Sen. Dianne Feinstein Releases Fusion GPS Transcript

a reply to: Grambler

Where does it say the FBI told Steele anything? It says the FBI believed Steele because he corroborated info they already had.
The FBI obviously already had opened an investigation into trump before this dossier ever made an appearance so the BIG FAT LIE that the dossier was the reason they opened the investigation into trump has been shown the light of day.

They were concerned the FBI was being manipulated by trumps people. I believe this refers to the N.Y. FBI and Rudy Guilanis statement about having ties to the FBI and how the N.Y. agents were outraged that they couldn't get a conviction on the Clintons.

www.nytimes.com...
The site won't allow cut and paste unless you subscribe.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

. It keeps the various people who are working on what ever is being investigated separate and does not allow them to collaborate or communicate

Fusion was working on 2 different investigations of Trump, and those clients are US citizens

I must have missed this part. What page what line please.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Concerns me not. Nor does it change this testimony or discredit the contents of the dossier and that's what matters.
Now you're trying g to muddy the water.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

P.S No one gets to sue a publisher of news for printing what someone else wrote. Sorry that's just not happening.
No one can sue Buzzfeed for content in the dossier unless they themselves altered the contents before they published it.
You really need to review the extent of the law and you won't fall for crap like this.
Now if buzzfeed altered the dossier that's a different story.
But no no one can sue them for publishing it as it was created unless it was copywrited which of course it was not. Lol.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Too bad I was responding to a post and was completely on topic.

The post I was answering

the author replied to this post:
Here is the official source. desantis asks speaker ryan to declassify doj documents related to steele dossier Now we wait what Paul Ryan does. I guess he has no intention of commiting political suicide in refusing the will of the people.

of course you're more than welcome to report my post if you feel it's off topic.
But I don't think Ryan will declassify all the DOJ documents nor submit to the will of the people any more than he has already in this whole mess.
The elections starting two months from now are STILL IN DANGER. But they won't do anything to protect us from Russia because...trump...fear...

a reply to: Sillyolme

Q. You said that he told you of the meeting
19 with the FBI in Rome in mid or late September, that
20 he "gave them a full briefing"?
21 A. A debrief I think is what he probably
22 said, they had debriefed him. I don't remember him
23 articulating the specifics of that. You know, my
24 understanding was that they would have gotten into
25 who his sources were, how he knew certain things,
Glenn Simpson
August 22, 2017
Washington, DC
1-800-FOR-DEPO
www.aldersonreporting.com
Alderson Court Reporting
Page 175
1 and, you know, other details based on their own
2 in
telligence. Essentially what he told me was they
3 had other intelligence about this matter from an
4 internal Trump campaign source and that -- that
5 they -- my understanding was that they believed
6 Chris at this point -- that they believed Chris's
7 information might be credible because they had
8 other intelligence that indicated the same thing
9 and one of those pieces of intelligence was a human
10 source from inside the Trump organization.

The FBI gave Steele a debrief in rome, and steele tells simpson they (the FBI) have other sources including someone inside the trump campaign.

So yes, the FBI did tell steele about details of the investigation.

a reply to: Grambler

I'm gonna need content. What page is that please it starts he said and I have no idea who he is in this conversation so please. Thanks

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

I'm gonna need content. What page is that please it starts he said and I have no idea who he is in this conversation so please. Thanks

Page 174 and on.

a reply to: Grambler

That says they told him they had other evidence. It doesn't say they told him what that evidence was. That's you spinning the info.
Muddying ... that's all you guys have left. Try to discredit anyone and everyone who says anything damaging about trump.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

That says they told him they had other evidence. It doesn't say they told him what that evidence was. That's you spinning the info.
Muddying ... that's all you guys have left. Try to discredit anyone and everyone who says anything damaging about trump.

As I said, it says they told him that they had a source inside Trumps team that backed some of this up.

That is hugely inappropriate, to tell an oppo firm working for the person being investigated's opponent that they had a source within trumps team saying the team was doing shady things with russians.

Do you think it would have been acceptable for the FBI to discuss sources within hillarys team that felt she acted with gross negligence in her handling of the server with people Trump was paying?

Of course not.

But as usual, you are more than willing to cheer for the politicization of the intel community when it hurts trump.

a reply to: Grambler

Still doesn't say the FBI gave him any info other than yes you're story is corroborated.
They were used to dealing with the man on many many intelligence missions. They know him and what he does. Of course they would tell him that. That does not in anyway mean they gave him any details on their investigation.
Also you seem to imply that Steele was just some Joe when in fact he had been a highly respected agent within the British MI and had worked with these same agents in tandem for the safety of our nation or the .U.K. often in the past. You try to marginalize the pedigree and resume of anyone opposing trump. You could even be him but you use bigger words.lol

a reply to: Grambler

You're chasing rainbows based on your feelings. You think there's an issue there.
I'm done discussing this now. Go tend the thread you started on this shadow issue.
I won't be participating with that be sure.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

Still doesn't say the FBI gave him any info other than yes you're story is corroborated.
They were used to dealing with the man on many many intelligence missions. They know him and what he does. Of course they would tell him that. That does not in anyway mean they gave him any details on their investigation.
Also you seem to imply that Steele was just some Joe when in fact he had been a highly respected agent within the British MI and had worked with these same agents in tandem for the safety of our nation or the .U.K. often in the past. You try to marginalize the pedigree and resume of anyone opposing trump. You could even be him but you use bigger words.lol

No matter how respected steele was, he was still a forgein agent working on behalf of hillary clintons firm to dig up dirt on trump.

If he was so respected, why did he goive info to fusion who then promptly gave it to all of these media sources?

Again, why would the FBI jeopardize their investigation by leaking out details of a source within trumps team to someone they knew was being [aid to get durt on trump and give it to the media?

They had to know that info would easily get to trumps team, and would give them a chance to cover up any crimes they may have committed.

Do you think the FBI routinely lets people they are investigating know they have an insider giving information to them?

Of course not.

But hey, if it makes trump look bad, who cares about trying to actually investigate a crime.

originally posted by: FauxMulder
a reply to: theantediluvian

A lot to go through here

Q. Does part of Fusion GPS's business involve
attempting to have media outlets publish articles
that further the interests of your clients?

A. Yeah, you could -- I mean, generally
speaking, we are -- generally we tend to respond to inquiries more than try to push things, but, you
know, we work with the press frequently.

"Yes we're in the business of pushing a narrative our clients want."

Yes, that is the business of any firm that is involved with PR.

So here we have that the FBI has corroborated the info in the trump dossier because someone on trumps own team gave similar evidence to the FBI.
So the FBI got info from the inside. It doesn't say what but we can go to the dossiers content now with the assurance that it's contents are true and start to look at that with a more critical eye.

originally posted by: neo96

Q. And you had also mentioned your background 20 knowledge of Paul Manafort and his involvement with 21 Russian oligarchs.

Page 152.

In my expierence on ATS the only people that use that word. Oligarch are ideologues.

Freggin partisan witch hunt.

McCarthy got nothing on todays leftists.

If you think this is just the leftists, I have a bridge to sell you.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
Does anyone know what kind of "innuendo and misinformation" we're supposed to have been spreading about this testimony?

So far, it appears to be exactly what everyone here expected: The Fusion guy refusing to answer anything important.

Check out any alt-right website and it's pretty clear.. Breitbart for example.

a reply to: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Sillyolme
So here we have that the FBI has corroborated the info in the trump dossier because someone on trumps own team gave similar evidence to the FBI.
So the FBI got info from the inside. It doesn't say what but we can go to the dossiers content now with the assurance that it's contents are true and start to look at that with a more critical eye.

Hahahahahaha!!!!!

So at least we have an admission that the FBI told steele about a source inside trumps team, which would have jeopardized the investigation.

How does this prove the dossier is true again?

So I guess now because papadopolous got drunk and told an australian that a russian said they have emails on hillary, that actually Cohen did got to prague, even though we know that is a lie.

I mean who cares if Cohen can prove he was at all ball game, and his passport clearly shows he never was in prague. Papadopoloius said russians had emails, so clearly the dossier is true!

If the FBI already had evidence, why were they turned down for their first fisa warrant, something that almost never happens?

a reply to: Sillyolme

For starters, Fusion, and it was stated time and time again, does work with a lot of subcontractors. On page 60, it talks about the NDA that the subcontractors sign and are not allowed to disclose or discuss about what they are researching, nor are they allowed to talk about such, taking in the information and passing it on. In a majority of the cases they do not even know who they are researching, just out there gathering information.