Except that it's not a bombshell. Because so what? The Steele dossier contains raw intelligence, and its credibility or lack thereof has nothing to do with the sources of its funding. Its credibility or lack thereof is being investigated, and where it proves credible that will be because supporting evidence has been found from credible sources. Which has been happening all along. And where the dossier proves not credible that will be because supporting evidence won't be found. Certainly, not all of it will be corroborated, but much already has been. The dossier is just one small piece of a very large puzzle that is being assiduously investigated by people whose standards of proof are and must be much higher than that of the raw intelligence in the dossier itself.
The Post's story simply isn't a bombshell. The Post's story also isn't new. It's old news. In fact, David Corn of Mother Jones reported it almost exactly a year ago, but without the breathless spin.
In June, the former Western intelligence officer—who spent almost two decades on Russian intelligence matters and who now works with a US firm that gathers information on Russia for corporate clients—was assigned the task of researching Trump’s dealings in Russia and elsewhere, according to the former spy and his associates in this American firm. This was for an opposition research project originally financed by a Republican client critical of the celebrity mogul. (Before the former spy was retained, the project’s financing switched to a client allied with Democrats.) “It started off as a fairly general inquiry,” says the former spook, who asks not to be identified. But when he dug into Trump, he notes, he came across troubling information indicating connections between Trump and the Russian government. According to his sources, he says, “there was an established exchange of information between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin of mutual benefit.”