U.S. charges Russians with 2016 U.S. election tampering to boost Trump

[Jingthing]

An act of war? yet America maintains the right to interfere in any election it desires as they "hold the moral high ground" make up the rules as you go along.
Guess Soros will be the next thrown in jail as how many elections has he interfered in?

This isn't about US influence In foreign elections. Other nations are free to see that as a hostile action. What Russia did in the US election and is still doing is defy a hostile action.

Sent from my [device_name] using http://Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[heybruce]

18 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

Thaibeachlovers' claim does accurately represent the information in the article. Him using the word 'collusion' doesn't make it any less accurate.

I have pointed out the errors in your assertion many times. Up to you if you want to keep repeating them. If i were in your shoes, I'd just admit my mistake and move on.

I explained it as simply as possible.  If you are unable to follow the logic I can't help you.

[heybruce]

14 minutes ago, riclag said:

Well  your one of the few that accept Mr. Trump as the POTUS.The only suspicion of illegal acts  during the campaign was with the Dems,DOJ and FBI(opposition research paper bought by the DEMs then used as unsubstantiated facts to bring down a candidate and President .Oh and bad leadership can happen in every WH .

You and I have been down this road before.Your hatred for Mr. Trump is tantamount to the facts on hand .Shoe on the other foot for a moment,If Trump had his DOJ and FBI do the same to Clinton    

The FBI was investigating possible illegal activities on both sides; very publicly for the Democrats, very privately for the Republicans.  The investigation of the Democrats ended with no charges filed, the investigation of the Republicans continues with charges filed against key Trump campaign and administration officials.  These are facts, independent of my desire to see a dangerous incompetent removed from the White House.

 

Check your facts (or stop lying if that is what you're doing).  The Steele dossier was not used in the campaign, and the portions presented to the FISA court were verified.

[Khun Han]

37 minutes ago, heybruce said:

The FBI was investigating possible illegal activities on both sides; very publicly for the Democrats, very privately for the Republicans.  The investigation of the Democrats ended with no charges filed, the investigation of the Republicans continues with charges filed against key Trump campaign and administration officials.  These are facts, independent of my desire to see a dangerous incompetent removed from the White House.

 

Check your facts (or stop lying if that is what you're doing).  The Steele dossier was not used in the campaign, and the portions presented to the FISA court were verified.

 

The 'verification' was from a Yahoo News article that Steele himself planted.

 

Good article here in the National Review. Trump haters will dismiss it out-of-hand because the National Review isn't a liberal left journal:

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/grassley-graham-memo-affirms-nunes-memo-fisa-steele-dossier/

Edited February 18, 2018 by Khun Han

[riclag]

37 minutes ago, heybruce said:

 

Between June and Nov 2016 Steel was giving his mostly unsubstantiated reports to the FBI.These reports were used in a FISA app.Don't call me a liar.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/politics/steele-timeline/?utm_term=.5f6e0ddda1a0

 

 

Me-Well  your one of the few that accept Mr. Trump as the POTUS.The only suspicion of illegal acts  during the campaign was with the Dems,DOJ and FBI(opposition research paper bought by the DEMs then used as unsubstantiated facts to bring down a candidate and President .Oh and bad leadership can happen in every WH .

You and I have been down this road before.Your hatred for Mr. Trump is tantamount to the facts on hand .Shoe on the other foot for a moment,If Trump had his DOJ and FBI do the same to Clinton    

You-"The FBI was investigating possible illegal activities on both sides; very publicly for the Democrats, very privately for the Republicans.  The investigation of the Democrats ended with no charges filed, the investigation of the Republicans continues with charges filed against key Trump campaign and administration officials.  These are facts, independent of my desire to see a dangerous incompetent removed from the White House.

 

Check your facts (or stop lying if that is what you're doing).  The Steele dossier was not used in the campaign, and the portions presented to the FISA court were verified".

Edited February 18, 2018 by riclag

[rockingrobin]

12 minutes ago, riclag said:

Between June and Nov 2016 Steel was giving his mostly unsubstantiated reports to the FBI.These reports were used in a FISA app.Don't call me a liar.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/politics/steele-timeline/?utm_term=.5f6e0ddda1a0

 

 

Me-Well  your one of the few that accept Mr. Trump as the POTUS.The only suspicion of illegal acts  during the campaign was with the Dems,DOJ and FBI(opposition research paper bought by the DEMs then used as unsubstantiated facts to bring down a candidate and President .Oh and bad leadership can happen in every WH .

You and I have been down this road before.Your hatred for Mr. Trump is tantamount to the facts on hand .Shoe on the other foot for a moment,If Trump had his DOJ and FBI do the same to Clinton    

You-"The FBI was investigating possible illegal activities on both sides; very publicly for the Democrats, very privately for the Republicans.  The investigation of the Democrats ended with no charges filed, the investigation of the Republicans continues with charges filed against key Trump campaign and administration officials.  These are facts, independent of my desire to see a dangerous incompetent removed from the White House.

 

Check your facts (or stop lying if that is what you're doing).  The Steele dossier was not used in the campaign, and the portions presented to the FISA court were verified".

Even if the Steel dossier was used to obtain the initial FISA.Anybody with an understanding of the process would know that further extensions require additional proof.

The Steel dossier was relaying in real time, events not known in the public domain

[riclag]

3 minutes ago, rockingrobin said:

Even if the Steel dossier was used to obtain the initial FISA.Anybody with an understanding of the process would know that further extensions require additional proof.

The Steel dossier was relaying in real time, events not known in the public domain

Interesting .So are you saying that when the head of the FBI(Comey) comes into a FISA court with a 500 page app to extend spying he was or wasn't  questioned on what new proof there  was lol .

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

The 'verification' was from a Yahoo News article that Steele himself planted.

 

Good article here in the National Review. Trump haters will dismiss it out-of-hand because the National Review isn't a liberal left journal:

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/grassley-graham-memo-affirms-nunes-memo-fisa-steele-dossier/

Can you provide a credible source that says that the sole verification of the Steele dossier was a Yahoo News article?  I thought not.

 

The National Review article argues that Steele was not a credible source, and the FISA court was not made aware of the political origins of the evidence.  Both are wrong.

 

" The memo does a poor job of explaining why Mr Steele should not be trusted. He ran the Russia desk for Britain’s foreign-intelligence service and provided solid intelligence for the FBI before. His objection to Mr Trump seems to have stemmed from his belief that the candidate had been compromised by Russian intelligence."     https://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21736550-how-make-country-less-great-attacks-fbi-and-justice-department-will-harm

 

"On February 10, 2017, CNN reported that some communications between "senior Russian officials and other Russian individuals" described in the dossier had been corroborated by multiple U.S. officials. They "took place between the same individuals on the same days and from the same locations as detailed in the dossier". Sources told CNN that some conversations had been "intercepted during routine intelligence gathering", but refused to reveal the content of conversations, or specify which communications were detailed in the dossier."    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Russia_dossier

 

Edit:  Omitted the final part:

 

" The New York Times also reported Friday that the FISA court was told about political motivations behind the dossier. A Democratic memo written to rebut the allegations in Nunes' document said the FBI did, in fact, tell the court that the information in the Steele dossier was politically motivated, even if the bureau didn't mention that research that went into the dossier was paid for by Democrats, the Times reported, citing two people familiar with the Democratic memo. "     https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/03/politics/memo-dossier-christopher-steele-carter-page/index.html

 

I wonder why Trump isn't as quick to release the Democrat memo on the subject?  He expressed willingness to declassify and release the Nunes memo before he'd saw it.

Edited February 18, 2018 by heybruce

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, riclag said:

Between June and Nov 2016 Steel was giving his mostly unsubstantiated reports to the FBI.These reports were used in a FISA app.Don't call me a liar.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/politics/steele-timeline/?utm_term=.5f6e0ddda1a0

 

 

Me-Well  your one of the few that accept Mr. Trump as the POTUS.The only suspicion of illegal acts  during the campaign was with the Dems,DOJ and FBI(opposition research paper bought by the DEMs then used as unsubstantiated facts to bring down a candidate and President .Oh and bad leadership can happen in every WH .

You and I have been down this road before.Your hatred for Mr. Trump is tantamount to the facts on hand .Shoe on the other foot for a moment,If Trump had his DOJ and FBI do the same to Clinton    

You-"The FBI was investigating possible illegal activities on both sides; very publicly for the Democrats, very privately for the Republicans.  The investigation of the Democrats ended with no charges filed, the investigation of the Republicans continues with charges filed against key Trump campaign and administration officials.  These are facts, independent of my desire to see a dangerous incompetent removed from the White House.

 

Check your facts (or stop lying if that is what you're doing).  The Steele dossier was not used in the campaign, and the portions presented to the FISA court were verified".

Steele's credibility was sufficient for the intelligence agencies to look into the dossier's claims.  Parts were verified, parts unverified, none has been proven false.  The evidence used in the FISA court was verified.  You suggested otherwise, which was misleading at best.  You also said the dossier was used in the campaign, which is false.

 

Edit:  In doing an internet search on key terms, I was struck on the number of conservative websites expressing outrage about the same selected facts.  Clearly they are trying to bury a balanced assessment of the Steele dossier under garbage.

Edited February 18, 2018 by heybruce

[riclag]

9 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Steele's credibility was sufficient for the intelligence agencies to look into the dossier's claims.  Parts were verified, parts unverified, none has been proven false.  The evidence used in the FISA court was verified.  You suggested otherwise, which was misleading at best.  You also said the dossier was used in the campaign, which is false.

No I didn't .Read it again!The dossier(oppostion research paper/reports, put out by the dems to bring down a candidate and later a President of the USA ) was used during the campaign to apply for a Fisa warrant 

Edited February 18, 2018 by riclag

[mogandave]

No I didn't .Read it again!The dossier(oppostion research paper/reports, put out by the dems to bring down a candidate and later a President of the USA ) was used during the campaign to apply for a Fisa warrant 

More regurgitated “facts” from faux news

[riclag]

2 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

More regurgitated “facts” from faux news

 

 You talk about facts ,by all means,bring on the Fisa transcripts. Why aren't the dems calling for the  entire transcripts to be revealed?GOP has called for them to be released and unredacted 

8 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

More regurgitated “facts” from faux news

 

 

[heybruce]

1 hour ago, riclag said:

No I didn't .Read it again!The dossier(oppostion research paper/reports, put out by the dems to bring down a candidate and later a President of the USA ) was used during the campaign to apply for a Fisa warrant 

The FBI decided to apply for another FISA warrant on Page during the campaign.  So what?

Edited February 18, 2018 by heybruce

[Jingthing]

The Russians did meddle. FACT.

Their meddling had some level of influence. FACT.

Their meddling had enough influence to swing the election to "trump." MAYBE.

 

"...

If the allegations of the indictment prove true, it seems probable that the Russians were successful in their multimillion-dollar effort to influence the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States. Of course the answer to this complex question will never be definitively known. Polling cannot tell us whether voters might have chosen differently if the Russian influence operation hadn't happened.

What is known, however, is that the election was close and voter shifts in just a few significant states could have changed the Electoral College vote count in a presidential election in which Hillary Clinton won the popular vote."

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/02/17/opinions/muellers-compelling-story-of-russian-intrigue-to-elect-trump-opinion-callan/index.html

Edited February 18, 2018 by Jingthing

[Scott]

Off-topic post and reply removed. 

[Khun Han]

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

Can you provide a credible source that says that the sole verification of the Steele dossier was a Yahoo News article?  I thought not.

 

The National Review article argues that Steele was not a credible source, and the FISA court was not made aware of the political origins of the evidence.  Both are wrong.

 

" The memo does a poor job of explaining why Mr Steele should not be trusted. He ran the Russia desk for Britain’s foreign-intelligence service and provided solid intelligence for the FBI before. His objection to Mr Trump seems to have stemmed from his belief that the candidate had been compromised by Russian intelligence."     https://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21736550-how-make-country-less-great-attacks-fbi-and-justice-department-will-harm

 

"On February 10, 2017, CNN reported that some communications between "senior Russian officials and other Russian individuals" described in the dossier had been corroborated by multiple U.S. officials. They "took place between the same individuals on the same days and from the same locations as detailed in the dossier". Sources told CNN that some conversations had been "intercepted during routine intelligence gathering", but refused to reveal the content of conversations, or specify which communications were detailed in the dossier."    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump–Russia_dossier

 

Edit:  Omitted the final part:

 

" The New York Times also reported Friday that the FISA court was told about political motivations behind the dossier. A Democratic memo written to rebut the allegations in Nunes' document said the FBI did, in fact, tell the court that the information in the Steele dossier was politically motivated, even if the bureau didn't mention that research that went into the dossier was paid for by Democrats, the Times reported, citing two people familiar with the Democratic memo. "     https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/03/politics/memo-dossier-christopher-steele-carter-page/index.html

 

I wonder why Trump isn't as quick to release the Democrat memo on the subject?  He expressed willingness to declassify and release the Nunes memo before he'd saw it.

 

"Can you provide a credible source that says that the sole verification of the Steele dossier was a Yahoo News article?  I thought not."

 

From the memo by Sen Chuck Grassley and Sen Lindsey Graham in the article I linked:

 

"The bulk of the application consists of allegations against Page that were disclosed to the FBI by Mr. Steele and are also outlined in the Steele dossier. The application appears to contain no additional information corroborating the dossier allegations against Mr. Page, although it does cite to a news article that appears to be sourced to Mr. Steele’s dossier."

 

"The National Review article argues that Steele was not a credible source, and the FISA court was not made aware of the political origins of the evidence.  Both are wrong."

 

On political origins (again from the Grassley/Graham memo):

 

"The FBI noted to a vaguely limited extent the political origins of the dossier. In footnote 8 [of the first warrant application, apparently repeated in the subsequent applications] the FBI stated that the dossier information was compiled pursuant to the direction of a law firm who had hired an “identified U.S. person” — now known as Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS."

 

On Steele's credibility, from my linked article (to clarify, not from the Grassley/Graham memo):

 

"In late October 2016, shortly after the first warrant was issued, the FBI terminated its relationship with Steele because he lied to the Bureau about his contacts with the media. But the Justice Department did not report this to the FISA court. Instead, when the first warrant expired in January 2017, the FBI and Justice Department sought its renewal by, again, relying on the credibility of the guy they’d booted for lying. In another lawyerly footnote, they told the FISA court that Steele had been terminated not because he lied but because he was guilty of “unauthorized disclosure of information to the press.”

But that was not the half of it. Steele’s agreement with the FBI was that he would not communicate with the press. He made that agreement and then communicated with the press anyway — which showed he was unreliable, notwithstanding the FBI’s continued insistence to the contrary. He hadn’t just flouted the agreement by speaking to the press, though; he had clearly lied about doing so."

 

It's worth noting that Steele left Russia twenty years ago, after being exposed as a spy.

 

It's also worth noting that The Economist, Wikipedia and The New York Times (the sources of the links in the quoted post) have not seen the transcripts of the relevant FISA court hearings. Whereas Senators Grassley and Graham, as Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Chair of one of it's sub-committees respectively, have seen transcripts of the relevant FISA court hearings.

Edited February 18, 2018 by Khun Han

[Khun Han]

5 hours ago, heybruce said:

Steele's credibility was sufficient for the intelligence agencies to look into the dossier's claims.  Parts were verified, parts unverified, none has been proven false.  The evidence used in the FISA court was verified.  You suggested otherwise, which was misleading at best.  You also said the dossier was used in the campaign, which is false.

 

Edit:  In doing an internet search on key terms, I was struck on the number of conservative websites expressing outrage about the same selected facts.  Clearly they are trying to bury a balanced assessment of the Steele dossier under garbage.

 

Steele's credibility was so bad that he was sacked by the FBI for lying to them.

 

As confirmed by Senators Grassley and Graham, the only "verification" for the Steele dossier presented to the FISA court was a Yahoo News article planted by Steele himself.

[heybruce]

4 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

"Can you provide a credible source that says that the sole verification of the Steele dossier was a Yahoo News article?  I thought not."

 

From the memo by Sen Chuck Grassley and Sen Lindsey Graham in the article I linked:

 

"The bulk of the application consists of allegations against Page that were disclosed to the FBI by Mr. Steele and are also outlined in the Steele dossier. The application appears to contain no additional information corroborating the dossier allegations against Mr. Page, although it does cite to a news article that appears to be sourced to Mr. Steele’s dossier."

 

"The National Review article argues that Steele was not a credible source, and the FISA court was not made aware of the political origins of the evidence.  Both are wrong."

 

On political origins:

 

"The FBI noted to a vaguely limited extent the political origins of the dossier. In footnote 8 [of the first warrant application, apparently repeated in the subsequent applications] the FBI stated that the dossier information was compiled pursuant to the direction of a law firm who had hired an “identified U.S. person” — now known as Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS."

 

On Steele's credibility:

 

"In late October 2016, shortly after the first warrant was issued, the FBI terminated its relationship with Steele because he lied to the Bureau about his contacts with the media. But the Justice Department did not report this to the FISA court. Instead, when the first warrant expired in January 2017, the FBI and Justice Department sought its renewal by, again, relying on the credibility of the guy they’d booted for lying. In another lawyerly footnote, they told the FISA court that Steele had been terminated not because he lied but because he was guilty of “unauthorized disclosure of information to the press.”

But that was not the half of it. Steele’s agreement with the FBI was that he would not communicate with the press. He made that agreement and then communicated with the press anyway — which showed he was unreliable, notwithstanding the FBI’s continued insistence to the contrary. He hadn’t just flouted the agreement by speaking to the press, though; he had clearly lied about doing so."

 

It's worth noting that Steele left Russia twenty years ago, after being exposed as a spy.

 

It's also worth noting that The Economist, Wikipedia and The New York Times (the sources of the links in the quoted post) have not seen the transcripts of the relevant FISA court hearings. Senators Grassley and Graham, as Chair of the Judiciary Committee and Chair of one of it's sub-committees respectively, have seen transcripts of the relevant FISA court hearings.

I asked for a credible source.  Senators Grassley and Graham are Republicans and not impartial on this matter.  I'd rather see the memo prepared by the Democrats and evaluate both sides rather than rely on selectively leaked information from one side.

 

Steele went to the press due to frustration with what he perceived as the FBI's lack of progress or interest in the information he provided them.  What he had uncovered left him convinced there was a serious chance Trump had been compromised by Russia and he expected a greater sense of urgency on the matter.

 

Steele left Russia after being exposed as a spy, which was a good reason to leave.  However he kept useful contacts in Russia and was considered trustworthy enough to be used by the FBI on other matters.

 

It's worth remembering that we are discussing one warrant on one person who was already of interest to the FBI because of his Russian contacts, and this one person is only a small part of the Mueller investigation. 

[heybruce]

9 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Steele's credibility was so bad that he was sacked by the FBI for lying to them.

 

As confirmed by Senators Grassley and Graham, the only "verification" for the Steele dossier presented to the FISA court was a Yahoo News article planted by Steele himself.

See the above post. 

 

BTW, Steele wasn't paid for the information he provided the FBI, so saying he was sacked is a stretch.

 

" Steele’s last report for Fusion was submitted on Oct. 20. The Post reported that the FBI had reached an agreement with Steele to pay him to continue his work after the election but that the arrangement fell apart after his research became public. He may have been reimbursed for some travel expenses. "    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/01/09/what-you-need-to-know-about-christopher-steele-the-fbi-and-the-dossier/?utm_term=.e07d943d5340

[Khun Han]

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

I asked for a credible source.  Senators Grassley and Graham are Republicans and not impartial on this matter.  I'd rather see the memo prepared by the Democrats and evaluate both sides rather than rely on selectively leaked information from one side.

 

Steele went to the press due to frustration with what he perceived as the FBI's lack of progress or interest in the information he provided them.  What he had uncovered left him convinced there was a serious chance Trump had been compromised by Russia and he expected a greater sense of urgency on the matter.

 

Steele left Russia after being exposed as a spy, which was a good reason to leave.  However he kept useful contacts in Russia and was considered trustworthy enough to be used by the FBI on other matters.

 

It's worth remembering that we are discussing one warrant on one person who was already of interest to the FBI because of his Russian contacts, and this one person is only a small part of the Mueller investigation. 

 

"I asked for a credible source.  Senators Grassley and Graham are Republicans and not impartial on this matter.  I'd rather see the memo prepared by the Democrats and evaluate both sides rather than rely on selectively leaked information from one side."

 

And I gave you two. And those two senior senators are not going put lies in print about this matter. But it's clear that, because the truth doesn't suit your obvious agenda, you will just prevaricate and refuse to accept it.

 

"Steele went to the press due to frustration with what he perceived as the FBI's lack of progress or interest in the information he provided them.  What he had uncovered left him convinced there was a serious chance Trump had been compromised by Russia and he expected a greater sense of urgency on the matter."

 

Steele hasn't uncovered anything. He has proven himself to be unreliable, and a liar.

 

"Steele left Russia after being exposed as a spy, which was a good reason to leave.  However he kept useful contacts in Russia and was considered trustworthy enough to be used by the FBI on other matters."

 

Steele's contacts relay second, third and worse-hand information of questionable veracity. Steele himself admitted in a British court that some of his information was false.

 

 

"It's worth remembering that we are discussing one warrant on one person who was already of interest to the FBI because of his Russian contacts, and this one person is only a small part of the Mueller investigation."

 

It's worth remembering that the type of warrant obtained on Carter Page was of the type that allowed the FBI to spy on the whole Trump presidential campaign. It's also worth remembering that Page was of interest to the FBI because he had shopped himself to a Senate committee about being approached by Russian agents.

[Khun Han]

12 minutes ago, heybruce said:

31 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Steele's credibility was so bad that he was sacked by the FBI for lying to them.

 

As confirmed by Senators Grassley and Graham, the only "verification" for the Steele dossier presented to the FISA court was a Yahoo News article planted by Steele himself.

See the above post. 

 

BTW, Steele wasn't paid for the information he provided the FBI, so saying he was sacked is a stretch.

 

" Steele’s last report for Fusion was submitted on Oct. 20. The Post reported that the FBI had reached an agreement with Steele to pay him to continue his work after the election but that the arrangement fell apart after his research became public. He may have been reimbursed for some travel expenses. "    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/01/09/what-you-need-to-know-about-christopher-steele-the-fbi-and-the-dossier/?utm_term=.e07d943d5340

 

"See the above post."

 

Yes, it's fascinating that you prefer to believe anonymous sources in newspaper articles and Wikipedia, rather than the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

"BTW, Steele wasn't paid for the information he provided the FBI, so saying he was sacked is a stretch."

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/4/fbi-authorized-christopher-steele-payments-dossier/

 

"The FBI officially authorized payments to Christopher Steele, who wrote the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, but then fired the former British spy for lying to agents about his covert leaks to the news media."

[bendejo]

9 hours ago, heybruce said:

However I think it is very likely that Trump is a sufficiently arrogant micro-manager to have been involved in covering up the collusion of family and friends, and will continue to be involved. 

 

Yes, this is the obstruction of justice that keeps coming up.  It's already been reported, months ago, that he coached Junior on what to say regarding that meeting in Trump Castle.

 

Something else that was reported and then never mentioned again was DT was caught passing classified info to the Russians, US intelligence snared him John LeCarre style.  In brief, they came up with a phony operation and gave it a classified code name, and gave it only to him; hours after the meeting that word was intercepted being passed along Russian channels.  US law enforcement can't use it to charge him without having to reveal their own intelligence apparatus.  For those who care to research it, it happened just days after he canned Comey; he went into the Oval Office with only Kislyak and Lavrov and the Russian press (no US coverage), before closing the door he was heard to tell his Russian buddies that "I got rid of Comey, what a nut case!"  Lavrov, with that classic in-your-face arrogance, turned to the US press and told them to eff-off before the meeting.

 

The way they got him is the same technique used in "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy" which was quite a popular book in its day.  DT should have read it.

 

Most patriotic president ever! 

 

 

[heybruce]

11 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

"See the above post."

 

Yes, it's fascinating that you prefer to believe anonymous sources in newspaper articles and Wikipedia, rather than the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

"BTW, Steele wasn't paid for the information he provided the FBI, so saying he was sacked is a stretch."

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/4/fbi-authorized-christopher-steele-payments-dossier/

 

"The FBI officially authorized payments to Christopher Steele, who wrote the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, but then fired the former British spy for lying to agents about his covert leaks to the news media."

"Yes, it's fascinating that you prefer to believe anonymous sources in newspaper articles and Wikipedia, rather than the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee."

 

Yes, just as I prefer anonymous consumer reviews of products over the marketing hype of a salesman.  Don't you?

 

[bendejo]

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Bringing up Soros is just baiting.

 

Certain names being brought up are indicative of a Fox News watcher.  Top of the chart is Soros, Susan Rice, and of course the conjoined twins Hillary and Obama.  Kellyanne loves to pivot to Bill Clinton, maybe part of some major crush.  And of course whoever DT or the GOP throws into the soup any given day.

Well, three of these people are well-known figures in the US, but if not for Fox's vilification 99% of Fox's viewers would have never heard of Soros or S. Rice, and know nothing of what they are about.  Teach them a name and they'll forever hold on to it, like a dog with a bone.

 

"Well, what about Bill Clinton....?" 

 

 

[Khun Han]

15 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"Yes, it's fascinating that you prefer to believe anonymous sources in newspaper articles and Wikipedia, rather than the Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee."

 

Yes, just as I prefer anonymous consumer reviews of products over the marketing hype of a salesman.  Don't you?

 

 

What a silly and inappropriate deflection.

[heybruce]

29 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

"I asked for a credible source.  Senators Grassley and Graham are Republicans and not impartial on this matter.  I'd rather see the memo prepared by the Democrats and evaluate both sides rather than rely on selectively leaked information from one side."

 

And I gave you two. And those two senior senators are not going put lies in print about this matter. But it's clear that, because the truth doesn't suit your obvious agenda, you will just prevaricate and refuse to accept it.

 

"Steele went to the press due to frustration with what he perceived as the FBI's lack of progress or interest in the information he provided them.  What he had uncovered left him convinced there was a serious chance Trump had been compromised by Russia and he expected a greater sense of urgency on the matter."

 

Steele hasn't uncovered anything. He has proven himself to be unreliable, and a liar.

 

"Steele left Russia after being exposed as a spy, which was a good reason to leave.  However he kept useful contacts in Russia and was considered trustworthy enough to be used by the FBI on other matters."

 

Steele's contacts relay second, third and worse-hand information of questionable veracity. Steele himself admitted in a British court that some of his information was false.

 

 

"It's worth remembering that we are discussing one warrant on one person who was already of interest to the FBI because of his Russian contacts, and this one person is only a small part of the Mueller investigation."

 

It's worth remembering that the type of warrant obtained on Carter Page was of the type that allowed the FBI to spy on the whole Trump presidential campaign. It's also worth remembering that Page was of interest to the FBI because he had shopped himself to a Senate committee about being approached by Russian agents.

The two Senators may not lie, but they will be highly selective in the information they release, and will present opinions as fact.  As stated earlier, I will withhold judgment until (if) the Democrat memo is released so I can consider the other side's presentation of the facts.

 

Steele's dossier, a collection of memos covering a period of months, matched with information the FBI had obtained from other sources.  As I've pointed out repeatedly, some of his information has been confirmed, some remains unconfirmed, none has been discredited.  Unless you can prove he has lied, you have committed libel.  Can you provide a source for your claim that "Steele himself admitted in a British court that some of his information was false."?

 

Yes, the type of warrant obtained on Carter Page, the FISA warrant, is used for investigating security issues.  What is your point?

 

Page was of interest to the FBI because he met with known Russian intelligence officers.  Surveillance indicates that the Russians regarded him largely as a potentially useful idiot, but idiots can be of tremendous use to the intelligence community.   https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/us/politics/carter-page-trump-russia.html

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

What a silly and inappropriate deflection.

Hardly a deflection.  Republicans are releasing carefully screened information to discredit any part of the Mueller investigation that they can, though so far they've done a poor job of it--they don't think the political origins of some of the FISA court application were explained in sufficient detail and it relied too much on the work of a respected British spy with over twenty years in MI6. 

 

The Republicans have no problem releasing classified information, over the objections of the FBI.  So far they've prevented the Democrats from doing the same to provide a balanced perspective.  I view one-sided information with great skepticism.

 

 

[Khun Han]

19 minutes ago, heybruce said:

The two Senators may not lie, but they will be highly selective in the information they release, and will present opinions as fact.  As stated earlier, I will withhold judgment until (if) the Democrat memo is released so I can consider the other side's presentation of the facts.

 

Steele's dossier, a collection of memos covering a period of months, matched with information the FBI had obtained from other sources.  As I've pointed out repeatedly, some of his information has been confirmed, some remains unconfirmed, none has been discredited.  Unless you can prove he has lied, you have committed libel.  Can you provide a source for your claim that "Steele himself admitted in a British court that some of his information was false."?

 

Yes, the type of warrant obtained on Carter Page, the FISA warrant, is used for investigating security issues.  What is your point?

 

Page was of interest to the FBI because he met with known Russian intelligence officers.  Surveillance indicates that the Russians regarded him largely as a potentially useful idiot, but idiots can be of tremendous use to the intelligence community.   https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/us/politics/carter-page-trump-russia.html

 

"The two Senators may not lie, but they will be highly selective in the information they release, and will present opinions as fact."

 

Senators Grassley and Graham were very specific in their memo about what was in the FBI's FISA court applications, as per the quotes I posted. Either they are lying, or they are presenting fact. Their memo about what was in the court applications isn't partial information, nor does it leave anything of substance out if they are being truthful, as can be seen by the way that it's worded.

 

 "Steele's dossier, a collection of memos covering a period of months, matched with information the FBI had obtained from other sources."

 

According to anonymous (mostly anonymous Democrat) sources in unverified media articles you have linked.

 

"As I've pointed out repeatedly, some of his information has been confirmed, some remains unconfirmed, none has been discredited."

 

None of it has been confirmed, except by anonymous sources in media articles. Senators Grassley and Graham have confirmed that the only 'verification' provided to the first FISA court application was the Yahoo News article planted by Steele himself.

 

"Unless you can prove he has lied, you have committed libel."

 

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/4/fbi-authorized-christopher-steele-payments-dossier/

 

"The FBI officially authorized payments to Christopher Steele, who wrote the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, but then fired the former British spy for lying to agents about his covert leaks to the news media."

 

"Can you provide a source for your claim that "Steele himself admitted in a British court that some of his information was false."?"

 

Here's one of any number:

 

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/25/christopher-steele-admits-dossier-charge-unverifie/

 

"Yes, the type of warrant obtained on Carter Page, the FISA warrant, is used for investigating security issues.  What is your point?"

 

My point is that the FBI didn't apply for a simple warrant to spy on Carter Page, they applied for a special warrant which allowed them to spy on anyone with current and previous connections to him, including the Trump election campaign.

 

"Page was of interest to the FBI because he met with known Russian intelligence officers.  Surveillance indicates that the Russians regarded him largely as a potentially useful idiot, but idiots can be of tremendous use to the intelligence community.   https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/us/politics/carter-page-trump-russia.html"

 

And Page was brought to the FBI's attention by reporting his meeting with suspected Russian spies to the US authorities.

 

 

[Khun Han]

41 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Hardly a deflection.  Republicans are releasing carefully screened information to discredit any part of the Mueller investigation that they can, though so far they've done a poor job of it--they don't think the political origins of some of the FISA court application were explained in sufficient detail and it relied too much on the work of a respected British spy with over twenty years in MI6. 

 

The Republicans have no problem releasing classified information, over the objections of the FBI.  So far they've prevented the Democrats from doing the same to provide a balanced perspective.  I view one-sided information with great skepticism.

 

 

 

The Republicans are in the middle of fending off a politically motivated legal assault on their government.

 

Steele is a "respected" ex-British spy who hasn't been on the front line in twenty years. The FBI sacked him for lying, and he is currently embroiled in a libel case in the UK, where he has had to admit that much of his 'information' is unverified.

[Thaidream]

Here is what I believe happened and will eventually lead to Trump's resignation

 

1.  Long before Trump decided to run for President- Russian money poured into the Trump organization and bailed Trump out as he was almost without any liquidity or ability to borrow.  The Russians were paying 50% over the market price for real estate in the US and Trump was pocketing the difference. In essence, he was laundering money.

 

2.  He refuses to release his tax returns because they will show records of the Russian business transactions and provide a clear picture of what waas going on as far as finances.

 

3.  Onc Trump was nominated to run for President- the Russians realized that they had a 'hook' into Trump and Putin saw a clear window to exploit the situation.  The Russians wanted Trump to become President as he was someone they could control.  they set out to influence the election with 'fake news'; hacking into the Democratic Party HQ;  using Wikileaks and Assange as their agent; and possibly actually hacking into the election machines themselves.

 

4. There is no doubt that members of the Trump inner circle were willing to work with the Russians to include Trump's immediate family. Even Steve Bannon used the word 'treason ' to describe the relationship. As far as the dossier- I suspect most of it is true. Watching how Trump thinks and holds grudges- and is jealous of anyone with power- it is completely believable

 

5.  the old adage- follow the money- will eventually be Trump's undoing. I don't think he was smart enough to realize what was happening initially or the ramifications of his entanglement with Russian money but he damn well knows now and is obstructing justice. He is finished as President- He will resign in disgrace and become a historical figure who is reviled. He did it to himself but what is worse he took part of America with him.