By Robert A. Vella
Only a small percentage of people around the world are now defending our shaky socioeconomic establishment (the elites, if you will), and that number is surely declining. It has certainly made a mess of things over the last few decades, and populist discontent is rising across the globe. Yes, the challenges it has faced were and are extremely difficult. Yes, ordinary people could and should be more understanding of the mistakes it has made. But, the establishment’s hypocrisy is something few can either dismiss or forgive.
When corrupt means are used to expose the corruption of a rival, no one is going to listen.
In my view, Donald Trump is mentally unfit to be President of the United States. He is a classic megalomaniac whose political empowerment poses a grave danger to every human being on this planet. He should be in a psychiatric ward, and not in the White House. That said, the following story describes how both the Republican and Democratic party establishments used the same subversive tactic to undermine his rise to power.
The Washington Post broke the story Tuesday night that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped pay for that now-famous dossier of research on President Trump.
The Post’s Adam Entous, Devlin Barrett and Rosalind S. Helderman report that powerful Democratic attorney Marc E. Elias retained the firm Fusion GPS for information, and Fusion GPS later hired Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent who was versed in Russia-related issues.
The dossier, which was published by BuzzFeed News in January, has been partially confirmed, though its most salacious allegations have not been.
There is a lot to sort through here. Below are three key points.
1) Clinton supporters — though not the campaign itself — were previously reported to fund the dossier
The fact Democrats were behind at least some of the funding for the dossier is not totally new. When CNN first reported on the dossier’s existence back in January, it said it was originally funded by President Trump’s GOP opponents and then, when he won the nomination, by those supporting Clinton.
Until now, though, the dossier had not been tied specifically to the Clinton campaign or the DNC.
Here’s what CNN reported back then:
The raw memos on which the synopsis is based were prepared by the former MI6 agent, who was posted in Russia in the 1990s and now runs a private intelligence gathering firm. His investigations related to Mr. Trump were initially funded by groups and donors supporting Republican opponents of Mr. Trump during the GOP primaries, multiple sources confirmed to CNN. Those sources also said that once Mr. Trump became the nominee, further investigation was funded by groups and donors supporting Hillary Clinton.
3) The appearance problems for Democrats
There is, presumably, a reason Democrats haven’t copped to funding the dossier — something they still haven’t publicly confirmed. Fusion GPS threatening to plead the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination also raised eyebrows last week.
First among those reasons is paying a foreigner for opposition research for an American political campaign. Given Democrats’ allegations Russia’s interference on Trump’s behalf was beyond the pale, the Clinton camp and the DNC paying a Brit for information would be somewhat problematic. Of course, the British are, unlike the Russians, American allies.
The Clinton campaign has also, notably, denied working with the Ukrainian government to dig up dirt on Trump. Republicans have pushed dubious comparisons between this allegation and Russia’s alleged Trump advocacy.
The firm that the Clinton camp and the DNC paid also has alleged ties to the Kremlin. In Senate testimony in July, Hermitage Capital Management chief executive William Browder accused Fusion GPS and its head, Glenn Simpson, of running a smear campaign against Sergei Magnitsky, a Russian whistleblower who in 2009 was tortured and killed in a Russian prison after uncovering a $230 million tax theft. Magnitsky worked for Browder, and he is the namesake of a law containing sanctions that was passed by Congress and is a sore spot between the U.S. government and Russian President Vladimir Putin.