Barr and Durham

[Anonymous]

It's also been repeatedly pointed out that at least 75-80% of the Steele Dossier was independently corroborated as true. Another 10-15% was true with minor, but insubstantive errors). Some, like the pee pee tape still remain unproven. But, very little of it was actually ever disproven.

Yet the right wing pretends like the entire thing was somehow proven to be a complete fabrication. No such disproof of the Dossier ever happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's also been repeatedly pointed out that at least 75-80% of the Steele Dossier was independently corroborated as true. Another 10-15% was true with minor, but insubstantive errors). Some, like the pee pee tape still remain unproven. But, very little of it was actually ever disproven.

Yet the right wing pretends like the entire thing was somehow proven to be a complete fabrication. No such disproof of the Dossier ever happened.

You haven't been paying attention.
This is from CNN - an outlet not terribly "friendly" to Trump or his supporters.

But five years later, the credibility of the dossier has significantly diminished.
A series of investigations and lawsuits have discredited many of its central allegations and exposed the unreliability of Steele's sources. They also raise serious questions about the political underpinnings of some key explosive claims about Trump by shedding new light on the involvement of some well-connected Democrats in the dossier, and separate efforts to prod the FBI to investigate ties between Trump's campaign and Russia.
These revelations have triggered a reckoning around the Steele dossier, particularly in the wake of two recent indictments secured by John Durham, the special counsel appointed during the Trump administration to investigate the FBI's Russia probe. Durham alleges that Steele's primary source, a US-based foreign policy analyst, repeatedly lied to the FBI about where he got his information.

(Anti-Trump Republicans initially funded Fusion GPS' research during the 2016 GOP primaries, but the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee picked up the tab before Steele got involved.)

But Steele's findings on Russian election-meddling, which were ahead of the curve at the time, now seem more like prescient geopolitical observations rather than insider information. Plus, his final and most consequential takeaway -- that Trump's campaign worked hand-in-hand with the Kremlin -- was essentially debunked by special counsel Robert Mueller's sweeping investigation.
CNN reported in February 2017 that US investigators had corroborated some of the communications detailed in the dossier, citing multiple current and former US law enforcement and intelligence officials.
The CNN report said US investigators were able to confirm the time, place and people involved in some of the conversations between foreign nationals mentioned by Steele. The story said CNN couldn't confirm if those conversations were about Trump, and the sources told CNN that the corroborated information had nothing to do with the salacious claims in the dossier.

The sources also told CNN that the corroboration gave investigators "greater confidence" in the credibility of some aspects of the dossier, which the FBI was still actively investigating at the time.
Two years later, the Justice Department watchdog said only limited information was corroborated from the dossier relating to "time, location, and title information, much of which was publicly available."
Horowitz's watchdog report, released in December 2019, also said much of the material in the dossier about Trump and his campaign "could not be corroborated" and that "certain allegations were inaccurate or inconsistent" with subsequent FBI findings.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/18/politics/steele-dossier-reckoning/index.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's also been repeatedly pointed out that at least 75-80% of the Steele Dossier was independently corroborated as true. Another 10-15% was true with minor, but insubstantive errors). Some, like the pee pee tape still remain unproven. But, very little of it was actually ever disproven.

Yet the right wing pretends like the entire thing was somehow proven to be a complete fabrication. No such disproof of the Dossier ever happened.

Goes hand-in-hand with all of the other tea-spilling that happened with Trump Administration leaks and whistleblowing. The right wing was more upset about the leaks than they were about the content of the leaks, which was far more damning. And so they try to shoot the messenger and pretend that it was a lie, when it was not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also been repeatedly pointed out that at least 75-80% of the Steele Dossier was independently corroborated as true. Another 10-15% was true with minor, but insubstantive errors). Some, like the pee pee tape still remain unproven. But, very little of it was actually ever disproven.

Yet the right wing pretends like the entire thing was somehow proven to be a complete fabrication. No such disproof of the Dossier ever happened.

You haven't been paying attention.
This is from CNN - an outlet not terribly "friendly" to Trump or his supporters.

But five years later, the credibility of the dossier has significantly diminished.
A series of investigations and lawsuits have discredited many of its central allegations and exposed the unreliability of Steele's sources. They also raise serious questions about the political underpinnings of some key explosive claims about Trump by shedding new light on the involvement of some well-connected Democrats in the dossier, and separate efforts to prod the FBI to investigate ties between Trump's campaign and Russia.
These revelations have triggered a reckoning around the Steele dossier, particularly in the wake of two recent indictments secured by John Durham, the special counsel appointed during the Trump administration to investigate the FBI's Russia probe. Durham alleges that Steele's primary source, a US-based foreign policy analyst, repeatedly lied to the FBI about where he got his information.

(Anti-Trump Republicans initially funded Fusion GPS' research during the 2016 GOP primaries, but the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee picked up the tab before Steele got involved.)

But Steele's findings on Russian election-meddling, which were ahead of the curve at the time, now seem more like prescient geopolitical observations rather than insider information. Plus, his final and most consequential takeaway -- that Trump's campaign worked hand-in-hand with the Kremlin -- was essentially debunked by special counsel Robert Mueller's sweeping investigation.
CNN reported in February 2017 that US investigators had corroborated some of the communications detailed in the dossier, citing multiple current and former US law enforcement and intelligence officials.
The CNN report said US investigators were able to confirm the time, place and people involved in some of the conversations between foreign nationals mentioned by Steele. The story said CNN couldn't confirm if those conversations were about Trump, and the sources told CNN that the corroborated information had nothing to do with the salacious claims in the dossier.

The sources also told CNN that the corroboration gave investigators "greater confidence" in the credibility of some aspects of the dossier, which the FBI was still actively investigating at the time.
Two years later, the Justice Department watchdog said only limited information was corroborated from the dossier relating to "time, location, and title information, much of which was publicly available."
Horowitz's watchdog report, released in December 2019, also said much of the material in the dossier about Trump and his campaign "could not be corroborated" and that "certain allegations were inaccurate or inconsistent" with subsequent FBI findings.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/18/politics/steele-dossier-reckoning/index.html

LMAO Sorry, NO.

This was about trying to shoot the messenger and questioning the sources as opposed to actual corroboration.
Horowitz was Trump's guy. Horowitz wasn't actually looking to verify or corroborate anything, he was looking to spread FUD about the report on Trump's behalf. There was a lot of independent corroboration by investigative journalists and others.

[Anonymous]

Folks should really be following Adam Goldman's live tweeting of testimony today. One of the FBI agents that investigated the Alfa Bank allegations is on the stand as a prosecution witness. So far we've learned that Durham did not like the story that the agent originally told him, so Durham informed him he was now the subject of a criminal investigation. The agent suddenly "found" some notes that "refreshed his recollection" and he began telling a story Durham liked more and the agent was no longer a subject.

There needs to be a special counsel to investigate the Durham's suborning perjury and witness intimidation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Folks should really be following Adam Goldman's live tweeting of testimony today. One of the FBI agents that investigated the Alfa Bank allegations is on the stand as a prosecution witness. So far we've learned that Durham did not like the story that the agent originally told him, so Durham informed him he was now the subject of a criminal investigation. The agent suddenly "found" some notes that "refreshed his recollection" and he began telling a story Durham liked more and the agent was no longer a subject.

There needs to be a special counsel to investigate the Durham's suborning perjury and witness intimidation.

We have also learned that the FBI's investigation of the Alfa Bank communications consisted almost entirely of calling up a consultant hired by Alfa Bank who told them it was nothing to be concerned about. Wow. Just wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks should really be following Adam Goldman's live tweeting of testimony today. One of the FBI agents that investigated the Alfa Bank allegations is on the stand as a prosecution witness. So far we've learned that Durham did not like the story that the agent originally told him, so Durham informed him he was now the subject of a criminal investigation. The agent suddenly "found" some notes that "refreshed his recollection" and he began telling a story Durham liked more and the agent was no longer a subject.

There needs to be a special counsel to investigate the Durham's suborning perjury and witness intimidation.

We have also learned that the FBI's investigation of the Alfa Bank communications consisted almost entirely of calling up a consultant hired by Alfa Bank who told them it was nothing to be concerned about. Wow. Just wow.

The FBI didn’t investigate much of anything re: Trump
They didn’t look into Kavanaugh (who paid his debt)
The didn’t investigate alpha bank
They didn’t investigate alt right provocateurs during
The George Floyd protests
They didn’t investigate militias leading up to 1/6

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Folks should really be following Adam Goldman's live tweeting of testimony today. One of the FBI agents that investigated the Alfa Bank allegations is on the stand as a prosecution witness. So far we've learned that Durham did not like the story that the agent originally told him, so Durham informed him he was now the subject of a criminal investigation. The agent suddenly "found" some notes that "refreshed his recollection" and he began telling a story Durham liked more and the agent was no longer a subject.

There needs to be a special counsel to investigate the Durham's suborning perjury and witness intimidation.

Many of us would agree.... but not for the same reasons.

Perhaps...... the original story the agent told him was full of holes and lies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks should really be following Adam Goldman's live tweeting of testimony today. One of the FBI agents that investigated the Alfa Bank allegations is on the stand as a prosecution witness. So far we've learned that Durham did not like the story that the agent originally told him, so Durham informed him he was now the subject of a criminal investigation. The agent suddenly "found" some notes that "refreshed his recollection" and he began telling a story Durham liked more and the agent was no longer a subject.

There needs to be a special counsel to investigate the Durham's suborning perjury and witness intimidation.

Many of us would agree.... but not for the same reasons.

Perhaps...... the original story the agent told him was full of holes and lies.

I'm taking it that you haven't read the report of the testimony then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks should really be following Adam Goldman's live tweeting of testimony today. One of the FBI agents that investigated the Alfa Bank allegations is on the stand as a prosecution witness. So far we've learned that Durham did not like the story that the agent originally told him, so Durham informed him he was now the subject of a criminal investigation. The agent suddenly "found" some notes that "refreshed his recollection" and he began telling a story Durham liked more and the agent was no longer a subject.

There needs to be a special counsel to investigate the Durham's suborning perjury and witness intimidation.

We have also learned that the FBI's investigation of the Alfa Bank communications consisted almost entirely of calling up a consultant hired by Alfa Bank who told them it was nothing to be concerned about. Wow. Just wow.

The FBI didn’t investigate much of anything re: Trump
They didn’t look into Kavanaugh (who paid his debt)
The didn’t investigate alpha bank
They didn’t investigate alt right provocateurs during
The George Floyd protests
They didn’t investigate militias leading up to 1/6

Don’t forget the best part, James Comey. Breaks all tradition and protocol to announce there’s an investigation into Hillary Clinton, fails to mention the investigations into Donald Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also been repeatedly pointed out that at least 75-80% of the Steele Dossier was independently corroborated as true. Another 10-15% was true with minor, but insubstantive errors). Some, like the pee pee tape still remain unproven. But, very little of it was actually ever disproven.

Yet the right wing pretends like the entire thing was somehow proven to be a complete fabrication. No such disproof of the Dossier ever happened.

Goes hand-in-hand with all of the other tea-spilling that happened with Trump Administration leaks and whistleblowing. The right wing was more upset about the leaks than they were about the content of the leaks, which was far more damning. And so they try to shoot the messenger and pretend that it was a lie, when it was not.

Did you read the previous post with the CNN article?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Folks should really be following Adam Goldman's live tweeting of testimony today. One of the FBI agents that investigated the Alfa Bank allegations is on the stand as a prosecution witness. So far we've learned that Durham did not like the story that the agent originally told him, so Durham informed him he was now the subject of a criminal investigation. The agent suddenly "found" some notes that "refreshed his recollection" and he began telling a story Durham liked more and the agent was no longer a subject.

There needs to be a special counsel to investigate the Durham's suborning perjury and witness intimidation.

Many of us would agree.... but not for the same reasons.

Perhaps...... the original story the agent told him was full of holes and lies.

Tell me you haven't read the testimony without using those words.

[Anonymous]

MAGA would like to pretend Priestap’s testimony yesterday didn’t happen, so of course they were talking about the dossier instead.

[Anonymous]

and now we are at the hoisting of the petard phase...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:and now we are at the hoisting of the petard phase...

Heide..... Isn't he the FBI agent currently under investigation for withholding exculpatory evidence?