“Unfortunately, who paid for the dossier and how it was collected does cast doubt on the veracity of the information captured in the report.”
No, that’s just a base assertion fallacy. All campaigns engage in opposition research. But the whole point of opposition research is to find facts that can be used to cast the target in a negative light. Sure, opposition research isn’t always successful. But you can be sure that the ones conducting it are doing their best to find the truth (regardless of whether they succeed and regardless of how they later spin it). Propaganda is a different department.
“And, in fact, there are many parts of the report that have been debunked along the way.”
And parts that have been corroborated. That’s how these things go: you gather a bunch of information, and then you try to confirm it. But note that the Steele dossier was never used during the campaign. It was leaked after the election.
“So when you have a report that was paid for by those that stand to benefit by smearing Trump, and that report has information that is demonstrably false, why would you suddenly believe that the parts you like are true?”
First of all, I don’t like any of it. Second, I don’t believe any part of the dossier that hasn’t been independently verified. My point, however, is that the Steele dossier is a red herring. It has nothing to do with Mueller or the Trump-Russia investigation.
“The Steele Dossier was paid for by Dems and Hillary, used information that Steele obtained by bribing Russian officials, and great efforts were made to try hiding all the details.”
Yes, it was paid for—at least in part—by people acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC. I already mentioned that. But the same testimony that gave us that information also told us that Steele did not pay for his information. So you are the one engaging in selective reasoning and believing only the parts of the evidence that you want to believe.
P.S. The testimony of Bill Browder, on which your previous question was based, also told us that the Steele dossier was an extension of the work Fusion GPS did for Trump’s opponents in the Republican primary. In other words, the dossier was paid for by the Republicans before it was paid for by the Democrats.
“Mueller does have ties to Clinton through the Uranium One deal.”
First of all, “close ties” has a specific meaning—and it requires more than serving in an independent role under the same president. By your logic, my aunt—who works for the Department of the Interior—has close ties to everyone who has worked in government in the last 40 years (including Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama). But that’s absurd. FBI directors are given a ten year term specifically to insulate them from partisan politics, and Mueller—who was appointed by George W. Bush and had his term extended by Barack Obama—is famously non-partisan and non-political.
As for Uranium One, you seem to be confused. Mueller’s involvement with nuclear material has nothing to do with that. He was part of a separate undertaking several years earlier that handed a sample of highly enriched uranium over to the Russians for forensic testing. In 2006, the United States and the republic of Georgia conducted a sting operation during which it seized 100 grams of highly enriched uranium. Russia requested 10 grams of this (about the size of four US pennies) for testing. Georgia agreed, and the US performed the actual delivery. Specifically, Mueller delivered the sample to his Russian counterpart on September 21, 2009. Note that the operation was not a secret, and that the cable released by WikiLeaks that supposedly brought this to light concerns nothing but a change in the delivery date.
The fact that you are conflating the two events suggests that you are not sufficiently familiar with the issues to draw reliable conclusions.
“The question is if there is enough question marks piling up that any report he comes up with could be questioned because of his potential conflicts.”
And the answer is “no,” as anyone sufficiently informed about the matter can see.