect Democrats. Now their statements will be scrutinized for any nuance of inconsistency or opacity, the NYT will weigh in on âcloudsâ hovering over the matter, and Trump-Russia will soon be Clinton/DNC-Russia. Emails v treason all over again, and a sudden shift in momentum that will embolden Republicans to attempt to wrap up the Mueller investigation less than 6 months into its existence.
Thatâs the GOP game-plan, in any case. We need on substantive new piece of Trump-Russia information, or leak, to stop this potential juggernaut right now.
The campaigns paid Perkins Coie to hire/coordinate an opposition research operation â a common practice to separate the campaign from the activity (covered by attorney work product) and the actual research that the operation provided.
That this is somehow nefarious because: Democrats is just nonsense.
Iâve never seen anything more retarded than this. There is no low the right wonât stoop to, no limit to their desperation, and no questioning of anything the conservative elite dishes out by their sycophants.
There has not been one Trump-Russia revelation that has shown Trump in a better light. Not a single one. Mueller doesnât care about this and I think most Americans can see right through this bullshit. NYTâs credibility will suffer if they keep pushing this.
Not to mention that Jared, Manafort et al. met with Russian government agents in Trump Towerâand thatâs OK, per GOP, because it was for oppo research purposes.
As far as I can tell, the only logic to this nonsense is that whatever the Dems do must be a lie and a smear on the Republicans⌠because thatâs what the GOP would do.
It was CNN. Not NYT.
So now weâre just going to run through every Democrat or Democratic donor to see if they were the ones who paid for the dossier? How about finding the Republican who originally funded the thing? My money is on Ted Cruz, more specifically, Kellyanne Conway, since Ted was Trumpâs deep pocket and data-connected competition.
And in case the the media is listening, I didnât fund the Dossier, so you can check this Democrat off your witchhunt list.
Can someone explain what the big deal is? Is any of this illegal? Seems like opposition research is exactly what political people do. Because the Trump dossier has been so impactful itâs interesting to know who paid for it, but I donât exactly understand the blaring headlines.
I donât really want to be that guy but the R word (I donât mean âRepublicanâ) fell out of fashion some time ago.
And?
So?
Sorry, but I fail to see the point of this piece.
Toss this on the âcloudsâ and âshadowsâ rhetoric the NYT pushed the entire campaign.
The RNC paid for the initial GOP hiring of Fusion would be my bet. The âNever Trumpersâ were desperate to keep trump from winning the nomination. Looking at ya here Rinse.
I couldnât get enough coverage of these kinds of issues during the campaign, so I read Shattered. Even Shattered didnât satiate my appetite, but this comes close. But in truth I am never fully satisfied. Keep it coming, guys.
Debbieâs a born liar- but we knew that from the primary.
Itâs a non story, nothing but deflection for the crimes of the trumpites, and reporting it oh so seriously plays into their hands and obviously know of them know the moron won and will treat his presidency as one long campaignâŚ
Hillary found out about the dossier after Buzzfeed published it. So, if she knew about the dossier before why would she have been surprised there was one?? A lot of information in the dossier turned out to be true. I would like to see it published again.
The story doesnât mention the NYT, but it does mention WaPo and CNN>