Wow. OK. I can't relate to the dismissal of the nature of the information sourcing (investigating legally vs. illegally hacking), but I guess it's an unbridgeable moral divide (I think it is morally wrong to break into private communications but not to ask questions). But also note that the Steele dossier wasn't for public consumption and wasn't leaked until after the election was over, while Russia's illegally obtained information was publicly released in a misleading way right when Trump's campaign needed help.
That's not true, and there's no evidence at all that there was anything inappropriate done. It's only "obviously partisan" because Trump obstructed the investigation and needs a way to defend himself in the face of the evidence. You can admit that, right? You can be honest, can't you? You really expect anyone to believe that you think that Trump would acknowledge a fair investigation to be fair? That doesn't even sound like a plausible lie.
