The Steel Dossier has never been presented as 100% true. Technically, it was not even for public consumption. When Buzzfeed leaked it, most media either didn’t report it initially or reported it with the clear disclaimer it was unproven. Literally nobody has ever taken that thing as the Bible. Just that it was a collection of rumors and innuendo. Here’s the thing though, the guy behind it was a professional investigator and intelligence gatherer. So while not everything is going to be accurate, it isn’t 100% made up either. It’s going to be a mixture. It’s sort of telling very little has been refuted, though to be fair an allegation like the pee tape can never truly be “refuted”. I always viewed that one as a joke, but as Trump is fairly depraved I don’t dismiss it either. I just view it as unimportant unless the hard evidence was there.
Again, Igor Danchenko says Hello. And read Spooked to understand the difference between a intel gatherer from state sponsored Intel Agency and a private sector spy. The difference is quite stark.
Again, not sure of your point, as the Steele Dossier did not form the basis of any investigation or prosecution. Law enforcement is not going to just run with some document dropped in their lap without doing their own investigative work. Further, the differences between state sponsored intel (CIA) and a “private sector spy” is like the difference between a state sponsored police investigator (a detective) and a Private investigator (PI). The private sector guys are usually just retired public sector, which was the case with Steele. There is nothing nefarious based on that alone. He was just a retired British spy with some connections in Russia, that’s pretty much the perfect guy to do such contracted work.
I'm sorry but the bolded part is exactly what the FBI did with the Steele Dossier. They took it directly to the FISC instead of verifying it with the IC first. After they did reach out to the IC about Page, they found out he was actually working with the CIA against the Russian and then lied about it to the FISC. This has been pointed out multiple times on this forum. The parts of the Steele Dossier that were not public information have been sourced to Igor Danchenko. Danchenko admitted that the information he gave Steele was not reliable and poorly sourced. The Durham team has stated that Danchenko got most of it from a Clinton FP adviser in a charging document. Again, this has been pointed out multiple times on this forum. Anyone still claiming the Steele Dossier has any credibility has not been paying attention and cannot expect to be taken seriously. I suggest reading this series by Erik Wemple of the Washington Post on this topic. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/media-steele-dossier/
And despite all the complaints, the truth is Trump's campaign had regular contact with Russian agents and not only knew about, but welcomed Putin's help during the election. The nonsense about Steele is just an effort to distract from that reality.
Again, literally nobody has ever said the Steele Dossier should be taken verbatim. Nobody. It was political research, contracted by GOP primary opponents and the Clinton campaign. We knew that from the day it was leaked by Buzzfeed. The FBI knew it. The document is essentially a collection of “people are saying” from Steele’s sources. That this is not 100%, or that it contains misinformation surprises nobody. That is inherent to what that is. If law enforcement wants to act, or sees something worth acting on, they will do their own investigation and it will require more than “people are saying” for that to get anywhere.
Exactly. Trump did enough on his own in plain public view to warrant a special council investigation. “Russia are you listening”, the sit-down with Don Jr. to discuss “adoptions” (lol), Mike Flynn, the firing of James Comey, etc. The “loyalty pledge” ask of Comey was the last straw. The Steele Dossier has always been a distraction. Trying to attack the credibility of a thing that never actually had credibility, then claim the investigation itself was unwarranted based on that lack of credibility. It’s all rather transparent… The joke is Mueller didn’t even follow the money, he was too tightly limited to Russian election interference, rather than where Trump is more likely compromised. The real estate transactions involving Russian nationals and the source of where that money comes from. The old adage “follow the money” was not part of that probe, and that’s unfortunate.
Again, the FBI did take it verbatim. The Steele Dossier is the information that the IG reports says pushed the FBI to run to the FISC with it. Why are you still trying to push this argument when the facts have been out in the public for years that show the exact opposite? And I'm not even touching on the Media that ran with this, built Steele up as unquestionable, and still have not apologized for saying that "the majority of the Steele Dossier has not been disproven." The Washington Post link I provided does a great job of covering that.
I'll be keeping an eye on this thread as Russiangate seems to be unravelling on Hillary. The spin from the Left should be quite entertaining to read.
Everyone upset about the Trump investigation should have joined liberals in assailing the overreach of the Patriot Act when it was created. Because of Trump, suddenly right wingers were shocked to learn that FISA warrants could be obtained on American businessmen whether or not they had any interaction with men in turbans. If any decent lawyer could get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich as the old saying goes, any decent lawyer could get a warrant from a FISA court on a jelly donut. This is not the fault of the Steele Dossier or anything used to investigate Trump--the issues lie with FISA standards.
Do know who was representing that woman? Fusion GPS, the same firm that hired Steele for the Clinton campaign. That fact does not have any real importance to this topic other than to show how strange the threads get twisted in the world of private intel firms.
Actually, there were quite a few Republicans who were not in favor of the Patriot Act. Myself, included. But that does not dismiss the fact that a bogus Dossier was used as evidence to open an investigation.
...revealing that intelligence community officials within the CIA forwarded an investigative referral on Hillary Clinton purportedly approving "a plan concerning U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server."
Former DNI Ratcliffe told Durham intelligence supports ‘multiple’ indictments in probe: sources 5th paragraph
DNI Ratcliff. LOL. The man was a partisan lackey with no intelligence experience, who only served as the DNI the final months of Trump term. You couldn’t cite somebody less credible on intelligence matters, except maybe Trump himself.
