So Clinton collaberated with Russians through a third party to obtain dirt on Trump which turned out to be unverified AND was given to the FBI for warrants on Trump and that's okay with you? While Trump received nothing, gave nothing and nothing happened and somehow that's horrible?
Let me provide an analogy, so maybe you can understand better. Let's say Hillary decided she wanted a new TV for her house, prior to the 2016 election. So, she heads down to Best Buy and buys a $15,000 TV from them, and the TV happened to be made in China.
Now, let's imagine that instead of going to Best Buy, an agent of the Chinese government came to her and told her they could "give" her that same TV, that she didn't need to buy one. Wouldn't your first question be, what are the Chinese going to get in exchange for giving her the TV? Regardless, the fact is that for a candidate (or someone in government) to receive a gift like that from a foreign government is against Federal law.
To compare this to what actually happened in the 2016 election: Hillary went to Fusion GPS and paid for them to create an opposition research report on Trump -- this is roughly analogous to buying the TV from Best Buy. Just like it wouldn't have mattered that the TV was manufactured in China, by Chinese workers; it likewise does not matter at all that Fusion GPS hired a British national (though one that has worked with US Intelligence and the FBI) to get information, some of which he got from Russians. Fusion GPS needed someone with the contacts that could get the information and from people (in this case Russians) that had direct knowledge of things Trump had done.
By contrast, officials in the Trump campaign were told that a Russian agent wished to meet with them, that they had information on Hillary Clinton. This is the equivalent of having the Chinese buy a TV. I can hear you already, "it was just
information..." but, again, remember information was what Hillary paid millions to Fusion GPS for. The right information would be worth millions of dollars, so even accepting the meeting (depending on what legal experts you talk to) is considered a violation of federal law -- the law requires reporting this type of contact to the FBI.
Now, at least from what the Trump campaign claims, all these Russians wanted to do was talk about the Magnitsky Act (or as the Trump campaigners put it, they just wanted to talk about "adoption"). They claim that she didn't really appear to have any information on Clinton so they ended the meeting -- though that gives the clear implication that had their been information on Hillary, that they may have been open to trading the information in exchange for repealing the Magnitsky Act. Do you now being to see why this is taken so seriously, and that getting information from a foreign government is considered to be a serious crime?
And even if you don't, it doesn't matter. The fact remains, buying something from a US company is legal for candidates/campaigns to do (whether it be a TV or information), even if it ends up being from "foreign sources" (manufactured in another country, or information gathered in another country). Getting "gifts" from any foreign source is illegal for a candidate/campaign.
Last, this whole "unverified" thing is a red herring. Yes, any "opposition research" report is going to be "unverified." If Trump had gotten information on Hillary from the Russians it would have been "unverified." Though, in the interim, we can also say that much of the information from Steele's report has been verified, much remains "unverified," and a small amount appears to have been incorrect.
