>>Isn't this all speculation until we get the bank records from Fusion GPS? (although my guess is that it would be a democrat vs a member of the GOP)

Unlike your certainty that Trump colluded with Russians without a shred of proof? But it's mere speculation about the HRC campaign till cast-iron proven?

Say, isn't it a crime to accept or even seek something of value to US electioneering from a dirty foreigner?

This fellow Steele who assembled the pee pee dossier: apparently he hails from the UK. Doesn't that make him a foreigner?

What about his alleged Russian sources: aren't Russians foreigners too?

I "get" the swamp tactic of trumping up an intermediary so those responsible can make Bambi eyes and pretend to be scandalized by smears they purchased: but is that subterfuge enough to get away with it after people shrieked at a Trump scion who was offered dirt on HRC and was too innocent to use a sock puppet?

Which is worse: to be willing to accept dirt offered to you, or to pay money to have it concocted for you- especially now that it's hinted that HRC's pee pee dossier formed a big part of the decision to investigate, followed by attacks on the integrity of Trump admin officials that led to appointment of Mueller?

How the conspirators must have exulted at their successful smears and attacks on the integrity of others over a scenario they paid to have concocted.

My experience in business: sometimes when a company vigorously claims worthy attributes for itself, those are the exact attributes it lacks. Whether it be claims of innovation or fair dealing, I've seen this time and again. People are quick to attribute this same behavior to Trump, but which is worse: to show brazen self-interest, or to be a devious swamp liar so convinced that you're the smartest person in the room that you think you can fool all the people all the time?.