Reply With Quote
You slurp federal surveillance takes from a grocery store managerslurping up the puff piece by the woman Steele lied to the FBI about doing interviews with
Defeated, he yells "Fake news! MAGA!" and runs back to the bunker.
You slurp federal surveillance takes from a grocery store manager
You just cited the same "puff piece" to try to "expose" Steele and Simpson.
Pick a lane, TSA.
“The allegation was attributed to four sources, but their reports were secondhand — nobody had witnessed the event or tracked down a pros ute, and one spoke generally about ’embarrassing material,'"
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-trump-dossier
All I know is if I spent weeks hyping emails stolen by Russia and disseminated through Wikileaks in order to destabilize my country's election, I'd feel pretty guilty about it. But I still have shame.
But one of the dossier’s other seemingly outlandish assertions—that the hack involved “state-sponsored cyber operatives working in Russia”—has been buttressed. According to Special Counsel Mueller’s recent indictment of thirteen Russian nationals, Kremlin-backed operatives, hiding behind fake and stolen iden ies, posed as Americans on Facebook and Twitter, spreading lies and fanning ethnic and religious hatred with the aim of damaging Clinton and helping Trump. The Kremlin apparently spent about a million dollars a month to fund Internet trolls working round-the-clock shifts in a run-down office building in St. Petersburg. Their tactics were similar to those outlined in Steele’s Charlemagne investigation, including spreading falsehoods designed to turn voters toward extremism. The Russian operation also involved political activism inside the U.S., including the organizing of bogus pro-Trump rallies.
In England, Steele kept cranking out memos, but he was growing anxious about the lack of response from the F.B.I. As the summer wore on, he confided in an American friend, Jonathan Winer, a Democratic lawyer and foreign-policy specialist who was working at the State Department. Steele told him that Orbis sources had come across unsettling information about Trump’s ties to Russia. Winer recalls Steele saying that he “was more certain of it than about any information he’d gotten before in his life.” Winer told me, “Chris was deeply disturbed that the Kremlin was infecting our country. By hacking our computers and using WikiLeaks to disseminate the information—it was an infection. He thought it would have really bad consequences for the U.S. and the U.K., for starters. He thought it would destabilize these countries. He wanted the U.S. government to know. He’s a very ins ution-oriented person.”
Last edited by Spurminator; 03-06-2018 at 05:58 PM.
Ah, good find. Still, the sources are closer to the info than the collectors.
Alternatively,
Before we get too far down this stupid rabbit hole.
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-trump-dossierJohn Sipher spent twenty-eight years as a clandestine officer in the C.I.A., and ran the agency’s Russia program before retiring, in 2014. He said of Steele’s memos, “This is source material, not expert opinion.” Sipher has described the dossier as “generally credible,” although not correct in every detail. He said, “People have misunderstood that it’s a collection of dots, not a connecting of the dots. But it provided the first narrative saying what Russia might be up to.” Alexander Vershbow, a U.S. Ambassador to Russia under George W. Bush, told me, “In intelligence, you evaluate your sources as best you can, but it’s not like journalism, where you try to get more than one source to confirm something. In the intelligence business, you don’t pretend you’re a hundred per cent accurate. If you’re seventy or eighty per cent accurate, that makes you one of the best.”
It's more about the constant train of it going on for years making it the central discussion in most every thread, counselor.Stop arguing with him at face value
Having said that you have a point.
I like how TSA doesn't admit he's wrong but double, triple and quadruples down on his and obviously wrong takes.
The indictment of the Russian troll farm does not buttress the DNC hack.
What does?
Kim Dotcom?
Mueller knew it was impossible to extradite them anyways. This is all a big distraction.
A distraction from what?
I like how you guys make sure to use the phrase "troll farm" to downplay it even though you were basically unpaid interns at the farm's US division for weeks.
Still are, tbh. How's that working out?
Steele's sources still good?
"On July 26, 2016, after WikiLeaks disseminated the D.N.C. e-mails, Steele filed yet another memo, this time claiming that the Kremlin was “behind” the hacking, which was part of a Russian cyber war against Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Many of the details seemed far-fetched: Steele’s sources claimed that the digital attack involved agents “within the Democratic Party structure itself,” as well as Russian émigrés in the U.S. and “associated offensive cyber operators.”
Pretty good. Trump mopped the floor with her ass. 2020? Looks good.
Sure.
If you want to fold that into whatever Seth Rich conspiracy you're slurping up this week, you go right ahead, sweetie. Now's your time to shine!
John Sipher spent twenty-eight years as a clandestine officer in the C.I.A., and ran the agency’s Russia program before retiring, in 2014. He said of Steele’s memos, “This is source material, not expert opinion.” Sipher has described the dossier as “generally credible,” although not correct in every detail. He said, “People have misunderstood that it’s a collection of dots, not a connecting of the dots. But it provided the first narrative saying what Russia might be up to.” Alexander Vershbow, a U.S. Ambassador to Russia under George W. Bush, told me, “In intelligence, you evaluate your sources as best you can, but it’s not like journalism, where you try to get more than one source to confirm something. In the intelligence business, you don’t pretend you’re a hundred per cent accurate. If you’re seventy or eighty per cent accurate, that makes you one of the best.”
...
John Sipher, the former C.I.A. officer, predicts that Mueller’s probe will render the final verdict on Steele’s dossier. “People who say it’s all garbage, or all true, are being politically biased,” Sipher said. “There’s enough there to be worthy of further study. Professionals need to look at travel records, phone records, bank records, foreign police-service cameras, and check it all out. It will take professional investigators to run it to ground.” He believes that Mueller, whose F.B.I. he worked with, “is a hundred per cent doing that.”
Until then, Sipher said, Steele, as a former English spook, is the perfect political foil: “The Trump supporters can attack the messenger, because no one knows him or understands him, so you can paint him any way you want.” Strobe Talbott, a Russia expert who served as Deputy Secretary of State in the Clinton Administration, and who has known Steele professionally for ten years, has watched the spectacle in Washington with regret. Talbott regards Steele as a “smart, careful, professional, and congenial” colleague who “knows the post-Soviet space, and is exactly what he says he is.” Yet, Talbott said, “they’re trying to turn him into political polonium—touch him and you die.”
House Intelligence Committee Investigation turns to John Kerry, State Department
Kerry under scrutiny after Jonathan Winer's Op-Ed
The House Select Committee on Intelligence is now investigating former Secretary of State John F. Kerry’s possible role into the unverified dossier paid for by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton Campaign, this reporter has learned. The dossier, assembled by a former British spy, laid the foundation for the FBI’s investigation into alleged collusion between President Trump and Russia and was the essential piece of evidence used by the FBI to get a warrant to spy on a former volunteer for the Trump campaign.
For more than a month, the committee has been in its second phase of investigations focused on former Obama State Department officials and their role in either transmitting information or using information provided by former British spy and investigator Christopher Steele. Steele was hired by embattled research firm Fusion GPS, also under several congressional and Senate investigations.
But it was in February when questions surfaced regarding Kerry’s possible involvement or knowledge of the dossier.
Jonathan Winer, a long-time colleague of Kerry and who served as the former envoy for Libya during his tenure at the Department, wrote an opinion piece in the Washington Post on Feb. 8, defending his relationship with Steele and his role in the infamous dossier.
Winer attempted to pre-empt questions that the committee would ask regarding his role by admitting in his article that he was a long-time friend of Steele. He also established his close working relationship with Kerry saying, “in 2013, I returned to the State Department at the request of Secretary of State John F. Kerry, whom I had previously served as Senate counsel.”
But information uncovered by the Senate Judiciary Committee and revealed in its criminal referral of Steele to the Department of Justice that several Clinton allies were also connected to the State Department and the dossier. Sidney Blumenthal, a close confidant of Hillary Clinton, and Cody Shearer, a former journalist who went on to work for the Clintons, appeared to be feeding Steele information.
Winer said in his op-ed that “in late September, I spoke with an old friend, Sidney Blumenthal, whom I met 30 years ago when I was investigating the Iran-contra affair for then-Sen. Kerry and Blumenthal was a reporter at The Post. At the time, Russian hacking was at the front and center in the 2016 presidential campaign. The emails of Blumenthal, who had a long association with Bill and Hillary Clinton, had been hacked in 2013 through a Russian server.
While talking about that hacking, Blumenthal and I discussed Steele’s reports. He showed me notes gathered by a journalist I did not know, Cody Shearer, that alleged the Russians had compromising information on Trump of a sexual and financial nature.”
In February, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-CA, sent a dozen letters, containing ten questions, to former high-ranking Obama administration officials demanding full disclosure of their knowledge of the unverified dossier.
At the time, the committee did not disclose what officials received the letters, so it is not clear if Kerry was among them. Last week, however, reports surfaced that former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former FBI Director James Comey were among those Obama officials to receive questionnaire.
On Monday, Nunes told Fox News that some of the former administration officials responded, others asked for extensions, and several have failed to respond. He also noted that another dozen letters will be sent to more former Obama officials in the upcoming weeks as the investigation expands. The letter contained ten questions but one is of specific importance, say congressional investigators and that is if President Obama was aware of the contents of the dossier prior to Jan. 5, 2017. Also, the committee is investigating whether or not any senior officials leaked the contents of the dossier to reporters or media, as reported earlier.
Nunes said Clapper, Comey and Brennan did respond to the committee’s letter.
“There are a few people though that are not responding –they seem to have went dark,” Nunes told Martha McCallum. “However, if they don’t respond here shortly they will be getting subpoenaed to appear before congress to be treated with a deposition.”
But Winer’s op-ed and statements made by former State Department official Victoria Nuland to the media regarding her role in the dossier have raised more questions than answers among congressional investigators. Winer, who also worked as the special envoy to Libya, noted in his op-ed that he contacted Nuland about Steele’s reports while he was at the State Department.
In one instance, Winer states that “over the years, Steele and I had discussed many matters relating to Russia. He asked me whether the State Department would like copies of new information as he developed it.”
Winer also said that he and Steele “met and became friends” in 2009 and both were interested in Russia and the collection of “business intelligence.” Winer also admitted sharing Steele’s work with the State Department’s Russia desk. “Over the next two years, I shared more than 100 of Steele’s reports with the Russia experts at the State Department, who continued to find them useful.”
Similar to Winer, Nuland has come forward to select media outlets regarding her relationship with Steele and the dossier. She told CBS’s Face the Nation, “[Steele] passed two to four pages of short points of what he was finding, and our immediate reaction to that was, ‘This is not in our purview. This needs to go to the FBI, if there is any concern here that one candidate or the election as a whole might be influenced by the Russian federation. That’s something for the FBI to investigate.”
https://saraacarter.com/house-intell...te-department/
"In England, Steele kept cranking out memos, but he was growing anxious about the lack of response from the F.B.I. As the summer wore on, he confided in an American friend, Jonathan Winer, a Democratic lawyer and foreign-policy specialist who was working at the State Department. Steele told him that Orbis sources had come across unsettling information about Trump’s ties to Russia. Winer recalls Steele saying that he “was more certain of it than about any information he’d gotten before in his life.” Winer told me, “Chris was deeply disturbed that the Kremlin was infecting our country. By hacking our computers and using WikiLeaks to disseminate the information—it was an infection. He thought it would have really bad consequences for the U.S. and the U.K., for starters. He thought it would destabilize these countries. He wanted the U.S. government to know. He’s a very ins ution-oriented person.”
Why did Steele lie to the FBI?
McCain is neck deep in as well.
Isn't your theory the FBI is in on the conspiracy?
What charges are you saying they will face?
Latter part of the article has some interesting tidbits about Steele. My gut says Brennan (deep state) has been orchestrating a lot of this.
Gowdy bad now
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Posting Permissions
