57Brave
Well-known member
ah, no
Russia Collusion Scandal (aka A Leftist fantasy)
- Thread starter Runnin
- Start date
ah, no
57Brave
Well-known member
https://www.justsecurity.org/44697/steele-dossier-knowing/
The first thing to examine is Christopher Steele, the author of the reports, and his organization Orbis International. Are they credible?
Steele was the President of the Cambridge Union at university, and was a career British intelligence officer with service in Moscow, Paris and Afghanistan prior to work as the head of the Russia desk at British intelligence HQS. While in London he worked as the personal handler of Russian defector Alexander Litvinenko. He was a respected professional who had success in some of the most difficult intelligence environments. He retired from SIS in 2009 and started Orbis Business Intelligence along with a former colleague. Prior to his work on the Russian dossier for Orbis, he was best known for his investigation of the world soccer association (FIFA), which provided direct support to the FBI’s successful corruption case. Steele and Orbis were also known for assisting various European countries in understanding Russian efforts to meddle in their affairs.
Like any private firm, Orbis’ ability to remain in business relies on its track record of credibility. Success for Steele and his colleagues depends on his integrity, reliability, and the firm’s reputation for serious work. In this regard, Steele is putting his reputation and his company’s continued existence on the line with each report. Yes, as with anyone operating in the murky world of intelligence, he could be duped. Nonetheless, his reputation for handling sensitive Russian espionage operations over the years suggests that he is security conscious and aware of Russian counterintelligence and disinformation efforts. His willingness to share his work with professional investigative agencies, such as the FBI and the British Security Service, also suggest that he is comfortable opening his work to scrutiny and is seen as a serious partner by the best in the business.
...
So, more than a year after the production of the original raw reports, where do we stand?
Obviously trumps 4d chess game.
goldfly
<B>if my thought dreams could be seen</B>
i would pay large amounts of money to see that idiot play a regular game of chess
and i would side bet he doesn't understand all the moves for the pieces too
seriously
sturg33
I
that's a great argument goldfly.
one that would be more relevant to this discussion would be like "hey the person who thinks Trump is a Putin puppet is arming Putin's enemies. I'm having a hard time criticizing him for both so I'll just stick with the Russia nonsense!"
Not even sure why you are trying anymore. He is symbolic of the modern day progressive left. No factual arguments. Its all emotion. Its dangerous and needs to be addressed with the next generation by changing the education system.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/455036/new-york-times-trump-russia-collusion-narrative-reset-george-papadopoulos-carter-page?platform=hootsuite
There is no evidence that Papadopoulos or the Trump campaign was ever shown or given any of the emails the Kremlin purportedly had. The evidence, in fact, undermines the collusion narrative: If the Trump campaign had to learn, through Papadopoulos, that Russia supposedly had thousands of emails damaging to Clinton, that would necessarily mean the Trump campaign had nothing to do with Russia’s acquisition of the emails. This, no doubt, is why Mueller permitted Papadopoulos to plead guilty to a mere process crime — lying in an FBI interview. If there were evidence of an actual collusion conspiracy, Papadopoulos would have been pressured to admit guilt to it. He wasn’t.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The internets doesn't forget. The times took a big U turn once it was becoming clear the Dossier was a load of trash.
There is no evidence that Papadopoulos or the Trump campaign was ever shown or given any of the emails the Kremlin purportedly had. The evidence, in fact, undermines the collusion narrative: If the Trump campaign had to learn, through Papadopoulos, that Russia supposedly had thousands of emails damaging to Clinton, that would necessarily mean the Trump campaign had nothing to do with Russia’s acquisition of the emails. This, no doubt, is why Mueller permitted Papadopoulos to plead guilty to a mere process crime — lying in an FBI interview. If there were evidence of an actual collusion conspiracy, Papadopoulos would have been pressured to admit guilt to it. He wasn’t.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The internets doesn't forget. The times took a big U turn once it was becoming clear the Dossier was a load of trash.
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
It's really become difficult to isolate the signal from the noise, as Nate Silver puts it, with this whole thing. I think there is an element of partisan attack to it, and I think there is an element of media bias and grandstanding to the reporting. But I also think that Trump would be willing to cheat if he was confident he could get away with it. I am not convinced he did, and I hope he didn't.
I don't put it past any powerful person to cheat in such a high stakes game. I especially wouldn't blame DJT for doing so when it was so obvious how much was done for HRC to get her the presidency.
I do find it amusing how the Dossier has went from the key piece in the investigation to an inconsequential piece over time. Funny how that works when you learn more about the seedy nature of it. But again, we won't have comment on this. Seems people only want to discuss the stories that strengthen their cause.
TRUMP'S "DEEP STATE CONSPIRACY" ROSTER (= Republican)
AG
Acting AG
Deputy AG
FBI Director ('17)
FBI Director ('16)
DOJ-FBI Special Counsel
Chair, Senate Intel
Chair, House Intel
Chair, Senate Judiciary
Chair, House Judiciary
Want to debate the Dossier or Papa stories or just list irrelevant nonsense?
57Brave
Well-known member
oh I wouldn't call it irrelevant when the President of the United States floats the notion the entire justice system has it out for him.
Ever watched or read The Caine Mutiny where Captain Queeg ...
b) neither you or I has enough information to "debate" the dossier.
What you can do is list where, from what we do know, it has gotten the facts right and where it has been wrong.
To this point I have seen you repeat what Fox and Friends has said about it. No more - no less
Papadopoulos took a plea for a reason. People don't just willy-nilly plead guilty to lying to the FBI
Sally YatesVerified account @SallyQYates
Sally Yates Retweeted Donald J. Trump
POTUS on 12/28: “I have the absolute right
to do what I want with the Justice Department.” Today he
slanders career DOJ professionals as “deep state,” calls for prison
for a political opponent, and tries to sic DOJ on a
potential witness against him. Beyond abnormal; dangerous.
Ever watched or read The Caine Mutiny where Captain Queeg ...
b) neither you or I has enough information to "debate" the dossier.
What you can do is list where, from what we do know, it has gotten the facts right and where it has been wrong.
To this point I have seen you repeat what Fox and Friends has said about it. No more - no less
Papadopoulos took a plea for a reason. People don't just willy-nilly plead guilty to lying to the FBI
Sally YatesVerified account @SallyQYates
Sally Yates Retweeted Donald J. Trump
POTUS on 12/28: “I have the absolute right
to do what I want with the Justice Department.” Today he
slanders career DOJ professionals as “deep state,” calls for prison
for a political opponent, and tries to sic DOJ on a
potential witness against him. Beyond abnormal; dangerous.
So the answer is no then?
Papa took a plea because he lied to the FBI or couldn't remember exact dates from a year ago whatever you want to call it. I just hope I never get asked what I did last week. Damn, I'm fried.
Jaw
It's OVER 5,000!
You seem to watch A LOT of Fox and Friends. I would encourage you to minimize the time you spend watching Fox's commentary shows. Everyone I know that watches a lot of political commentary gets old and grumpy. Don't let it happen to you.