It Looks Like The James Bond Behind The Dossier Let A Putin Stooge Do All The Work

originally posted by: Hazardous1408
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

While I wouldn’t go so far myself, yet at least...

There is still no doubt whatsoever that the Law was flaunted with this dossier, across the board it would seem.
The fact that most of it is gossip, as opposed to hinting towards any illegality, just solidifies my belief that it should be discarded instantly.

Just look at Steele’s sources. We’re not supposed to trust the Kremlin until it gives up unverifiable dirt on Trump.

But yes I agree with you.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Very good angle I hadnt thought of.

Look, even though I like trump, my primary reason for supporting him was to out a corrupt system.

Had he lost the primary and Bernie won his, I would have voted Bernie (even though I despise his economic deas) for the same reason.

But I am not naive; there are plenty of legitimate reasons foe people to dislike trump.

I just dont understand why so many people have a problem saying "I hate trump, but I will not cheer fro deep state corruption to take him down"

I felel like you are willing to dislike trump as a person and perhaps his policies, and still call out corruption when you see it, and that is very admirable.

a reply to: Grambler

I just dont understand why so many people have a problem saying "I hate trump, but I will not cheer fro deep state corruption to take him down"

That's a pretty simple answer and it is directly related to the statement you said right before. If we, the people, can establish common ground and work together to take our government back and come to understandings that are good for most citizens then those in charge stand to lose everything. While we are separated, they are unified. It works in the opposite as well.

I wonder what they had on Cruz.

Just change the name from Cruz to Trump on that tabloid piece of garbage.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I find it very hard to trust the Kremlin myself, no matter what they’re saying (for or against)...
They’re notoriously unreliable.

And they’ve never dropped their past expansion plans, so I’m sure anything they do say is solely for their benefit.
Anyone else benefiting is just a byproduct of the overall game they play.



a reply to: Grambler

Thank you, pal.

I’ll be honest, and I’ve said this on ATS before, from a hypothetical standpoint, I would not have hesitated to vote for Trump at all.

During the campaign run up at least, I didn’t disagree with many of his proposals.
I’ve seen a few things since I didn’t like, but I expected as much anyways.


It will be obvious to anybody paying attention, any time I have ever criticised POTUS here, it has been solely due to his personality (uncouth), gullibility (certain retweets) and his attitude (sometimes foul). Or his fabrications.


But I can’t currently think of a thread referring to his policies that received my discontent, aside from a little input on the recent bank waiver and I may have commented on the Embassy fiasco if I recall correctly.



However, I’ve defended him numerous times as well...
Even dedicated an entire thread to my thoughts on “collusion”.
To save you looking for it, I don’t believe a single word of it, in regards to Trump personally.

So to tie in that tangent with some on topic commentary, this dossier is just another mud sling to discredit him.
Even if true in parts, I see no reason for it to be used against him. It’s gossip. It’s irrelevant.

Thanks for the nice words, pal.
Glad you’ve noticed my best attempts to remain neutral in all of this.



I’ll try to look further into the Official Secrets Act angle too...
It seems very important to me.

If anybody (especially any UK members in this instance) has a knack of deciphering legalese could help out, I’m sure we’d all appreciate it.

Aha! So Trump used Putin who used Steele to trick Simpson/FBI who set up the DNC/FBI to set up Clinton/FBI with a false dossier to embarass Trump/FBI so Trump could make the Dems look bad for crying Russia.

Makes sense.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Very good observation, good points!

I had heard rumors three is involvement
with Five Eyes. Could this be related?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Yes, the only Russian active measures, the only KGB influence, was found in that dossier.

This!

The sad part is pretty sure there were some top level people
who knew this. Determined by the pseudonym posts they made
and are available in the media last I checked.

A hint: Faded into the blue curtains .....

a reply to: burntheships

I’ll be honest, BTS...
That was too cryptic for me to understand.

Or maybe I’m just too far removed to get the reference you made.


“Three is involvement with Five Eyes?”

I’m lost mate.
Could you elaborate?

a reply to: Hazardous1408

My apologies.

This should be a good primer...

foreignpolicy.com...

There is also a thread here on ATS let me find it...

originally posted by: neo96
I wonder what they had on Cruz.

Just change the name from Cruz to Trump on that tabloid piece of garbage.

Geehs where to begin with Cruz? Do you start with his wife, his fit-bit numbers, or oh so many things.

a reply to: burntheships

Just googled it...
I’m with you now. 👍


It’s very likely to be the case.

Thing is, at least according to what I quoted from the OSA, Steele would still need authorisation...
I can’t imagine he would have received it in this particular case.


I’d be upset if he was given it by UK officials, its election tampering 100%.
I’d rather we didn’t do that to our closest Ally (you guys).

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Ok, thanks! Great...so here is a shorter version that might
shed a little light.

Known as “Five Eyes,” intelligence services from the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and Australia are bound by what is formally known as the UKUSA Agreement outlining joint cooperation in the gathering, processing and sharing of signals, military, and human intelligence (SIGINT, MILINT and HUMINT). In recent years, reports based on leaked secret documents indicate that, in order to get around each country’s strict rule against domestic spying, the various intelligence services from each of the five countries spy on citizens of all the other countries. In November 2013, The Guardian reported:

www.newstarget.com...

I am not clear yet on the explanation as to how they managed
this, but so far they countries involved are spot on.

Just last week the Aussie connection was published.

So ...who is left?

a reply to: burntheships

Interesting indeed. Thanks for the link.

Personally... I’d always assumed we spied on each other’s citizenry to bypass domestic laws anyways.
So that comes as no surprise.


However, with Steele now working freelance outside of the agency structure, I’m not sure how much he’d have benefitted from this Five Eyes agreement.

He’ll certainly have connections within the framework who he could network with, but I do find it hard to believe it would have played a prominent role in his dossier.

I wouldn’t rule it out entirely though.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

Also the ATS thread on Obama's actions

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: burntheships

The Attorney General is involved with the DOJ...
And the NSA is under DOD...

So I’m left wondering...
How would the AG sign an order in regards to the NSA?


Not saying I doubt the story in that thread, but my current knowledge limits any sort of understanding towards those claims.
Maybe you could clue me in.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

The conversation is what it is about..👍 Thanks!

I came to the conclusion that Five Eys was just a
cover so to speak. Not necessarily the avenue.

It allowed them to move the information without
drawing much attention.

Oh, in case you were interested in the Aussie connection:

An Australian investigative journalist who is a retired police detective said Tuesday he has been asked to provide the FBI with details about multiple allegations of mishandling millions of dollars contributed to the Clinton Foundation by the Aussie government. “I have been asked to provide the FBI with further and better particulars about allegations regarding improper donations to the CF funded by Australian taxpayers,” Michael Smith told LifeZette. At the center of Smith’s complaints are former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State and 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, and multiple Australian government officials, including senior diplomat Alexander Downer, that government’s high commissioner to the United Kingdom.

Downer hit U.S. headlines recently when he was reported to have told the FBI of a May 2016 conversation he had with George Papadopoulos, then a campaign aide to President Donald Trump. Downer told U.S. law enforcement officials that Papadopoulos told him Russia had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. The New York Times claimed in its Dec. 30, 2017, story that the information Downer gave the FBI was a major factor in the bureau’s decision to investigate allegations of collusion between Russian interests and the Trump campaign. Papadopoulos pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI last year.

www.lifezette.com...

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: Grambler

Instead the article says he relied on a PR guy with no intel experience, who had connections to russia because he was working with putin allies to smear an anti putin activist.

I think this part might be well worth digging into.

Literally, the dossier is Russian do doo.

And it is no surprise that Hiilary Clinton
paid for this. I also wonder who the "one
Person who has already died" is?

Could they be another tally in
The Clinton Body Count?

I believe the "people have died" has been recanted. My info comes from a radio news report some days ago.

Seems to me that the rumor that the naughty bits of the file came from someone's basement is slipping toward the truth of the matter.

Seems to me this retired spy saw a way to make a quick buck and bingo! Apparently he just included the golden showers story for giggles or perhaps to test the gullibility of the public. Anyone who had even a passing knowledge of Trump knew that he, like Howard Hughes, is terrified of germs. So saying he would pay ladies to shower him with urine is like saying I would pay men to cover me with serpents. Ain't happening. Probably copied and pasted from somewhere on the dark side so how are we to give any credence to the rest of the unverifiable information

a reply to: diggindirt

Yes, the "one dead person" could just be hyperbole
on the part of Simpspn. Then again, one can't dismiss
such an idea when considering The Clinton's.

Imdo, the dossier is not even as good as a blog post from
Siberia. I think it is pure B.S. And yes, especially the part
you mentioned.

a reply to: Hazardous1408

I would not pretend to know the actual power struggles taking
place withi the FBI, DOJ, NSA.

Looking back, James Domey who was in the FBI which is the LE
division of,the judicial branch. He stepped out of his bounds
in the Clintoninvestigation. Then we read Loretta Lynch knew Clinton
would not be charged. They both said otherwise to the executive
branch. As far as I know The POTUS has the power over all of this,
as Trump did. Till they tied his hands with the Soecial Counsel.

Oh, he still can do a lot, which I think he is busy doing.

Also, here are a few clues.
www.nytimes.com...