>>9335693 lb

5. Why did the Obama administration use opposition research— funded by a political organization and filled with foreign dirt—to spy on members of the Trump campaign?

Here's a little bit of research establishing that opposition research funded by a political organization was indeed used:

The [anti-Trump rag] Washington Post admitted on Oct 25, 2017 that the DNC and Hillary’s presidential campaign helped pay for the opposition research that resulted in the discredited “dodgy dossier” alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. (https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/debra-heine/2017/10/25/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-oppo-research-led-discredited-anti-trump-dossier-n54220)

According to the Washington Post, the opposition research firm Fusion GPS was retained in April 2016 by Marc Elias (of law firm Perkins Coie), a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Fusion GPS then hired former British spy Christopher Steele to conduct the research (i.e. to assemble false rumors and innuendo into a "dossier" of allegations that Trump and his campaign actively colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 election). (I hate that word "dossier" because the word itself implies a package of credible evidence on a person.)

The FBI used "dossier" - in conjunction with a Yahoo News report - in their fraudulent application for a FISA warrant. A version of the "dossier" was leaked to Yahoo News, which in turn wrote an article; this article was used in an attempt to create credibility for the "dossier" in a process that we could call "intelligence laundering", i.e. a circuitous route that tries to conceal the actual source of intel.

None of the dossier’s allegations of collusion have been verified. Lawyers for Steele admitted in court filings in April 2017 (http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/02/politics/donald-trump-spy-dossier/index.html) that Steele's work was not verified and was never meant to be made public.

The Federalist reported that OFA, Obama’s 2016 campaign arm, paid nearly $800,000 to Perkins Coie in 2016 alone, according to FEC records. The first 2016 payments to Perkins Coie, classified only as “Legal Services,” were made April 25-26, 2016, and totaled $98,047. A second batch of payments, also classified as “Legal Services,” were disbursed to the law firm on September 29, 2016, and totaled $700,000. Payments from OFA to Perkins Coie in 2017 totaled $174,725 through August 22, 2017. (https://thefederalist.com/2017/10/29/obamas-campaign-gave-972000-law-firm-funneled-money-fusion-gps/)

So the next questions we need to get into are

• "filled with foreign dirt" (i.e. what was in the dossier and can we prove that it was false? Perhaps somebody admitted it was false?)

and

• WHY was the dossier used by the Obama admin?

Any budding journalists want to step up?

Almost got this thing nailed...

>>9336712 It's not about anon formatting text – it's about a couple of anons trying to get other anons to get off their lazy asses to research and write.

I have it all in a 12,400 charactger text file too, since the majority of the answers were mine.

If I posted it all at once, anons would surely complain.

>>9336650 This anon is doing us a great service by showing us which answers are still incomplete.

No one is going to hand anons the answers. I am ashamed to be answering the majority of the questions since I already know how to do research and write down the answers found. I did it to provide an example for muh frens.

>>9336820

I am ashamed to be the only one trying to tackle this assignment. I am ashamed that my frens are lazy or too busy. I am ashamed that even though I tried to teach by example, it was insufficient to motivate anons.

>>9336846

It's Not About Formatting

–Anon is VERY WELL AWARE how to do formatting. That is NOT THE POINT here.

–A discussion of formatting is a distraction from the real point, i.e. Why don't anons research, and write down what they find, in a manner that it could potentially be published?

Do anons lack the motivation?

Or do anons lack the skills?

Or are anons just lazy?

Thank you very much Jacque Cousteau.

>>9336850

You are missing my point entirely.

We don't watch the MSM.

THEY need to watch US.

WE are the news.

WE are the notables.

Do I repeat myself?

WE are the news.

Do we pick up the mantle and use it?

Or do we leave it laying there on the ground, and not contest MSM's right to dictate the narrative?

>>9336933

How are we going to make the MSM die?

By superceding them.

By offering TRUTH that exposes their lies.

We don't just sit and wait for them to drop dead.