Collusion with Russia

[waitforufo]

A short while back I recall quite a hullabaloo about Donald Trump Jr. meeting with a Russian lawyer about getting dirt on Hillary Clinton.  The meeting turned out to be about a different topic and nothing became of it.  News stories at the time assured us all that Don Jr would soon be heading to prison for collusion with a foreign power to influence the US election.  Somehow Don Jr. is still walking around free.

Today I’m reading about how Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid a lawyer to hire Fusion GPS which hired a foreign spy to collect uncorroborated intelligence (aka smears) from Russian sources on Donald Trump to influence the US election.  Let’s call that uncorroborated intelligence the golden shower dossier.   The golden shower dossier was provided to all major news media in the US prior to the election.  They did not print it because it could not be corroborated.  Surprise, news organizations have ethics    The golden shower dossier was given to the FBI who briefed it to Donald Trump just prior to the election which was then promptly leaked to the media. The golden shower dossier was used to acquire a FISA order against Carter Page.  The golden shower dossier was used as an excuse to unmask US citizens in intelligence reports.  The golden shower dossier was then used by the FBI to bolster the ongoing special prosecutor Russia-Trump investigation. Finally the FBI considered continuing funding of the foreign spy to keep finding smears against Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton's political opponent.  

I’m wondering why there is no media or public outrage about collusion with Russia regarding the golden shower dossier.  If Don Jr. was sure to go to prison for attending a meeting with a Russian lawyer in the hopes of getting dirt on Hillary which turned into nothing, why no talk of Hillary and DNC officials going to prison over the golden shower dossier which is still uncorroborated and has certainly been a big something? 

What am I missing?  

[CharonY]

I think you are conflating several things when you talk about collusion. There are two broad questions. The first (and what is the primary subject of the probe, as I understand) is whether a foreign entity (i.e. Russia) has tried to influence the US election. The second, the actual collusion, is the question whether there has been a tit for tat for influencing elections. For the latter there is so far only indirect evidence, though esp. Flynn and Manafort appear to be neck deep in ties with Russian officials. The real issue why there is a lot of suspicion regarding current and former people around Trump is that there appeared to be active efforts to hides those ties.

Now regarding the dossier, that was started as opposition research by the Republicans and then Democrats took over. Opposition research is a rather common thing in US politics and in this case was executed by an US firm. The fact that Steele was an spy should only have bearing if he was actually hired by the British government to influence the election (note that you are not strengthening your argument by calling him a foreign spy, at least at this point there is little indication that he acted as foreign contractor). What it does show is that the dossier was ultimately assembled by Trump's political enemies and should therefore be viewed with skepticism (which, as you pointed out was why it was not used as fact in mainstream media). I could agree with you that if the dossier was everything that ties the Trump campaign/administration to Russia it would be pretty slim.

However, that dossier was not seen as a smoking gun, but only one of the many aspects of suspicion that had been piling up. For example, it is possible that the many omissions from Manafort and co regarding their business and ties with Russian officials are not deliberate. Yet it does add suspicion and together with the known fact that the intelligence agencies agree that Russia did meddle in the election, it is what ultimately launched the probe by Bob Mueller. Who ultimately is involved to which degree can only be seen after the probe is done. And quite frankly, if the Trump Jrs. meeting was innocuous, at minimum one has to acknowledge that his handling of that information was hilariously inept.

 

[waitforufo]

47 minutes ago, CharonY said:

I think you are conflating several things when you talk about collusion. There are two broad questions. The first (and what is the primary subject of the probe, as I understand) is whether a foreign entity (i.e. Russia) has tried to influence the US election.

Check with regard to the golden shower dossier.

 

47 minutes ago, CharonY said:

The second, the actual collusion, is the question whether there has been a tit for tat for influencing elections. For the latter there is so far only indirect evidence, though esp.

Ever hear of Uranium One?

47 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Now regarding the dossier, that was started as opposition research by the Republicans and then Democrats took over.

The foreign spy, Christopher Steele, who put together the dossier was hired after the GOP stopped funding Fusion GPS.  So no, not the same thing.  Two customers with different but similar goals.

47 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Yet it does add suspicion and together with the known fact that the intelligence agencies agree that Russia did meddle in the election... 

Yes, and it appears that Hillary Clinton, and the DNC were major players in the meddle. 

Edited October 25, 2017 by waitforufo

[Ten oz]

11 hours ago, waitforufo said:

 

What am I missing?  

The House Intelligence Committee, Senate Intelligence Committee, and the Independent Investigator assigned by the deputy Attorney General are all still investigating these matters. Saying "nothing became of it" is a complete mis-characterization of what has and is currently happening.

[waitforufo]

I guess I just needed to be a little more patient. 

http://nypost.com/2017/10/25/why-doesnt-hillarys-dossier-trick-count-as-treason/

Quote

None of this excuses the actions of Paul Manafort and others who may have benefitted from their relationship with the Russians. Yet, using the very standards Democrats have constructed over the past year, the Fusion GPS story is now the most tangible evidence we possess of Russian interference in the American election.

 

More

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5016865/A-YEAR-Clinton-lies-dirty-dossier-exposed.html

http://nypost.com/2017/10/25/clintons-collusion-who-will-investigate-the-new-russia-scandal/

[waitforufo]

Slowly the facts come out.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/10/25/top-10-things-to-know-about-dossier/

I won't bother with quotes because the entire article would have to be quoted.  

Here is another great piece from the NY post.

http://nypost.com/2017/10/26/how-team-hillary-played-the-press-for-fools-on-russia/

Quote

Hillary Clinton’s campaign didn’t just pay for the Kremlin-aided smear job on Donald Trump before the election; she continued to use the dirt after the election to frame her humiliating loss as a Russian conspiracy to steal the election.

 

[CharonY]

What was the smear job before the election? AFAIK the dossier really only came out when Steele gave it to McCain.

[iNow]

So... During the Republican primaries, a Republican candidate hired a firm to do opposition research on Trump. That firm hired an investigator who began exploring Trump connections with Russia.

That Republican candidate lost, and when Trump became the front runner, a donor to the Clinton campaign began paying that same firm for more opposition research on Trump. 

That firm simply kept paying the same guy who was already doing this research and who had already begun to uncover some Trump/Russia connections.

That investigator put his findings into a word document and that document was shared back with the campaign.

Inside the document was information about the pee tape, and the campaign chose to use it.

Now... Tell me again how this is supposed to be equivalent to Trump campaign collusion directly with Russian government and related oligarchs (and similar issues of secret meetings, paid trolls and and false advertisements, district-level targeting of those ads done by Russia, etc.)? It feels like it's a false equivalence to me.

Edited October 27, 2017 by iNow

[waitforufo]

34 minutes ago, iNow said:

So... During the Republican primaries, a Republican candidate hired a firm to do opposition research on Trump. That firm hired an investigator who began exploring Trump connections with Russia.

That Republican candidate lost, and when Trump became the front runner, a donor to the Clinton campaign began paying that same firm for more opposition research on Trump. 

That firm simply kept paying the same guy who was already doing this research and who had already begun to uncover some Trump/Russia connections.

That investigator put his findings into a word document and that document was shared back with the campaign.

Inside the document was information about the pee tape, and the campaign chose to use it.

Now... Tell me again how this is supposed to be equivalent to Trump campaign collusion directly with Russian government and related oligarchs (and similar issues of secret meetings, paid trolls and and false advertisements, district-level targeting of those ads done by Russia, etc.)? It feels like it's a false equivalence to me.

Fusion GPS is an political opposition research company.  As such Fusion GPS has many clients.  For example Fusion GPS has had Russian clients.  Does this mean that all of these clients are somehow associated with each other in any way?  Of course not.  Does this mean the goals of these separate clients are identical or even related?  Of course not.  Did Fusion GPS have a Republican client (not currently identified as a primary presidential candidate)? As reported, Yes.  Did that Republican client stop paying Fusion GPS after the Republican primary was resolved?  Yes.  Was Christopher Steele, a foreign spy, contracted by Fusion GPS during it's employ by it's Republican client? No.  Did HIllary Clinton and the DNC hire Fusion GPS for opposition research on Donald Trump after the termination of Fusion GPS's contract with it's Republican client? Yes.  Did Fusion GPS hire Christopher Steele as part of its contract with Hillary Clinton and the DNC? Yes.  So why are you, Hillary Clinton, the DNC and many in the media attempting to claim that any Republican had anything to do with Christopher Steele and the golden shower dossier?  The facts show there is no connection between any Republican and the golden shower dossier.  This fact was reported by the Washington Post.  Hillary and the DNC paid for the hiring of Christopher Steele through Fusion GPS.  Suggesting otherwise is either a misunderstanding on your part or an intentional lie.  Also interesting is that Christopher Steele paid Russian operatives for the information in the golden shower dossier.  Who's money did Christopher Steele use to make these payments to Russian operatives?  Hillary Clinton's campaign money and money from the DNC.  Are you starting to see the equivalence now?  Doesn't it bother you that Hillary Clinton and the DNC were paying Russian operatives to slander a candidate for President and then to undermine his presidency after winning the election?  

Imagine the tables were turned in this situation.  How would you, Hillary, the DNC and the media be reacting?  In case you didn't notice, that was a rhetorical question.

How are Hillary and the DNC currently reacting.  This image sums it up well.

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, waitforufo said:

 

Imagine the tables were turned in this situation.  How would you, Hillary, the DNC and the media be reacting?  In case you didn't notice, that was a rhetorical question.

How are Hillary and the DNC currently reacting.  This image sums it up well.

Has there even been a single year over the last two decades Republicans weren't investigating Hillary Clinton? Wtf are you even saying. No public figure has been the focal point of more investigations. There are websites dedicated to the number of people she is said to killed. We don't need to imagine if the tables were turned Hillary Clinton has been accused of murder, pay for play, selling uranium, bullying rape victims, having secret illnesses, and the list goes on and on. She was even sabotage by an aggressive foriegn power yet you think opposition research is a line never crossed? 

[waitforufo]

21 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Has there even been a single year over the last two decades Republicans weren't investigating Hillary Clinton? Wtf are you even saying. No public figure has been the focal point of more investigations. There are websites dedicated to the number of people she is said to killed. We don't need to imagine if the tables were turned Hillary Clinton has been accused of murder, pay for play, selling uranium, bullying rape victims, having secret illnesses, and the list goes on and on. She was even sabotage by an aggressive foriegn power yet you think opposition research is a line never crossed? 

Thank you for pointing out why Hillary Clinton lost the election.  Oh by the way you didn't mention accusations against Hillary Clinton for covering up a rape by her husband.

Everything you mention however has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton and the DNC paying over 9 million dollars to create the golden shower dossier where part of that money was used to pay Russian operatives to fabricate slanderous information about a US presidential candidate and then use that slander to undermine the President after he fairly won the election.  Maybe that 9 million dollars would have been better spent on her campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin.  We now have quid pro quo facts to prove Russian collusion which you, iNow and others are choosing to dismiss.  

Sure Hillary is denying any knowledge of the 6 million she paid for the golden shower dossier.  Maybe she should look for her Fusion GPS billing records in her piano. 

[Ten oz]

53 minutes ago, waitforufo said:

Thank you for pointing out why Hillary Clinton lost the election.  Oh by the way you didn't mention accusations against Hillary Clinton for covering up a rape by her husband.

Everything you mention however has nothing to do with Hillary Clinton and the DNC paying over 9 million dollars to create the golden shower dossier where part of that money was used to pay Russian operatives to fabricate slanderous information about a US presidential candidate and then use that slander to undermine the President after he fairly won the election.  Maybe that 9 million dollars would have been better spent on her campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin.  We now have quid pro quo facts to prove Russian collusion which you, iNow and others are choosing to dismiss.  

Sure Hillary is denying any knowledge of the 6 million she paid for the golden shower dossier.  Maybe she should look for her Fusion GPS billing records in her piano. 

 

I actually did mention the rape stuff; read the post again.

 

Who paid for the research doesn't make everything resulting from that research a lie. You are conflating a lot of different things.  Carry on about the millions spent as if spending money itself were suspicious. How many millions of tax payers dollars, not campaign dollars, were squandered investigating Clinton?? If anything you should be pleased this matter is being investigated and hope Trump doesn't do anything to interfere with Mueller's work since you care so much about it. 

If Clinton broke the law I hope she is prosecuted. If Trump broke the law I hope he is prosecuted. If you feel the same don't move the goal posts if and when indictments start rolling out. 

[waitforufo]

8 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

If Clinton broke the law I hope she is prosecuted. If Trump broke the law I hope he is prosecuted. If you feel the same don't move the goal posts if and when indictments start rolling out. 

Well at least we can agree on something.

[iNow]

8 hours ago, waitforufo said:

Hillary and the DNC paid for the hiring of Christopher Steele through Fusion GPS.  Suggesting otherwise is either a misunderstanding on your part or an intentional lie.

If you think I suggested otherwise, please quote me as to where.

I’ve submitted one previous post to this thread. Your task is simple. Your likelihood of avoiding failure low. 

Now, returning to my point about the way you’re equivocating standard opposition research with the likely collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government and related oligarchs...

The way you’re equivocating standard opposition research with all of the other actions Russia took to interfere in our election... something in the past we’d deem an act of war regardless of political party or ideology... something we’d previously have banded together to ferociously fight back against collectively as Americans... as neighbors... as friends... as brothers... as honorable men who put aside childish differences to join arms and fight together for important principles...

And the way you’re equivocating standard opposition research with Russia’s active interference in other democratic elections throughout the world and Putins openly stated desire to sow the seeds of discord and division and to destroy as a viable method of governance the concept of democracy itself...

Why are you doing that?

Never mind... Rhetorical question. I know why, and I’ll be here when you’re ready to join me once again in approaching this situation like a patriot and not some unthinking partisan talking point hack. 

Edited October 28, 2017 by iNow

[waitforufo]

10 hours ago, iNow said:

If you think I suggested otherwise, please quote me as to where.

Here you go.

19 hours ago, iNow said:

So... During the Republican primaries, a Republican candidate hired a firm to do opposition research on Trump. That firm hired an investigator who began exploring Trump connections with Russia.

That Republican candidate lost, and when Trump became the front runner, a donor to the Clinton campaign began paying that same firm for more opposition research on Trump. 

That firm simply kept paying the same guy who was already doing this research and who had already begun to uncover some Trump/Russia connections.

That investigator put his findings into a word document and that document was shared back with the campaign.

Inside the document was information about the pee tape, and the campaign chose to use it.

Now... Tell me again how this is supposed to be equivalent to Trump campaign collusion directly with Russian government and related oligarchs (and similar issues of secret meetings, paid trolls and and false advertisements, district-level targeting of those ads done by Russia, etc.)? It feels like it's a false equivalence to me.

No Republican candidate paid Fusion GPS anything. So your wishful thinking was getting a bit ahead of itself.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/27/politics/washington-free-beacon-fusion-gps/index.html

It was not a donor to the Clinton campaign that contracted Fusion GPS, it was the Clinton campaign itself and the DNC.

You are suggesting that the same guy, Christopher Steele, was working for Fusion GPS when contracted by both the Washington Free Beacon and Hillary Clinton/DNC.  The foreign spy, Christopher Steel was only employed by Fusion GPS while under contract by Hillary Clinton and the DNC. 

Facts matter.

Why no direct comment from you regarding the quid pro quo Russian collusion between Hillary Clinton and the  DNC?  When are you going to start approaching this situation like a patriot?

[swansont]

18 hours ago, waitforufo said:

Suggesting otherwise is either a misunderstanding on your part or an intentional lie.

Quote

Facts matter.

!

Moderator Note

OK, I've had enough.

You of all people — a great font of misinformation — should not be accusing others of lying. Facts do matter; that applies to you, too. 

For example, you have called Steele a spy. But he isn't. He was at one time, but if that's your criterion, then you will have no objection to being called a child because you were a child at one time. You have not mentioned (much less substantiated) that he is in the employ of any government as an intelligence operative.

Further, the topic you presented is collusion. Not why Hillary lost, or sexual allegations, or anything else. Stick to the topic (which includes not responding to this modnote). Substantiate your claims with credible sources. Drop the innuendo. 

 

 

[iNow]

I honestly don’t see much daylight between these two comments:

Quote

Hillary and the DNC paid for the hiring of Christopher Steele through Fusion GPS. 

On 10/27/2017 at 11:14 AM, iNow said:

when Trump became the front runner, a donor to the Clinton campaign began paying that same firm for more opposition research on Trump. 

That firm simply kept paying the same guy who was already doing this research 

But I’ll stipulate the point so we can move forward.

You’re right. I’m wrong. The Clinton campaign and DNC made the payments for this oppo research. Fine. You’re right. I was wrong.

Now, my core point remains unaddressed:

In what way is paying a firm for opposition research equivalent in your mind to the Kremlin Ops, Putin directed media tactics, launching of social media bots, twitter trolls, fake FB accounts, and related election subterfuge? 

Why are you conflating them?

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

Posts about the Mueller indictments hae been moved 
http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/111231-mueller-indictments-split-from-collusion-with-russia/

The topic here is the alleged collusion of the Clinton campaign

 

[waitforufo]

21 hours ago, iNow said:

In what way is paying a firm for opposition research equivalent in your mind to the Kremlin Ops, Putin directed media tactics, launching of social media bots, twitter trolls, fake FB accounts, and related election subterfuge? 

So Putin did all the things you mention above, but when Christopher Steele meets with Russian officials holding fists full of Clinton campaign and DNC cash, looking for dirt on candidate Donald Trump to disrupt our democratic processes in the United States, you see this as unrelated to election subterfuge? Really? While it does blow a huge hole in arguments that the Kremlin wanted Trump to win the election, all of these Russian actions are indeed related, just not in the way you hope. 

Russia is a US adversary.  It has been since the Bolshevik revolution 100 years ago. They have worked throughout that century to undermine our democratic processes. The unique aspect of our current situation is that it now has an ally in the Democratic party and its last presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton.  Hillary and the DNC, furious at Donald Trump for his curiosity about Hillary's deleted 30,000 emails, was likely the impetus driving Hillary and the DNC to collude with Russia in their constant attempts to undermine the confidence of the American people in our democracy.    Hillary's loss to Donald Trump has so  unhinged Democrats and supporters of Hillary Clinton, that they will do anything to undermine a legitimately elected president.  Hence the Mueller investigation which at its core is the golden shower dossier.  A dossier which paid Russian operatives in an act of collusion between Russia and Hillary & the DNC. 

By the way the quid pro quo payments to Russia by Hillary & the DNC move this beyond collusion in into the realm of a criminal conspiracy.   

Still no comment from you on the quid pro quo payments.  Why no outrage from you regarding this collusion between Russia and Hillary & the DNC?  I seriously doubt Russia spent 9 million dollars for all the things you mention above. it just shows that Russia, in its goal to undermine our democracy, has always been good at exploiting useful idiots.

[iNow]

I don’t see them as equivalent. It was a US firm they hired. That US firm subcontracted to an investigator. The report didn’t come out until Trump had already won.

You’re right. I’m not outraged based on what we currently know. I think it’s yet another case of manufactured anger like Benghazi. Maybe I’m wrong. As I learn more, I’ll adjust my position accordingly. 

My bigger frustration is how this is all being used as yet another distraction. I find it far more relevant discussing whether what’s in the tape is real or not, but of course we’re not doing that.

Given your concern with useful idiots, perhaps you can join me in not falling for the shell game yet again by talking about who paid for opposition research. If Hillary broke a law then fry her. I don’t care about that and I’m hardly some bobble head supporter. 

Is the content of the report real, amd if so what are the implications? That’s what matters. Let’s talk about that.

[iNow]

8 hours ago, waitforufo said:

Why no outrage from you regarding this collusion between Russia and Hillary & the DNC?

 

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/10/27/16552458/trump-russia-clinton-steele-cambridge-analytica

Quote

The notion that the Clinton campaign paying Steele is the same as Trump (allegedly) colluding with Russia is laughable.

The former involves paying an experienced private investigator — remember, Steele is a retired British agent — to conduct research. The latter involves working with a hostile foreign government to influence the outcome of a US election, and potentially aiding and abetting a crime (the hack and theft of Clinton campaign and DNC emails) in the process.

Most importantly, attacks on the provenance of the Steele dossier would only matter if it were the only real source of allegations about Trump and Russia. It’s not.

 

[waitforufo]

On 10/29/2017 at 10:38 AM, iNow said:

I don’t see them as equivalent. It was a US firm they hired. That US firm subcontracted to an investigator. The report didn’t come out until Trump had already won.

You’re right. I’m not outraged based on what we currently know. I think it’s yet another case of manufactured anger like Benghazi. Maybe I’m wrong. As I learn more, I’ll adjust my position accordingly. 

My bigger frustration is how this is all being used as yet another distraction. I find it far more relevant discussing whether what’s in the tape is real or not, but of course we’re not doing that.

Given your concern with useful idiots, perhaps you can join me in not falling for the shell game yet again by talking about who paid for opposition research. If Hillary broke a law then fry her. I don’t care about that and I’m hardly some bobble head supporter. 

Is the content of the report real, amd if so what are the implications? That’s what matters. Let’s talk about that.

Well of course you don't see it as equivalent.  Of course you are not outraged.  Of course you see it as a distraction.  Of course you don't care if they fry Hillary.  The quid prod quo collusion between Russia and Hillary/DNC doesn't fit you agenda which is to get Trump out of office. You will ignore anything that doesn't fit that agenda.  You could care less about Hillary at this point because she is a loser.  She was such a bad candidate she couldn't even beat Donald Trump. 

You have been looking for collusion with Russia since the election and now that its been found you pretend it doesn't exist.  if such money trail evidence had been found between Trump, the Trump Campaign, or the RNC you would be hysterically demanding impeachment.   

[iNow]

So, now I have an agenda... and I ignore anything that doesn't fit it? Christ almighty, WFU... Your version of this is haunting.

I've tried hard to be respectful of your position and fair when representing it while remaining skeptical and flexible with mine. In response, you accuse me of having an agenda.

It's hard to have a mature conversation when your version of the exchange we're sharing is so warped.

 

Edited October 30, 2017 by iNow

[swansont]

35 minutes ago, waitforufo said:

Well of course you don't see it as equivalent.  Of course you are not outraged.  Of course you see it as a distraction.  Of course you don't care if they fry Hillary.  The quid prod quo collusion between Russia and Hillary/DNC doesn't fit you agenda which is to get Trump out of office. You will ignore anything that doesn't fit that agenda.  You could care less about Hillary at this point because she is a loser.  She was such a bad candidate she couldn't even beat Donald Trump. 

You have been looking for collusion with Russia since the election and now that its been found you pretend it doesn't exist.  if such money trail evidence had been found between Trump, the Trump Campaign, or the RNC you would be hysterically demanding impeachment.   

!

Moderator Note

I warned you already. Your allegations are unsourced, and that will not fly. You have not provided any evidence of a direct connection between the Clinton campaign and the Russian government, and you have not provided any evidence of a quid pro quo exchange. You don't get to state that as a fact.

Post links to such evidence or this gets locked. 

Questioning the motives of anyone who happens to disagree with you is off-topic, as would a reply to this modnote.

 

[iNow]

On 10/29/2017 at 11:16 AM, waitforufo said:

Russia is a US adversary.  It has been since the Bolshevik revolution 100 years ago. They have worked throughout that century to undermine our democratic processes.

Here, we agree.

On 10/29/2017 at 11:16 AM, waitforufo said:

The unique aspect of our current situation is that it now has an ally in the Democratic party and its last presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton.  Hillary and the DNC, furious at Donald Trump for his curiosity about Hillary's deleted 30,000 emails, was likely the impetus driving Hillary and the DNC to collude with Russia in their constant attempts to undermine the confidence of the American people in our democracy.  

But here your position is confusing. We know Russia actively worked to elect Trump. You seem to be saying Clinton colluded with them in these efforts, efforts intended to defeat her. You’re saying she actively worked to secure her own defeat.

You then claim that the evidence of this is how her team paid a US company to do opposition research, and that company hired a British fellow, and that British fellow got some information from people who were from Russia, and those Russian folks suggested our current president was videotaped while prostitutes peed on him. That’s your evidence of this.

Even if your point that Clinton sought to undermine democracy itself due to her fury over Trumps push for her deleted emails (which strains credulity, but I’ll stipulate it), the evidence you cite in no way supports or begins to scale with this claim. 

Your position is confusing, but more than that it’s defective. 

Edited October 31, 2017 by iNow