Why the Dossier may be the most serious political scandal the US has ever seen.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Exactly. Thank you. The TIMELINE of events is complex and extremely important to this discussion as well as the actual facts vs. suppositions.

a reply to: ausername

I'm not entirely on the right, but I sincerely hope they do nothing to her specifically and would like to go on the record now with my endorsement for her candidacy for president in 2020.

LOL I starred you for that one and suspect that the other stars came from Trump supporters

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: DJW001

Why to you love Al Qaeda?

I don't. I am on record as being opposed to the United States being involved in the Muslim Civil War. You seem to think it is all some kind of hoax.

Then WTF are any of you people doing supporting Hillary / Obama / CIA / MSM after they armed Al Qaeda in a attempt to overthrow Assad, thus causing a ruthless civil war that they turned around and blamed on Russia?

Come debate me on it. Lets hear.

Or are all of you a bunch of shills?

While most people out there dont follow closely enough to piece it all together, for nearly a year now I've been rubbing it in and here you're all still sticking up for ruthless psychopathic mass murderers whom are treasonous Al Qaeda arming war criminals.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
You might as well come debunk this thing, because I'm not going to let up about it. Ever.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: theantediluvian

And that was the extent of the FISA wiretaps?

That we know of. Then there are the tapes Trump made. Someone that paranoid must have made tapes!

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Grambler

People here have been asking about the fisa warrants since flynn had to resign.
How did anyone know at that time that flynn had lied?

Flynn was reportedly caught in incidental collection — clearly surveillance of Kislyak. The administration knew for weeks that he was lying. Sally Yates had informed them of that fact. They did nothing until 8-9 sources leaked to Washington Post that Flynn was in fact lying.

Then they let him resign and said nice things about him.

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

I'm still waiting for some (any) avowed ATS leftist to say that if Hillary did anything wrong, she should be punished.

If Hillary did anything she should be punished!

Now that that's out of the way, I'd like to see the right wingers here say that whatever Hillary did doesn't subtract from what Trump might have done..

I'll wait.

Fail.

I've been on record for months saying that if Trump is guilty, fry his butt.

But it is nice for a leftist to actually say that they want Hillary punished if she did anything wrong.

Are you a right winger? You constantly call yourself a "classic liberal", but you assume I'm talking about you when I say "right winger"...

Hmmmm.

The problem I see is that the left is so immersed in identity politics, that to condemn Hillary is paramount to condemning themselves, hence a level of irrationality often exists.

Funny, I've condemned Hillary on several occasions here, as have more than a few other left leaning posters.

What I haven't seen is anyone in the Trump camp say the same about Trumps Russian involvement. When it comes to Trump, it's just a made up liberal-media conspiracy. And if it did happen, Obama did it worse..

Only because if "Drumpf" is so dumb, it shouldn't be too hard to find evidence. If he did, then yes. But I'm not holding my breath for another 10 months.

Why do you think we're seeing all these hyperbolic news stories and threads, filled with nothing but assumptions and zero evidence of anything?

Distraction. Nothing more. I think a lot of people in our government are privy to a lot of facts we don't have. Obviously the Trump people are afraid of something right now, which is why the Trump-propaganda machine is currently working at full speed.

And as someone familiar with investigations, an investigation doesn't grind on for almost a year without any results. Mueller had to show some kind of evidence to get the funding approved for his last round of high priced lawyers he hired to help him on the case.

The fact that it's taking so long is obviously starting to unnerve the Trump camp. As it should. While Trump may be an idiot, the people he surrounds himself with aren't.

Its humorous to see posts like this.

I outlined all sort of evidence in the OP, and people just say "This is a distraction there is no evidence"

I think our definitions of "evidence" are different.

Evidence isn't an assumption. Evidence is information that clearly shows what took place without any room for interpretation. It isn't subjective.

If you have provided anything like that, please refresh me. In reading the OP, all I saw were assumptions that only make sense if you accept the right-wing Obama is Satan narrative without thinking.

Then you didn't read carefully.

There is absolute evidence for position one, that Hillarys team paid for the dossier that used a foreign agent and Russian intelligence. There is evidence that many of them said that using any intel from russia was treason, and now they are being hypocrites about it.

Position two is proven, they lied about paying for it for a year.

Positions three is proven, regardless of rather or not it was used for a dossier, the people that paid for it gave Russia the easiest path to interfering with american politics by spreading their agents intel to foster distrust.

Now points 4 and 5, which I admitted we do not have absolute proof that the dossier was used for warrants. However, we do have articles that claim to have sources that say that.

Now by all means, you are making bold claims about Trump and his team.

So provide me with your evidence that is absolute and not objective that they are guilty.

Seeing as how there aren't any links in the OP at all, you're going to have to do better. You saying there's evidence while not providing any links or evidence isn't going to cut it for someone who doesn't automatically believe right wing propaganda to be fact.

If you have any evidence beyond your assumptions and partisan hate, let's see it. I'll completely change my tune if you can provide any actual evidence and not just opinion masquerading as evidence, which is what these endless threads are based on.

I've read every page of every thread about this so far, and it's all just opinion masquerading as fact. Something the Trump propaganda campaign does oh so well..

Ok so you need evidence for those positions?

I love it when people feign ignorance.

1. Hillary team paid for dossier.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

I can give you over a dozen more sources if you want. Funny you must have missed that being discussed for the last couple of days. Perhaps if you didnt even know this you should look into things a little before you comment and make so many claims.

2. Hillarys team lied about paying for it. www.zerohedge.com... Note that it sources two New York Times employees that say they were lied to by Hillarys team and told they did not pay for it for a year.

Must have missed that too, huh.

3. Kremlin sources used. dailycaller.com...

Many more sources on this too. Weird that you missed that.

The CNN article saying the dossier was used for fisa warrants.

www.cnn.com...

I am still awaiting for your "absolute" evidence as to why Trump or his people are guilty.

Please post it for us all to see.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I am not supporting Clinton, I am trying to keep people focussed on the facts. I did not vote for her, I urged everyone to vote third party. Remember this?



You are supporting a propaganda campaign that originates from a hostile foreign power.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: theantediluvian

And that was the extent of the FISA wiretaps?

The only reporting of FISA warrants for Trump associates have been about Manafort and Carter Page. If any others existed, it hasn't been reported. Doesn't mean that they didn't/don't exist but there's nothing to say they did/do either.

The other vague mentions of surveillance coming from Nunez referred to incidental collection (per Nunez, not my assumption).

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AboveBoard

We are not just talking about a foreign spy, we are talking about a known spy for a foreign country.

You assume all russian people contacted are still working on Russias behalf, but a former UK spy you are sure was not working for the UK government.

Its a double standard.

Its moot anyways as he used Russain agents connected to the Kremlin for the info. So if fisa warrants were issued in part because of this dossier, that means Obama's admin knowingly used Kremlin agents intel to spy on opponents.

As far as mysterious deaths, what does this prove.

It could be just as likely that these sources were offed by Steele or the people that paid him, because they didn't want them to spill the beans about helping the DNC.

I am not saying this is what happned, but there is just as much proof of this as that Putin killed them.

So now Steele is "offing" Russians?

Wow. Ok so you are saying this as a wild conjecture and claiming your fantasy of a rogue criminal Steele is equally valid to the many deaths laid at Putin's feet??

No, there is PLENTY more evidence that Putin killed them. That's something he is KNOWN for... My friend you are grasping here...

Hey, whatever puts this on Obama and takes the light off of Trump. Doesn't matter how far you have to reach.

It has to be on Obama. Nothing else makes sense.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Flynn was reportedly caught in incidental collection — clearly surveillance of Kislyak.

source please

then there is the question of the unmasking of an american citizen as well.....lying is not a crime so what was the justification of the unmasking?

originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: Grambler

Grambler, the following reply is my rant and not intended as a personal attack on you.



Some people, like me, see all of this as an obvious deflection from the corruption and authoritarian threat to our democracy that currently resides in the White House. The "Trump Russia" issue isn't going away no matter how twisted the opposition gets in their fabrication of reality.

That is what they (those who would save their own skins) are hoping you are falling for - an alternate reality that feels better to those tired of wondering if their President and his men are possibly under scrutiny for a legitimate reason.

But this new Trump-as-victim story can only exist through the marketing of a convoluted and "flipped" new false reality where the villains the Right are comfortable with still reside on their spider couches and their hero, the God Emperor of The Golden Middle Finger, is still shiny and untarnished, a mere victim of those they have been trained to hate.

I've followed this from the beginning and can only watch in bemused horror as the Lords of Lies present this gift to their followers in a last hope to control the narrative. It's a Roger Stone and Sean Hannity move of dirty tricks and the agent provocateur. Sullying Mueller wasn't working, the noose was tightening and thus the fun-house mirror story of " what really happened *wink*" is being delivered on cue.

Brilliant.

Completely Machiavellian and a fine addition to our very own American Horror Story: The White House Edition.

You said:
The "Trump Russia" issue isn't going away no matter how twisted the opposition gets in their fabrication of reality.

Ok - so let me get this straight - The trump administrations supposed Russian ties have been under investigation for over a year by congress, Mueller, and large portions of the media, and they have found literally zero evidence of any wrong doing.

How long does the investigations have to go on finding nothing before you will admit there is nothing to the charges - 5 years? 10? a thousand?

I'm sorry but for anyone who has any ability to use logic and look at actual facts you are the one who is fabricating reality.

Now as far as Trump supporters being trained to hate - where is your evidence of this. I suppose you would point to Richard Spencer or something. This BS that there is some white supremacist plague that has come up from the shadows to suddenly menace the country is so stupid I can hardly believe anyone actually thinks it possible, but apparently some do. All that shows me is they are not interested in facts, because every fact shows Racism is actually at an all time low in America.

Another thing I should disabuse you of - very few if any Trump supporters worship him or believe he lacks faults - he has very many faults, and is making the job far more difficult on himself because of self sabotage.

The idea that the uranium one story is some new story to shift away focus is also laughable. I as many trump supporters have been keenly aware of it since the podesta emails. Those emails from Clinton campaign insiders talk about how the clinton foundation has the appearance - if not is in fact - a mechanism for pay to play. Even Chelsea herself expresses concern the foundation has been used improperly, and suggests an audit be performed.

The only reason the uranium one story is now coming up - is because some in the media have finally made enough noise to get congress to look into it.

I will submit the evidence for impropriety in the uranium one deal already has 5 times the evidence of any Trump collusion, and that the consequences of it being accurate are at least 20 times as serious. I say this because even if all that has been alleged of Trump collusion was true - that somehow Trumps campaign helped get the podesta and DNC emails released, and that they helped the Russians to target their advertising were true - that would not nearly be enough to actually change the results of the election.

How do I know this? Because hardly anybody even knows what were in any of those emails, because they were not covered by the media.

The DNC emails - the ones allegedly hacked by the russians - actually did very little to damage Hillary against Trump - instead what they showed was collusion by the DNC the media and Hillary's campaign to cheat Bernie Sanders out of the nomination.

The real problem your ilk seems to have, is you do not even understand what you are arguing. You say Russia stole the election - but you have nothing to back it up. The FBI has clearly already said not one vote was changed through fraud.

Therefore your entire argument seemingly is based on propaganda turning the election. Let me tell you as a Trump supporter, the amount of anti-Trump propaganda was literally 10 times the anti-Hillary propaganda - this has been in fact verified by several studies, and Hillary was supported by nearly every major Paper, network, social media company, and celebrity.

If propaganda truly was so powerful, Trump should have gotten no more than 10% of the vote. Your entire argument is patently false from the very premise. Even if every allegation made against Trump collusion were true - they pail in comparison to the undue influence of all these other left leaning entities using their monopoly of power against him. The only reason you are so offended by supposed Russia propaganda - is because it wasn't your brand of propaganda.

a reply to: proximo

Great post. Especially about the whole white supremacy thing. That nonsense might play well in his echo chamber but throughout most of America it's another "basket of deplorables" accusation. It's gonna cost them in 2018 and 2020, but they keep doubling down on it because they need some bogeyman to distract from their complete lack of a message and real leader.

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

There is nothing to debate. We screwed up ever chasing terrorists all over the ME and now Africa. Not even Trump can pull us out. I read today we have 240,000 troops in 150 countries.

a reply to: DJW001

Dude for over a year I see people tear into Clinton, the CIA and their CNN collaborators and you come streaking in tearing down the house with your damage control games of deflection and derailment.

a reply to: MOMof3

That's a misleading stat. Most of them are stationed in a handful of countries. Literally every country we have an embassy in has "troops" stationed there. They're not engaging in any military operations though. There's "troops" stationed in just about every major US city too, they're called recruiters. This is just another example of how you can make statistics say anything you want.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Well i forget which article it was that came up yesterday about the dossier was used to get FISA, my notes keeping on this news cycle stuff has been lacking, but maybe you might make a thread with all the ins and outs of this FISA claim angle.

a reply to: theantediluvian

First the time frame does add up.

If they got the warrant for Page after his July trip. According to the timeline, Steele sent his first dossier to the FBI in early July.

“Near the start of July” 2016: Steele sends “a report he had written for that firm to a contact at the FBI,” according to an account of his research by Mother Jones’ David Corn.

talkingpointsmemo.com...

Yes, it seems page was under surveillance from before. But much like Manafort, they had to apply for a new fisa warrant. Or do you think that all of the reports of the summer 2016 warrant on page are wrong?

Again, this isn't something I am just making up. The cnn article did claim that sources said the dossier was used for things like the fisa warrant.

www.cnn.com...

Again, this is not definitive proof.

The point is, if this is true, do you agree it would be a big scandal.

I wonder if people would provide the same scrutiny on Trump threads?

"How dare you make a thread saying if Trump colluded it would be bad!!! There is no reason to discuss that"

Yes, the FBI has stonewalled since August on subpoenas on this, apparently saying today finally they will realse the info.

I feel its important to ask these questions, and if we find out it was used to help with Fisa warrants, all of the [problems outlined in th OP about that are true.

a reply to: proximo

Star for you

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AboveBoard

We are not just talking about a foreign spy, we are talking about a known spy for a foreign country.

You assume all russian people contacted are still working on Russias behalf, but a former UK spy you are sure was not working for the UK government.

Its a double standard.

Its moot anyways as he used Russain agents connected to the Kremlin for the info. So if fisa warrants were issued in part because of this dossier, that means Obama's admin knowingly used Kremlin agents intel to spy on opponents.

As far as mysterious deaths, what does this prove.

It could be just as likely that these sources were offed by Steele or the people that paid him, because they didn't want them to spill the beans about helping the DNC.

I am not saying this is what happned, but there is just as much proof of this as that Putin killed them.

So now Steele is "offing" Russians?

Wow. Ok so you are saying this as a wild conjecture and claiming your fantasy of a rogue criminal Steele is equally valid to the many deaths laid at Putin's feet??

No, there is PLENTY more evidence that Putin killed them. That's something he is KNOWN for... My friend you are grasping here...

Hey, whatever puts this on Obama and takes the light off of Trump. Doesn't matter how far you have to reach.

It has to be on Obama. Nothing else makes sense.

It didnt have to be steele. It could have been Us intel community.

But you are right, they never killed anyone.

Only putin kills people, so it must have been putin.

And further more, if your evidence is some guy in the dossier died so it must have been Putin, then I guess you believe that Seth Rich dies so it must have been Hillary.

a reply to: Grambler

Yeah, see, I thought it was CNN.

I usually dont trust the MSM, but with certain topics especially when they have vested interest, by the time they do report on it ya just know its BAD.