Learn how to use Uber, Lyft and other ride-sharing services!  Register now for a free AARP webinar Nov. 18.

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
708
Views

Re: Byron York: After Trump dossier revelation, FBI is next

708 Views
Message 1 of 7
Jim, it's fake news.
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
708
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
715
Views

Re: Byron York: After Trump dossier revelation, FBI is next

715 Views
Message 2 of 7

trump hillary russia.jpg

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
715
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
726
Views

Re: Byron York: After Trump dossier revelation, FBI is next

726 Views
Message 3 of 7

john - In Russia they pay the servants on the number of discussions they can start on the same lie.

 

jim's link - In the end, according to reports, the FBI did not pay Steele. But the dossier did not go away. Indeed, in January 2017, Comey briefed President-elect Trump (and President Obama) on the dossier's contents.

jim - "The dossier is a complete fabrication and is a work of pure fiction."

 

Same as it was (11) months ago right jim?  I sense some economic desperation maybe afoot.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
726
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
740
Views

Re: Byron York: After Trump dossier revelation, FBI is next

740 Views
Message 4 of 7

@jimc91 wrote:

Clinton’s collusion: Who will investigate the new Russia scandal?

 

After more than a year of lying denials, Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee now stand exposed as the funders of that salacious dossier alleging years of collusion between the Kremlin and Donald Trump.

 

The FBI stands exposed, too — as having agreed to keep paying for the same research after Trump was elected.

 

All of which raises lots of disturbing questions, plus the possibility that if anyone colluded with Moscow, it was Team Hillary.

 

The Washington Post reported that Clinton and the DNC paid millions to a DC law firm, Perkins Coie, which in turn hired Fusion GPS to investigate Trump.

 

Fusion GPS then hired Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer who compiled the 35-page dossier containing information he claimed came from Russian government and inte....

But Fusion has its own Kremlin ties, having done paid work to try to reverse the sanctions imposed in the Magnitsky Act, named for a Russian whistleblower tortured and killed in Moscow — work that allegedly included smear campaigns against Magnitsky and Bill Browder, his top champion in the West.

 

Little wonder Fusion GPS has been stonewalling Congress’ efforts to get to the bottom of this, with company officials taking the Fifth Amendment.

 

And why the FBI has been resisting congressional subpoenas for information on its role in the whole matter.

 

What we had here wasn’t a leak from intelligence sources, but a piece of opposition research — contracted and paid for by President Trump’s opponents and prepared by a firm with a record of Russian-linked smears — which the FBI glommed onto.

 

Indeed, it looks very much like the whole Trump “collusion” probe was prompted by the Democratic-commissioned hit job. The same dossier seems to have been the FBI’s pretext for FISA warrants on Trump officials.

 

Meanwhile, the latest disclosures about the FBI, the Clintons and the Russian uranium scheme raise big questions about former FBI chief Robert Mueller — who’s now the special counsel investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 race. Who investigates the investigator?

 

http://nypost.com/2017/10/25/clintons-collusion-who-will-investigate-the-new-russia-scandal/

 

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

The American people require more integrity than this complete fiasco!

 

 

 


Why the FBI jumping into the investigation? Presidential candidates have commited treason before to get elected. Google Nixon Treason.

 

If he had been cuaght before the election..we would be living in a better nation.

So it begins.
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
740
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
757
Views

Re: Byron York: After Trump dossier revelation, FBI is next

757 Views
Message 5 of 7

Clinton’s collusion: Who will investigate the new Russia scandal?

 

After more than a year of lying denials, Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee now stand exposed as the funders of that salacious dossier alleging years of collusion between the Kremlin and Donald Trump.

 

The FBI stands exposed, too — as having agreed to keep paying for the same research after Trump was elected.

 

All of which raises lots of disturbing questions, plus the possibility that if anyone colluded with Moscow, it was Team Hillary.

 

The Washington Post reported that Clinton and the DNC paid millions to a DC law firm, Perkins Coie, which in turn hired Fusion GPS to investigate Trump.

 

Fusion GPS then hired Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer who compiled the 35-page dossier containing information he claimed came from Russian government and inte....

But Fusion has its own Kremlin ties, having done paid work to try to reverse the sanctions imposed in the Magnitsky Act, named for a Russian whistleblower tortured and killed in Moscow — work that allegedly included smear campaigns against Magnitsky and Bill Browder, his top champion in the West.

 

Little wonder Fusion GPS has been stonewalling Congress’ efforts to get to the bottom of this, with company officials taking the Fifth Amendment.

 

And why the FBI has been resisting congressional subpoenas for information on its role in the whole matter.

 

What we had here wasn’t a leak from intelligence sources, but a piece of opposition research — contracted and paid for by President Trump’s opponents and prepared by a firm with a record of Russian-linked smears — which the FBI glommed onto.

 

Indeed, it looks very much like the whole Trump “collusion” probe was prompted by the Democratic-commissioned hit job. The same dossier seems to have been the FBI’s pretext for FISA warrants on Trump officials.

 

Meanwhile, the latest disclosures about the FBI, the Clintons and the Russian uranium scheme raise big questions about former FBI chief Robert Mueller — who’s now the special counsel investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 race. Who investigates the investigator?

 

http://nypost.com/2017/10/25/clintons-collusion-who-will-investigate-the-new-russia-scandal/

 

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

The American people require more integrity than this complete fiasco!

 

 

 

VIMTSTL
Report Inappropriate Content
Tags (1)
0
Kudos
757
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
5
Kudos
791
Views

Re: Byron York: After Trump dossier revelation, FBI is next

791 Views
Message 6 of 7

@jimc91 wrote:

by Byron York | Oct 25, 2017, 12:43 AM

 

Investigators looking into the so-called "Trump dossier" were not surprised when news broke Tuesday night that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, working through the Democrats' law firm, Perkins Coie, financed the "salacious and unverified" compilation of allegations of Trump collusion with Russia in the 2016 presidential campaign. (The "salacious and unverified" description comes from former FBI Director James Comey.)

 

There had been plenty of talk about the Democrats and Perkins Coie, so much that investigators almost assumed that was the case. But it wasn't until the Washington Post broke the story that it was confirmed.

 

And why did the story break when it did? Credit the much-maligned Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. The California Republican has been pursuing the dossier more aggressively than anyone else, and it was his Oct. 4 subpoena for the bank records of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that handled the dossier, that finally shook loose the information.

But knowing that the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and Perkins Coie supported the dossier is not the end of the story. The most important next step is the FBI.

 

Sometime in October 2016 — that is, at the height of the presidential campaign — Christopher Steele, the foreign agent hired by Fusion GPS to compile the Trump dossier, approached the FBI with information he had gleaned during the project. According to a February report in the Washington Post, Steele "reached an agreement with the FBI a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him to continue his work."

 

It was an astonishing turn: the nation's top federal law enforcement agency agreeing to fund an ongoing opposition research project being conducted by one of the candidates in the midst of a presidential election. "The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican nominee for president in the run-up to the election raises further questions about the FBI's independence from politics, as well as the Obama administration's use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends," wrote Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

 

In the end, according to reports, the FBI did not pay Steele. But the dossier did not go away. Indeed, in January 2017, Comey briefed President-elect Trump (and President Obama) on the dossier's contents.

 

In recent months, Nunes has been trying to force the FBI to reveal just what it did in the dossier matter. The intel chairman issued a subpoena to the FBI on Aug. 24, and in the time since, not a single document has been produced to the committee. The FBI and the Justice Department have spent most of that time talking about possibly complying with this or that part of the subpoena. But so far — nothing.

 

The same is true of Grassley's inquiries.

 

The new Clinton/DNC/Perkins Coie revelation will likely increase pressure on the FBI to explain what it did, and did not do, with the dossier. Certainly Nunes hopes that is the case. When I asked Nunes Tuesday night what would happen next with the FBI, he responded, "Their best option at this point is to bring all the documents tomorrow to the Capitol."

 

Of course, he won't be holding his breath.

 

Republican investigators had two big questions about the dossier. One was who paid for it, and that now seems answered. The other was: Did the FBI or other agencies use any information from the dossier as a basis for warrant requests before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court? In other words, did, say, the FBI use the dossier's "salacious and unverified" information to make the case that the bureau should be granted the authority to conduct intercepts?

 

Nunes, as well as Grassley and Senate Judiciary Committee colleague Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., have been pushing for months for the FBI to answer that question. So far, they've gotten nothing.

 

When the Post story broke Tuesday night, some journalists noted that Democrats involved in the story had been lying about their role. "When I tried to report this story, Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias pushed back vigorously, saying 'You (or your sources) are wrong,'" tweeted the New York Times' Ken Vogel. "Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year," added the Times' Maggie Haberman.

 

Yes, they did. But the importance of the Democrats' involvement in the dossier is that it could be one step on the road to a bigger story. What did the FBI do with the dossier material? Did judges make surveillance decisions in the Trump-Russia investigation based in whole or in part on the dossier? To what degree is the "salacious and unverified" dossier the source of what we think we know about allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign?

 

In the end, a House subpoena squeezed the information out of key players in the who-funded-the-dossier side of the story. But so far, the FBI has been much harder to crack.

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-after-trump-dossier-revelation-fbi-is-next/article/2638...

 

 

 


Here we  see what I am talking about. This  thread is being started by a poster who has the same thread going under a different name. This is what the Russian's taught the Far right leaders repeat the lie often enough and it will become true. So from that lesson the far right masters have told their servants to get as much on the subject out there. In Russia they pay the servants on the number of discussions they can start on the same lie. Could that have spread to the US? Well lets be smart people and ask why are you starting the same tread under a different name?

Report Inappropriate Content
5
Kudos
791
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
809
Views
6
Replies

Byron York: After Trump dossier revelation, FBI is next

809 Views
Message 7 of 7

by Byron York | Oct 25, 2017, 12:43 AM

 

Investigators looking into the so-called "Trump dossier" were not surprised when news broke Tuesday night that the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, working through the Democrats' law firm, Perkins Coie, financed the "salacious and unverified" compilation of allegations of Trump collusion with Russia in the 2016 presidential campaign. (The "salacious and unverified" description comes from former FBI Director James Comey.)

 

There had been plenty of talk about the Democrats and Perkins Coie, so much that investigators almost assumed that was the case. But it wasn't until the Washington Post broke the story that it was confirmed.

 

And why did the story break when it did? Credit the much-maligned Rep. Devin Nunes, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. The California Republican has been pursuing the dossier more aggressively than anyone else, and it was his Oct. 4 subpoena for the bank records of Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm that handled the dossier, that finally shook loose the information.

But knowing that the Clinton campaign, the DNC, and Perkins Coie supported the dossier is not the end of the story. The most important next step is the FBI.

 

Sometime in October 2016 — that is, at the height of the presidential campaign — Christopher Steele, the foreign agent hired by Fusion GPS to compile the Trump dossier, approached the FBI with information he had gleaned during the project. According to a February report in the Washington Post, Steele "reached an agreement with the FBI a few weeks before the election for the bureau to pay him to continue his work."

 

It was an astonishing turn: the nation's top federal law enforcement agency agreeing to fund an ongoing opposition research project being conducted by one of the candidates in the midst of a presidential election. "The idea that the FBI and associates of the Clinton campaign would pay Mr. Steele to investigate the Republican nominee for president in the run-up to the election raises further questions about the FBI's independence from politics, as well as the Obama administration's use of law enforcement and intelligence agencies for political ends," wrote Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

 

In the end, according to reports, the FBI did not pay Steele. But the dossier did not go away. Indeed, in January 2017, Comey briefed President-elect Trump (and President Obama) on the dossier's contents.

 

In recent months, Nunes has been trying to force the FBI to reveal just what it did in the dossier matter. The intel chairman issued a subpoena to the FBI on Aug. 24, and in the time since, not a single document has been produced to the committee. The FBI and the Justice Department have spent most of that time talking about possibly complying with this or that part of the subpoena. But so far — nothing.

 

The same is true of Grassley's inquiries.

 

The new Clinton/DNC/Perkins Coie revelation will likely increase pressure on the FBI to explain what it did, and did not do, with the dossier. Certainly Nunes hopes that is the case. When I asked Nunes Tuesday night what would happen next with the FBI, he responded, "Their best option at this point is to bring all the documents tomorrow to the Capitol."

 

Of course, he won't be holding his breath.

 

Republican investigators had two big questions about the dossier. One was who paid for it, and that now seems answered. The other was: Did the FBI or other agencies use any information from the dossier as a basis for warrant requests before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court? In other words, did, say, the FBI use the dossier's "salacious and unverified" information to make the case that the bureau should be granted the authority to conduct intercepts?

 

Nunes, as well as Grassley and Senate Judiciary Committee colleague Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., have been pushing for months for the FBI to answer that question. So far, they've gotten nothing.

 

When the Post story broke Tuesday night, some journalists noted that Democrats involved in the story had been lying about their role. "When I tried to report this story, Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias pushed back vigorously, saying 'You (or your sources) are wrong,'" tweeted the New York Times' Ken Vogel. "Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year," added the Times' Maggie Haberman.

 

Yes, they did. But the importance of the Democrats' involvement in the dossier is that it could be one step on the road to a bigger story. What did the FBI do with the dossier material? Did judges make surveillance decisions in the Trump-Russia investigation based in whole or in part on the dossier? To what degree is the "salacious and unverified" dossier the source of what we think we know about allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign?

 

In the end, a House subpoena squeezed the information out of key players in the who-funded-the-dossier side of the story. But so far, the FBI has been much harder to crack.

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-after-trump-dossier-revelation-fbi-is-next/article/2638...

 

 

 

VIMTSTL
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
809
Views
6
Replies
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Open Enrollment: Oct 15-Dec 7, 2019 Find resources to help you decide on the best healthcare insurance plans for you during Open Enrollment season

Top Authors