Explaining why the Steele Dossier isn’t collusion

[Hindsight was 2020]

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1140357421547839488
So just to clear up because Trump and others have been saying that the Steele Dossier is no different then what Trump said in the ABC interview. Steele is a private citizen hired by an American firm to do oppo research on Trump which he did with a dossier who’s content he was concerned enough with to go to the proper authorities over and to top it off Hillary never even used the dossier. Nothing about that situation is remotely similar to what Trump’s campaign did in 2016 or what he said in the interview.

[bandg]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

[Hindsight was 2020]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

1) a lot of the dossier was confirmed
2) propagated through the media? Nobody heard of this thing until buzzfeed published it in January 2017

[bandg]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

1) a lot of the dossier was confirmed
2) propagated through the media? Nobody heard of this thing until buzzfeed published it in January 2017

1) Which of the central claims of the dossier were confirmed by the Mueller report?
2) I'll point you to this story: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump/

[SteveRogers]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

It’s not illegal for a campaign to pay for opposition research on their opponent. It is illegal for a campaign to accept contributions from foreign governments.

[Hindsight was 2020]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

1) a lot of the dossier was confirmed
2) propagated through the media? Nobody heard of this thing until buzzfeed published it in January 2017

1) Which of the central claims of the dossier were confirmed by the Mueller report?
2) I'll point you to this story: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/steele-dossier-allegations-trump-russia-mueller-investigation-2019-1

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

[Nyvin]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

Something that Trump Supporters never seem to bring up is that even if the Steele Dossier originated from the Clinton Campaign, nothing about that is illegal or wrong.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

So far, you've been talking to some of the most unreasonable partisans Atlas has to offer. 

But you're right.  And they're wrong.

[Hindsight was 2020]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

So far, you've been talking to some of the most unreasonable partisans Atlas has to offer. 

But you're right.  And they're wrong.

Pot meet kettle

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

So far, you've been talking to some of the most unreasonable partisans Atlas has to offer. 

But you're right.  And they're wrong.

Pot meet kettle

Weak.

[Pericles]

The Steele dossier did not influence the election outcome in any way, it wasn't even publicly known until months after the election. The Russian interference on Trump's behalf, from spreading disinformation to more importantly hacking the Clinton campaign and the resulting Wikileaks releases, did affect the election. The hacked emails were an important part of the news cycle in the final weeks and depressed progressive enthusiasm and turnout at a critical time, as well as of course the DNC leaks adding salt to the wounds of the Democratic primary and the claims it was 'rigged' against Bernie. Given how close the election was, Trump won by 0.76% in the tipping-point state, it's possible this actually did make the difference between President Trump and President Hillary Clinton.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The Steele dossier did not influence the election outcome in any way, it wasn't even publicly known until months after the election. The Russian interference on Trump's behalf, from spreading disinformation to more importantly hacking the Clinton campaign and the resulting Wikileaks releases, did affect the election. The hacked emails were an important part of the news cycle in the final weeks and depressed progressive enthusiasm and turnout at a critical time, as well as of course the DNC leaks adding salt to the wounds of the Democratic primary and the claims it was 'rigged' against Bernie. Given how close the election was, Trump won by 0.76% in the tipping-point state, it's possible this actually did make the difference between President Trump and President Hillary Clinton.

The Steele Dossier has had more influence on the actual behavior of our government than the other actions.  A false, discredited dossier was a critical element in the issuance of FISA Warrants that triggered the endless cycle of investigations, none of which would be happening without that.

The nominating process against the Democrats was rigged.  Is that information the public should have known before they voted?  Podesta and Palmieri had actually discussed plans to infiltrate the Catholic Church with liberal activists in the hope of liberalizing its doctrine; is that something folks ought to have known about before they voted?  Now I grant you that Trump should have released his tax returns, but even in his not releasing them, people could easily infer what they wanted to infer and decide for themselves whether they cared about that or not.  But the rigged nominating process of the Democrats; that was a SECRET that the Clintonistas hoped you never found out about.

Did Russian interference with the election affect matters?  Of course it did.  But Russians can do this as they will; they are free to log on the internet, create memes and fake news and lies on Facebook and such.  Free Speech is the right of PERSONS, and not citizens.  The issue is not whether or not the Russians attempted to inject themselves in the political process; it's whether or not they colluded with Trump to do that, and that question has been answered as a "No!".

I do not sign off on everything Donald Trump has done.  I am under no illusions as to when he's telling tales or being outrageous.  He has not yet told me tales of Americans dying in Benghazi over outrage over a movie that was bogus, but he's told some whoppers.  I do not sign off on all of his policies.  I voted for him hoping he'd be a moderate Republican, especially on economics.  Instead, he's turned out to be a standard supply-sider, which is the essence of today's GOP.  "Voodoo Economics" is more than mainstream; it's defining dogma, and has been for 3 decades now.  And, no, that part of the Trump package is not my bag.

All of that has to be balanced against the "resistance" which, I believe, is an organized effort to drive Trump from office, one way or another, not because he deserves to be, but because elites before the election decided that Trump"must not become President" and, having been confounded by the Electoral College structure, have now going out whole hog to reverse the 2016 election.  This is the part I cannot abide.  It is people saying that we can only elect "approved" candidates of either party.  The process by which this whole matter has been investigated confirms this to me.  What these events say to me is that elite forces will come together to ensure that "this kind of man" cannot be elected President, and if he is, by hook or by crook, his Presidency will not stand.  This is more undemocratic than things Trump has given up to complain about. 

If Trump is beaten in a free and fair election in 2020, that's fine.  I haven't decided to vote for him myself; the most I could say is that, gun to my head, binary choice, I'd either vote for Trump or abstain if the election were today, and it's not being held today.  If Trump is driven from office in the way Comey, Schiff, Nadler, et al are trying to drive him from office, then I will not support that effort, and I will not vote for those pushing it.  That's where I'm coming from.  If there were a Nixonian Smoking Gun against Trump, that would be another thing, but there's not, and the best people can come up with is arguments that require redefining "obstruction of justice" and "thing of value" to mean things they were never meant to mean.  There's no smoking gun.  If Trump's opponents wish to save democracy, they need to drop the investigations and get out and make the arguments as to why his policies are bad.  That, of course, would take work.

[Hindsight was 2020]

The Steele dossier did not influence the election outcome in any way, it wasn't even publicly known until months after the election. The Russian interference on Trump's behalf, from spreading disinformation to more importantly hacking the Clinton campaign and the resulting Wikileaks releases, did affect the election. The hacked emails were an important part of the news cycle in the final weeks and depressed progressive enthusiasm and turnout at a critical time, as well as of course the DNC leaks adding salt to the wounds of the Democratic primary and the claims it was 'rigged' against Bernie. Given how close the election was, Trump won by 0.76% in the tipping-point state, it's possible this actually did make the difference between President Trump and President Hillary Clinton.

The Steele Dossier has had more influence on the actual behavior of our government than the other actions.  A false, discredited dossier was a critical element in the issuance of FISA Warrants that triggered the endless cycle of investigations, none of which would be happening without that.

The nominating process against the Democrats was rigged.  Is that information the public should have known before they voted?  Podesta and Palmieri had actually discussed plans to infiltrate the Catholic Church with liberal activists in the hope of liberalizing its doctrine; is that something folks ought to have known about before they voted?  Now I grant you that Trump should have released his tax returns, but even in his not releasing them, people could easily infer what they wanted to infer and decide for themselves whether they cared about that or not.  But the rigged nominating process of the Democrats; that was a SECRET that the Clintonistas hoped you never found out about.

Did Russian interference with the election affect matters?  Of course it did.  But Russians can do this as they will; they are free to log on the internet, create memes and fake news and lies on Facebook and such.  Free Speech is the right of PERSONS, and not citizens.  The issue is not whether or not the Russians attempted to inject themselves in the political process; it's whether or not they colluded with Trump to do that, and that question has been answered as a "No!".

I do not sign off on everything Donald Trump has done.  I am under no illusions as to when he's telling tales or being outrageous.  He has not yet told me tales of Americans dying in Benghazi over outrage over a movie that was bogus, but he's told some whoppers.  I do not sign off on all of his policies.  I voted for him hoping he'd be a moderate Republican, especially on economics.  Instead, he's turned out to be a standard supply-sider, which is the essence of today's GOP.  "Voodoo Economics" is more than mainstream; it's defining dogma, and has been for 3 decades now.  And, no, that part of the Trump package is not my bag.

All of that has to be balanced against the "resistance" which, I believe, is an organized effort to drive Trump from office, one way or another, not because he deserves to be, but because elites before the election decided that Trump"must not become President" and, having been confounded by the Electoral College structure, have now going out whole hog to reverse the 2016 election.  This is the part I cannot abide.  It is people saying that we can only elect "approved" candidates of either party.  The process by which this whole matter has been investigated confirms this to me.  What these events say to me is that elite forces will come together to ensure that "this kind of man" cannot be elected President, and if he is, by hook or by crook, his Presidency will not stand.  This is more undemocratic than things Trump has given up to complain about.  

If Trump is beaten in a free and fair election in 2020, that's fine.  I haven't decided to vote for him myself; the most I could say is that, gun to my head, binary choice, I'd either vote for Trump or abstain if the election were today, and it's not being held today.  If Trump is driven from office in the way Comey, Schiff, Nadler, et al are trying to drive him from office, then I will not support that effort, and I will not vote for those pushing it.  That's where I'm coming from.  If there were a Nixonian Smoking Gun against Trump, that would be another thing, but there's not, and the best people can come up with is arguments that require redefining "obstruction of justice" and "thing of value" to mean things they were never meant to mean.  There's no smoking gun.  If Trump's opponents wish to save democracy, they need to drop the investigations and get out and make the arguments as to why his policies are bad.  That, of course, would take work.

No *clap* it *clap* wasn’t.
Edit: also I have to debunk some of your other bs. No Hillary and the DNC didn’t rig the primary and nothing in the emails showed that. I see your catholic emails and rise you Trump getting Farwell’s endorsement with Trump blackmailing him over him and his wife banging a 20 something pool boy. If you wanna go the Benghazi route I got a navy seal who died in a raid in Yemen because Trump didn’t properly read intelligence reports. Also spare me with the “elitist” garbage, most of the “resistance” are everyday Americans who are sick and tired of this jerk and his appalling conduct. Last and not least you been told how charging Trump with obstruction of justice over Comey isn’t “redefining” the term and quite frankly your arguments that Trump should be able to do whatever he wants to the FBI is far more dangerous for our democracy then impeaching him

[Pericles]

The Steele dossier was not the central basis of the Mueller investigation.  By the time the Mueller investigation finally began the public pressure in favor of it was unstoppable, and given the increasing evidence of Russian interference and Trump's firing of Comey, not appointing a special counsel would have been downright irresponsible.

The whole idea that the FBI was biased in favor of Hillary Clinton is ridiculous. If the FBI wanted Clinton to win, why did Comey give that press conference and cast judgement on her supposedly 'extremely careless' behavior, rather than just follow standard practice and avoid doing so? Why did Comey defy DOJ precedent to release a letter days before the election that everyone knew would benefit Trump, at a time when there was far too little information to know whether the information was actually relevant to the investigation and would change anything (and by the time it was revealed millions of votes had been cast and it was too late to adjust the narrative of the campaign)? The FBI wasn't Hillaryland, if anything, it was Trumpland. If the FBI had been truly unbiased and followed standard practice, then Hillary Clinton would probably be President right now. The FBI was not biased in Hillary's favor and certainly did not act like it.

[T'Chenka]

Edit: also I have to debunk some of your other bs. No Hillary and the DNC didn’t rig the primary

https://www.npr.org/2017/11/03/561976645/clinton-campaign-had-additional-signed-agreement-with-dnc-in-2015

Brazile took over the DNC as interim chair following Debbie Wasserman Schultz's sudden resignation during the Democratic National Convention. Once she was at the party's helm, Brazile wrote that she discovered an agreement that "specified that in exchange for raising money and investing in the DNC, Hillary would control the party's finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff."

This agreement has been seized on by everyone from President Trump to Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren as proof that the DNC "rigged" the 2016 primary for Clinton.

The DNC and former Clinton staffers pushed back on Brazile's claim but never outright denied it.

[Badger]

The content of the dossier was Russian disinformation, or as the media likes to call it, Russian "dirt". Steele, working on behalf of the Clinton campaign, gathered this "dirt" from Russian government sources. The "dirt" was then propagated through the US media with the purpose of influencing the 2016 election. None of this is in dispute.

This is far worse than anything the Trump campaign was alleged to have done.

So far, you've been talking to some of the most unreasonable partisans Atlas has to offer. 

But you're right.  And they're wrong.

Wow. That is some high grade irony ore material right there. Coming from somebody who probably more than anyone else on Atlas has literally made up an alternative universe and, even when confronted with links directly and unquestionably disapproving what he hammers on about, insists he's right and repeat the same things regardless of facts.

[Joe Republic]

The Steele Dossier has had more influence on the actual behavior of our government than the other actions.  A false, discredited dossier

Stopped reading there.  The only part of the dossier that Mueller dismissed as false was Cohen’s trip to Prague (and yet remained silent on the evidence that Cohen’s cell phone was geolocated to the Prague area at the time).  The rest of it has either been proven correct, or remains largely unverified.

[The Mikado]

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1140357421547839488
So just to clear up because Trump and others have been saying that the Steele Dossier is no different then what Trump said in the ABC interview. Steele is a private citizen hired by an American firm to do oppo research on Trump which he did with a dossier who’s content he was concerned enough with to go to the proper authorities over and to top it off Hillary never even used the dossier. Nothing about that situation is remotely similar to what Trump’s campaign did in 2016 or what he said in the interview.

You're missing the crux of Trump's argument, which is that Steele is British and not an American citizen.

It's still a dumb argument, though. Steele was alarmed enough by what he turned up that he turned his research over to the FBI, and nothing from Steele's research was ever used by the Clinton campaign.

The Steele Dossier is interesting...it was a fine "first draft" of what was going on, but like any first draft, got many things big and small wrong. It's interesting how many aspects of it panned out and how much of it very, very much did not pan out.

[Joe Republic]

I also love how Trump and his goons like to point out the dossier was paid for by Hillary and the DNC.  Yeah, it was, once the Republicans were done paying for it by as late as May 2016. 

[136or142]

If the mods are serious about removing posts for containing falsehoods, then fuzzy bear's last post should be deleted.  Everything in it is wrong.

[Badger]

I also love how Trump and his goons like to point out the dossier was paid for by Hillary and the DNC.  Yeah, it was, once the Republicans were done paying for it by as late as May 2016. 

[Progressive Pessimist]

I also love how Trump and his goons like to point out the dossier was paid for by Hillary and the DNC.  Yeah, it was, once the Republicans were done paying for it by as late as May 2016. 

This cannot be stated enough! Let's say that this was an illegal conspiracy and right wing fantasy-land conspiracies are correct, then Republicans are implicated too.

But in trying to get Trump's followers to recognize the stark differences between the dossier and Trump's situation, you're wasting your mental energy. The right will never concede that they are subscribing to a false reality and will always continue holding Democrats to a standard that they themselves ignore by manufacturing false equivalency and water muddying tactics.