Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:
"According to the head of the FBI's counterintelligence division, Assistant Director Bill Priestap, corroboration of the Steele dossier was in its "infancy" at the time of the initial Page FISA application."

Most of the dossier remains uncorroborated.

See, I think you are interpreting that the way Nunes wants to. Why does the memo not say something like "And the FBI has not been able to corroborate the Steele Dossier any further." All the memo states is the state of collaboration at one point in time. If Nunes (or his staff/white house that actually wrote the memo) knew that the most corroboration that happened they would have stated as such. Instead they just stated what was known at the time, not what is known now. Other places in the document they talk about what is known now and not at the time of the FISA application, like McCabe's testimony about the application, so it is not limiting itself to that.

Simply, either Nunes/surrogates do not know if dossier has been corroborated further or that it has and it was not stated in the memo because it would hurt the purpose of the memo. I would imagine that Nunes or someone else on the committee asked McCabe during the same session referenced in the memo if more of the dossier had been corroborated, since it is an obvious question. So I would bet large sums of money more of the dossier has been corroborated since the initial FISA application and quote in the memo.
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [chaparral] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
So I would bet large sums of money more of the dossier has been corroborated since the initial FISA application and quote in the memo.

You mean like the meeting in Prague?

The dossier is a POS. If you go through and replace Trump with Clinton and change a few details, and add some Clinton Foundation, and uranium stuff. You'd have the 'opposition research' that was offered to Trump.

The Trump team was smart to walk away from it; the Dems bought it hook line and sinker.
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:
Quote:
So I would bet large sums of money more of the dossier has been corroborated since the initial FISA application and quote in the memo.


You mean like the meeting in Prague?

The dossier is a POS. If you go through and replace Trump with Clinton and change a few details, and add some Clinton Foundation, and uranium stuff. You'd have the 'opposition research' that was offered to Trump.

The Trump team was smart to walk away from it; the Dems bought it hook line and sinker.

I would not be surprised if the dossier is not 100%, it is raw intelligence (really should not be called a dossier). Just because some of it is wrong, does not mean all of it is. I am only 50/50 on Trump's team actually conspiring with Russia during the election, I just don't think that partnership was required and Trump's team is dumb enough that I doubt they would have kept it that hidden. On the other hand, I think there is a very good chance that Russia may have compromised Trump with his involvement with Russian Oligarchs over the past decade. This compromise could lead to Trump make decisions that are good for Russia/Oligarchs and bad for America. I think that is much more likely than collusion mentioned by Steele, because both were. We know that Trump was very dependant on Russia for money (by statements by the Trumps) because US banks would not loan to him after his bankruptcies. We also know from the Stormy Daniels thing that his susceptible to black mail.
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:
Quote:
So I would bet large sums of money more of the dossier has been corroborated since the initial FISA application and quote in the memo.


You mean like the meeting in Prague?

The dossier is a POS. If you go through and replace Trump with Clinton and change a few details, and add some Clinton Foundation, and uranium stuff. You'd have the 'opposition research' that was offered to Trump.

The Trump team was smart to walk away from it; the Dems bought it hook line and sinker.

Another sound, well-argued post. Bravo!
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [chaparral] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Trump's team actually conspiring with Russia during the election

Conspiring to do what? Rig the election? How did they do that? How were illegal/invalid votes entered?

Quote:
Trump make decisions that are good for Russia/Oligarchs and bad for America.

You mean like: Trump War: From Bombing Syria to Challenging Russian and Iran

Quote:
Stormy Daniels thing

Fake news!
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Another sound, well-argued post. Bravo!

Are you saying that the meeting in Prague happened? Despite Trump's lawyer never having traveled to Prague?

It's one small item in the dossier that was disproved, and disproved easily. So easily, it should have been easy to double check when the dossier was created, so speaks to the overall quality of the information in it.
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:
Quote:
Trump's team actually conspiring with Russia during the election


Conspiring to do what? Rig the election? How did they do that? How were illegal/invalid votes entered?

Quote:
Trump make decisions that are good for Russia/Oligarchs and bad for America.


You mean like: Trump War: From Bombing Syria to Challenging Russian and Iran

Quote:
Stormy Daniels thing


Fake news!

First, I said it was unlikely that Trump conspired with Russia during the election. So thanks for quoting me out of context, really shows a strong case there.

Second, yes doing things like undermining Article 5. That is way bigger than bombing a Syrian air field and not hitting the Russian istallations. Not implementing sanctions against Russia is another example. And tons of other examples of Trump undermining our relationship with our Allies. Really Trump has been much better for Russia than Clinton would have been, because Clinton would have made many of the same anti-Russia moves and also done more. So while Trump has not been a lap dog, he has been much much better than Clinton would have been.

Third, sure fake news. Let us ignore the evidence and just go by statements by people that signed NDAs and ignore their statements prior to the NDA.
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:

Quote:
Stormy Daniels thing


Fake news!

Do you actually believe this?

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Do you actually believe this?

I know she's an attention seeking whore who was all set to 'expose Trump' on late night TV, then rescinded all of her allegations.
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:
Quote:
Do you actually believe this?


I know she's an attention seeking whore who was all set to 'expose Trump' on late night TV, then rescinded all of her allegations.

That wasn't the question.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Nunes memo: FBI vs. White House [efernand] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
efernand wrote:
Quote:
Another sound, well-argued post. Bravo!


Are you saying that the meeting in Prague happened? Despite Trump's lawyer never having traveled to Prague?

It's one small item in the dossier that was disproved, and disproved easily. So easily, it should have been easy to double check when the dossier was created, so speaks to the overall quality of the information in it.

Yes, the dossier does have some factual inaccuracies in it. That is virtually inevitable when gathering raw intelligence through clandestine means. Even if you trust your sources, and even if the sources believe they are passing you accurate information, that does not mean all the information will be correct. The raw intelligence is passed to the security analysts, whose jobs are to sort out what is reliable and what is not. Many items in the dossier have since been corroborated.

If you actually want to learn more about this, and what elements of the "dossier" have been corroborated, read this written by an ex-CIA Senior Intelligence Service member. (Warning, it's long and detailed, so it may take some time and concentration.)

https://www.justsecurity.org/...ele-dossier-knowing/
Quote Reply

Prev Next