Flynn in major trouble for speaking to Russia about sanctions

[Pavlov]

cue but her emails.exe

What are you saying they will find, Chris?

[Spurminator]

So who's lying the FBI, Christopher Steele, or Glenn Simpson?

... he asks in defense of Candidate #1, a known and repeated liar.

[Pavlov]

"To serve its clients, Orbis employs dozens of confidential “collectors” around the world, whom it pays as contract associates. Some of the collectors are private investigators at smaller firms; others are investigative reporters or highly placed experts in strategically useful jobs. Depending on the task and the length of engagement, the fee for collectors can be as much as two thousand dollars a day."

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-trump-dossier

"The ex-British intelligence agent who authored the opposition research dossier on President Donald Trump and Russia did not pay the sources he used to compile the do ent, Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson testified to congressional Russia investigators, multiple sources familiar with the matter told CNN."

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/15/polit...ier/index.html

This New Yorker piece is exposing some interesting inconsistencies.

Only if you're trying to make a conspiracy out of it.

[TSA]

The Newsweek article lists several things that were verified. The BBC link another. The standard set by ConservativeCowboy was that none of the dossier could be verified.

The FBI investigation has been tight lipped I never claimed that my post was exhaustive. Good to see you are still dumb as and struggle to follow a conversation or determine key points. You can eat too.

You said the FBI verified much of the dossier, they didn't, and none of your links showed they did.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You said the FBI verified much of the dossier, they didn't, and none of your links showed they did.

I'm not going to split hairs for the meaning of the word "much." Nonetheless, CC's standard of "none" was clearly not met.

[Spurminator]

"To serve its clients, Orbis employs dozens of confidential “collectors” around the world, whom it pays as contract associates. Some of the collectors are private investigators at smaller firms; others are investigative reporters or highly placed experts in strategically useful jobs. Depending on the task and the length of engagement, the fee for collectors can be as much as two thousand dollars a day."

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-trump-dossier

"The ex-British intelligence agent who authored the opposition research dossier on President Donald Trump and Russia did not pay the sources he used to compile the do ent, Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson testified to congressional Russia investigators, multiple sources familiar with the matter told CNN."

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/15/polit...ier/index.html

This New Yorker piece is exposing some interesting inconsistencies.

Collectors and sources aren't the same people.

Next?

[TSA]

Only if you're trying to make a conspiracy out of it.

Were informants paid or not paid?

[Pavlov]

Were informants paid or not paid?

Considering Steele's history with Russia and the nature of the work, I see no reason to doubt the statement. Feel free to provide something other than innuendo, though.

Why don't you just post the blog you lifted that from so we can see your next five arguments?

[Spurminator]

Were informants paid or not paid?

The informants were not paid. If you read a little further (to the VERY NEXT SENTENCE after the one you posted), it says this:

The collectors harvest intelligence from a much larger network of unpaid sources, some of whom don’t even realize they are being treated as informants. These sources occasionally receive favors—such as help in getting their children into Western schools—but money doesn’t change hands, because it could risk violating laws against, say, bribing government officials or insider trading. Paying sources might also encourage them to embellish.

[Pavlov]

The informants were not paid. If you read a little further (to the VERY NEXT SENTENCE after the one you posted), it says this:

The blog he read left that out.

TSA

[TSA]

I'm not going to split hairs for the meaning of the word "much." Nonetheless, CC's standard of "none" was clearly not met.

Neither was your standard of "much".

[clambake]

Why don't you just post the blog you lifted that from so we can see your next five arguments?

[Pavlov]

Neither was your standard of "much".

Eh, whether the FBI verified it is a semantic argument at this point, but one you'll have to cling to.

It’s too early to make a final judgment about how much of Steele’s dossier will be proved wrong, but a number of Steele’s major claims have been backed up by subsequent disclosures. His allegation that the Kremlin favored Trump in 2016 and was offering his campaign dirt on Hillary has been borne out. So has his claim that the Kremlin and WikiLeaks were working together to release the D.N.C.’s e-mails. Key elements of Steele’s memos on Carter Page have held up, too, including the claim that Page had secret meetings in Moscow with Rosneft and Kremlin officials. Steele may have named the wrong oil-company official, but, according to recent congressional disclosures, he was correct that a top Rosneft executive talked to Page about a payoff. According to the Democrats’ report, when Page was asked if a Rosneft executive had offered him a “potential sale of a significant percentage of Rosneft,” Page said, “He may have briefly mentioned it.”

And, just as the Kremlin allegedly feared, damaging financial details have surfaced about Manafort’s dealings with Ukraine officials. Further, his suggestion that Trump had “agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine as a campaign issue” seems to have been confirmed by the pro-Russia changes that Trump associates made to the Republican platform. Special Counsel Mueller’s various indictments of Manafort have also strengthened aspects of the dossier.

Indeed, it’s getting harder every day to claim that Steele was simply spreading lies, now that three former Trump campaign officials—Flynn, Papadopoulos, and Rick Gates, who served as deputy campaign chairman—have all pleaded guilty to criminal charges, and appear to be coöperating with the investigation. And, of course, Mueller has indicted thirteen Russian nationals for waging the kind of digital warfare that Steele had warned about.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-trump-dossier

[Splits]

Why don't you just post the blog you lifted that from so we can see your next five arguments?

lol

[TSA]

The informants were not paid. If you read a little further (to the VERY NEXT SENTENCE after the one you posted), it says this:

The collectors are sources themselves. Steele paid sources to get third hand information from other sources.

[spurraider21]

Collectors and sources aren't the same people.

Next?

The informants were not paid. If you read a little further (to the VERY NEXT SENTENCE after the one you posted), it says this:

Why don't you just post the blog you lifted that from so we can see your next five arguments?

Damn.

795 was a bad page for TSA

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The collectors are sources themselves. Steele paid sources to get third hand information from other sources.

Wow, you're stupid. If I collect something it does not mean that I created what I collected, dim.

[spurraider21]

The collectors are sources themselves. Steele paid sources to get third hand information from other sources.

No. Steele paid collectors to get FIRST hand information. That’s what makes them a source.

woj is a collector. Execs are his sources. Woj doesn’t have first hand knowledge, so you wouldn’t call him a source

[spurraider21]

Wow, you're stupid. If I collect something it does not mean that I created what I collected, dim.

Stop arguing with him at face value

[Spurminator]

The collectors are sources themselves. Steele paid sources to get third hand information from other sources.

So you're just going to ignore the part of the article I posted? Let me try bolding it differently.

The collectors harvest intelligence from a much larger network of unpaid sources, some of whom don’t even realize they are being treated as informants. These sources occasionally receive favors—such as help in getting their children into Western schools—but money doesn’t change hands, because it could risk violating laws against, say, bribing government officials or insider trading. Paying sources might also encourage them to embellish.

[Pavlov]

Now TSA is trying to argue that subcontractors are sources.

He chooses to die on the dumbest hills.

[spurraider21]

Damn. 796 off to a bad start for TSA

[Spurminator]

It's very simple.

orbis:collector:informant = newspaper:journalist:source

[TSA]

Eh, whether the FBI verified it is a semantic argument at this point, but one you'll have to cling to.



https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-trump-dossier

slurping up the puff piece by the woman Steele lied to the FBI about doing interviews with

[spurraider21]

It's very simple.

orbis:collector:informant = newspaper:journalist:source

Sorry, all he sees is Clinton:Podesta:Steele:Comey:Strzok