Can blue light from your phone cause vision problems? Find out and learn more about your vision in the AARP Eye Center.

Reply
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
103
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

103 Views
Message 1 of 26

@rk9152wrote:

@Panjandromwrote:

rk9152:  If the first warrant is granted based on a fraudulent basis, any subsequent warrants would, naturally, be equally fraudulent.

 

 

What was fraudulent about it? I don't want citations from hyperventilating RWNJ media, I'd like to see something from credible sources. Since you insist on repeating this falsehood, it would be nice if you could back it up.


I was responding to the claim that subsequent warrants showed the first to be legit.

 

As to the first one, can you show proof of it's validity from other than the hyperventilating radical left wing media? That is an issue for the Courts.


@Panjandrom- Well - he/she couldn't back it up with anything even vaguely resembling proof - just indirecly implied things that sounded suspiciously similar to various and assorted kinds of rightwing crackpottery...

 

 

44>dolt45
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
103
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
108
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

108 Views
Message 2 of 26

@Panjandromwrote:

rk9152:  If the first warrant is granted based on a fraudulent basis, any subsequent warrants would, naturally, be equally fraudulent.

 

 

What was fraudulent about it? I don't want citations from hyperventilating RWNJ media, I'd like to see something from credible sources. Since you insist on repeating this falsehood, it would be nice if you could back it up.


I was responding to the claim that subsequent warrants showed the first to be legit.

 

As to the first one, can you show proof of it's validity from other than the hyperventilating radical left wing media? That is an issue for the Courts.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
108
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
109
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

109 Views
Message 3 of 26

@Richvawrote:

@rk9152wrote:

@ChasKy53wrote:


You seem to have ignored so much about FISA warrant procedures, in this instance the fact that they are renewed every six weeks based on actual intelligence gathered.  Those issuing the FISA Warrants and reviewing them every six weeks are sure of their validity and that makes your  "I do not believe that the Steele dossier meets that standard" completely irrelevant and insignificant.


If the first warrant is granted based on a fraudulent basis, any subsequent warrants would, naturally, be equally fraudulent.


But it was not granted on a fraudulent basis so problem solved. Even the (revised) Nunes memo mentions the source of the funding. Plus, the fact that the Steele memo was not the only justification for the warrants. The FBI was onto this before Steele came to talk to them. Of course, the fact that Steele had been a valuable partner to the FBI in the past probably helped as well.  Finally, the question is the veracity of the memo and other sources used to justify the request. From what I read in the memo itself, it is well documented and proves its point. Trump is susceptible to blackmail by the Russians. 


Of course the corrupted elements were into it but they were not looking for approval to spy on American citizens for partisan purposes at that point.

 

I have seen no evidence of "susceptible to blackmail".

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
109
Views
Super Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
119
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

119 Views
Message 4 of 26

rk9152:  If the first warrant is granted based on a fraudulent basis, any subsequent warrants would, naturally, be equally fraudulent.

 

 

What was fraudulent about it? I don't want citations from hyperventilating RWNJ media, I'd like to see something from credible sources. Since you insist on repeating this falsehood, it would be nice if you could back it up.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
119
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
131
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

131 Views
Message 5 of 26

@rk9152wrote:

@ChasKy53wrote:


You seem to have ignored so much about FISA warrant procedures, in this instance the fact that they are renewed every six weeks based on actual intelligence gathered.  Those issuing the FISA Warrants and reviewing them every six weeks are sure of their validity and that makes your  "I do not believe that the Steele dossier meets that standard" completely irrelevant and insignificant.


If the first warrant is granted based on a fraudulent basis, any subsequent warrants would, naturally, be equally fraudulent.


But it was not granted on a fraudulent basis so problem solved. Even the (revised) Nunes memo mentions the source of the funding. Plus, the fact that the Steele memo was not the only justification for the warrants. The FBI was onto this before Steele came to talk to them. Of course, the fact that Steele had been a valuable partner to the FBI in the past probably helped as well.  Finally, the question is the veracity of the memo and other sources used to justify the request. From what I read in the memo itself, it is well documented and proves its point. Trump is susceptible to blackmail by the Russians. 

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
131
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
135
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

135 Views
Message 6 of 26

@ChasKy53wrote:


You seem to have ignored so much about FISA warrant procedures, in this instance the fact that they are renewed every six weeks based on actual intelligence gathered.  Those issuing the FISA Warrants and reviewing them every six weeks are sure of their validity and that makes your  "I do not believe that the Steele dossier meets that standard" completely irrelevant and insignificant.


If the first warrant is granted based on a fraudulent basis, any subsequent warrants would, naturally, be equally fraudulent.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
135
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
167
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

167 Views
Message 7 of 26

same old conservative crackpot nonsense as usual...

Indeed.

.....Republican claims to the contrary, Steele’s interest in Trump did not spring from his work for the Clinton campaign. He ran across Trump’s name almost as soon as he went into private business, many years before the 2016 election. Two of his earliest cases at Orbis involved investigating international crime rings whose leaders, coincidentally, were based in New York’s Trump Tower.

 

.....Mark Medish, a former director of Russian affairs at the National Security Council, told me that “if Steele had not shared his findings, he might have been accused of dereliction or a coverup.” He added, “It takes courage to deliver bad news, particularly when the stakes are so high.” And Senator Whitehouse described Steele’s actions as akin to warning the F.B.I. about a “physical detonation of some sort,” noting, “If it had gone off, and he or the F.B.I. had ignored it, heads would roll.”  Christopher Steele, The Man Behind the Trump Dossier 

 

The dt detonation did go off but Republicans are trying to roll the same heads of those who would protect the country from that destructive force.  Hard to imagine what their undermining of Muller's final case may be.  Maybe by that time they will be ready to tuck their tails and get back to work repairing themselves and their party. 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
167
Views
Super Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
170
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

170 Views
Message 8 of 26

jimc91:   Former British spy Christopher Steele was informed months after accepting the job to compile a dossier on then-candidate Donald J. Trump that the Hillary Clinton Campaign and the Democratic National Committee were paying the bills but that’s not what the FBI told the secret FISA court when it sought a warrant to spy on one of Trump’s campaign volunteers.

 

 

 

Thought I'd help since I'm sure you inadvertently left out the source of your cut n paste job. Smiley Happy

https://saraacarter.com/ex-british-spy-knew-who-funded-dossier-fbi-told-secret-court-something-diffe...

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
170
Views
Super Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
173
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

173 Views
Message 9 of 26

ChasKy53: Is it not understanding or blatant denial?  Facts seem to have no impact whatsoever.

 

 

You're correct, facts have no impact. I think they're naively trying to convince themselves that if they can invent a smidgen of doubt about the FBI's sources or handling of intel, then the case is contaminated and won't be legitimate. As far as I know, the FBI has never in their entire history taken the intelligence they intend to use to Hannity or Alex Jones for approval and they have been quite successful without that "help".

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
173
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
185
Views

Re: Thoughts on the Steele Dossier

185 Views
Message 10 of 26

@jimc91wrote:

Former British spy Christopher Steele was informed months after accepting the job to compile a dossier on then-candidate Donald J. Trump that the Hillary Clinton Campaign and the Democratic National Committee were paying the bills but that’s not what the FBI told the secret FISA court when it sought a warrant to spy on one of Trump’s campaign volunteers.

 

This bit of explosive information was revealed in an expose on Steele by The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer but the implications for the FBI are profound. Why? Because the bureau explicitly stated in its Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Application to the secret court that Steele was unaware of who backed Fusion GPS, the firm which hired him, for the research.

 

Steele, however, claimed in the expose titled Christopher Steele, The Man Behind the Trump Dossier that he did know who was paying his bill.

 

Well given that the FBI has NOT reversed their position on the Steele revelations and has NOT requested a court with jurisdiction to find that the Dossier is thoroughly flawed and untruthful/invalid - sounds like the same old conservative crackpot nonsense as usual...

 

44>dolt45
Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
185
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

Have a question about AARP membership or benefits? Ask it in the AARP Help Membership forum, Benefits & Discounts forum, or General forum.


multiple white question marks with center red question mark

Top Authors