• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BREAKING: Senator Lindsey Graham Just Confirmed The Steele Dossier Was Used For 2016 FISA Warrant

Fishking said:
If this is true it's freaking huge. I mean....Trump "YUGE" huge. This means the DNC paid for un-vetted dirt and then had it inserted into the friendly government systems to attack a political opponent. I can't even vocalize how big this is.
Click to expand...

LOL Dream on. There are plenty of reasons for a FISA warrant that predate the dossier by YEARS.

Britain’s spy agencies played a crucial role in alerting their counterparts in Washington to contacts between members of Donald Trump’s campaign team and Russian intelligence operatives, the Guardian has been told.

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.

Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/13/british-spies-first-to-spot-trump-team-links-russia
 
iguanaman said:
What evidence do you have that the dossier was compiled with the cooperation of the Russian Govt.? There is none because it was not. There is plenty of evidence that Putin was helping Trump to win and authorities did not even need the DNC server to determine that. Your grasping at straws resembles birtherism and the future of Trumpis no brighter than that racist meme.
Click to expand...

The dossier itself names coded sources as being within the Russian government. So is it true or is it false?
 
Absentglare said:
We know that he had these contacts with Russia. Again, when Australia got wind of this activity, they alerted the authorities. Cohen didn't.
Click to expand...

Muddying the waters again. If he was one place when the dossier claimed he was somewhere else, that allegation would prove to be false wouldn't it?
 
OpportunityCost said:
The dossier itself names coded sources as being within the Russian government. So is it true or is it false?
Click to expand...

They were informants within the Russian Govt you mean. Several of whom lost their lives when the dossier was leaked. Putin was very angry when those leaks were revealed. Why would he feed information that incriminates him and makes him a liar? He has consistently denied meddling in our elections.
 
Last edited:
iguanaman said:
What evidence do you have that the dossier was compiled with the cooperation of the Russian Govt.? There is none because it was not. There is plenty of evidence that Putin was helping Trump to win and authorities did not even need the DNC server to determine that. Your grasping at straws resembles birtherism and the future of Trumpis no brighter than that racist meme.
Click to expand...

But see, here's the thing: Russia is evil incarnate; headed up by a master KGB guy who plotted to steal the election for his buddy Trump.

Until evidence emerges that Russian intelligence was funnelled to the buddy's competitor. Then suddenly It becomes all debateable to what extent the master KGB guy interfered in the election.

It doesnt work. Yes- There is no evidence that Steele was played by Russia. But neither is there evidence Russia hacked the DNC. But since the latter is concluded in part because Russia is evil incarnate headed up by a master KGB guy, the latter cant be be arbitrarily dismissed either.
 
iguanaman said:
They were informants within the Russian Govt you mean. Several of whom lost their lives when the dossier was leaked. Putin was very angry when those leaks were revealed. Why would he feed information that incriminates him and makes him a liar? He has consistently denied meddling in our elections.
Click to expand...

Yes-- thank you. Putin denies meddling in the election. What evidence exists that challenges that claim?
The dossier-- assembled from information from the Russian government for the Clinton campaign.
 
Athanasius68 said:
If we are going to double down on the Trump/Russia collusion story, then at some point there is a need to start dealing with facts. And as a matter of 'fact' it cannot be said that Russia hacked the Dems (and its not a claim based on the lack of some sort of judicial finding. Its a claim based upon the fact the Dems never permitted the government to assess the evidence).
Click to expand...

There is no reason to believe otherwise. A preponderance of in favor, one dissenter who's own claims are not fact, and not even coherent:

Cybersecurity experts and firms, including CrowdStrike, Fidelis Cybersecurity, Mandiant, SecureWorks, and ThreatConnect, and the editor for Ars Technica, stated the leak was part of a series of cyberattacks on the DNC committed by two Russian intelligence groups.[43][44][45][46][47][48] U.S. intelligence agencies also stated (with "high confidence"[49]) that the Russian government was behind the theft of emails and documents from the DNC, according to reports in the New York Times and the Washington Post.[49][50][51][52][53]
Click to expand...
7 firms along with U.S. intelligence agencies.
vs
An unknown blogger “The Forensicator”

You are making a fool of Republicans in supporting such nonsense.

According to Patrick Lawrence's article in The Nation, the memorandum argued that the metadata in these files were altered to add Russian fingerprints, and that file transfer rate reportedly proved they were transferred locally.[12] Brian Feldman, writing in the New York Magazine, criticized the report for relying on "the 'metadata' of 'locked files' that only [Forensicator] had access to" pointing out that these phrases were meaningless. Feldman described the claims in Patrick Lawrence's article as "too incoherent to even debunk" and criticized its use of "techno-gibberish".[13]
Click to expand...


Reminds me of people who point out the complexity of the "human eye" as evidence that evolution isn't how humans came to be.
 
Mach said:
There is no reason to believe otherwise. A preponderance of in favor, one dissenter who's own claims are not fact, and not even coherent:


7 firms along with U.S. intelligence agencies.
vs
An unknown blogger “The Forensicator”

You are making a fool of Republicans in supporting such nonsense.




Reminds me of people who point out the complexity of the "human eye" as evidence that evolution isn't how humans came to be.
Click to expand...

Two different issues here. I have no reason to dispute the claim that Russia hacked the DNC.

But none of these firms were the government. If the claim is that Trump conspired with Putin to benefit from the Russian hack of the DNC, then the government has to actually show that Russia hacked the DNC. Otherwise we are simply relying upon the DNC say so. And if we are going to do that, well, Trump has said there was no collusion.
We can all go home now.
 
iguanaman said:
LOL Dream on. There are plenty of reasons for a FISA warrant that predate the dossier by YEARS.
Click to expand...

We'll see what comes out from the FISA request. It shouldn't be hard to find the request and the justifications used for the request. This will be fully documented and I hope to see some information on it. In other words, there is no guess work to it. In other words, it's verifiable if it did or didn't happen and it doesn't take a drawn out investigation to do.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Muddying the waters again. If he was one place when the dossier claimed he was somewhere else, that allegation would prove to be false wouldn't it?
Click to expand...

Oh? Do you have any reason to believe one statement over the other?
 
Athanasius68 said:
Two different issues here. I have no reason to dispute the claim that Russia hacked the DNC.
Click to expand...
vs
then the government has to actually show that Russia hacked the DNC.
Click to expand...

To me that looks contradictory. You have no reason to dispute everyone who claims it occurred. You believe they need to show it occurred !?
Who is investigating this? No one, it's not credible enough to go anywhere, hence, it's done and over.
 
Fishking said:
We'll see what comes out from the FISA request. It shouldn't be hard to find the request and the justifications used for the request. This will be fully documented and I hope to see some information on it. In other words, there is no guess work to it. In other words, it's verifiable if it did or didn't happen and it doesn't take a drawn out investigation to do.
Click to expand...

Correct...if it even gets that far. It appears that Mueller has Trump on Obstruction of justice and we might not even need the crimes he was obstructing. I hope Trump takes down Pence with him and we get a Democratic majority in the House this year. Won't it be sweet to have a Democrat back in the Whitehouse again so soon? :lol: Things are looking up for sure.
 
Last edited:
Mach said:
vs


To me that looks contradictory. You have no reason to dispute everyone who claims it occurred. You believe they need to show it occurred !?
Who is investigating this? No one, it's not credible enough to go anywhere, hence, it's done and over.
Click to expand...

Then apply the same standards:

We KNOW that the Democrats hired Fusion. We KNOW that Fusion hired Steele. We KNOW Steele wrote the dossier. We KNOW that Steele used his sources within the Russian government to prepare, in part, the dossier.
We KNOW this because the Democrats, Fusion and Steele have all said this. Its not a conclusion based upon reasoned speculation by people.

Meanwhile:

Russia has DENIED being in possession of the Clinton emails. Russia has DENIED hacking the DNC. Wikileaks has DENIED that Russia was its source for the DNC files.
And There is NO proof to the contrary.
The claim is that Trump abd/or various people working for Trump were interested in DNC files that somebody, who DID NOT work for the Russian government, said he/she knew people in the Russian government who had access to them.

In other words, its based upon speculation. It may be reasoned speculation, but it is still just that.

So if we are going to talk about Russian interference in the 2016 election, more evidence exists they did so on behalf of Clinton than on behalf of Trump.
Applying to Trump and Clinton equal standards.
 
In other news, Senator's Lindsey Graham and Chuck Grassley are calling for an investigation of Christopher Steele, the author of the Russian dossier, claiming he lied to federal agencies about leaking information to the press.

Two top Republican senators have formally recommended that the Justice Department and FBI investigate the author of the controversial anti-Trump “dossier,” in the first known criminal referral from Congress as part of lawmakers’ Russia probes.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., made the referral in a Jan. 4-dated letter to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and FBI Director Christopher Wray. The move ramps up congressional Republicans’ investigation of the salacious document and those involved in creating it, as Special Counsel Robert Mueller continues to probe Russian meddling in the 2016 election and possible collusion with Trump associates.

The dossier was authored by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who was hired by opposition research firm Fusion GPS. In their letter, the GOP lawmakers cited potential violations for false statements “the Committee has reason to believe Mr. Steele made regarding his distribution of information contained in the dossier.”

....[T]he senators claim Steele may have lied to federal authorities specifically about his contacts with reporters regarding the dossier contents.
Click to expand...

Source: GOP senators refer Trump dossier author for federal investigation | Fox News

Got one word for this: SQUIRREL

You can't find any fault with the claims made in the dossier. So, what do you do? Claim that:

1) the dossier is false without any proof. (FBI/SC Mueller is holding its/his cards close to the vest)
2) the dossier's author was a "foreign agent" hired directly by your political foe/rival political party and that such interactions was "the real collusion".
3) the dossier was used as justification for placing certain private U.S. citizens under FBI surveillance. (Q: If the claims made in the document were even remotely true, don't we have a duty and a responsibility to investigate?)
4) the dossier's author violated the law by lying to federal authorities about discussing its contents to reporters/the press

It's like the GOP/Trump/the vein, opportunist Lindsey Graham will stop at nothing to discredit this document and its author. So, now they want to investigate about what??? Whether or not Mr. Steele lied to the FBI about having discussions with the media? What a waste of time, energy and taxpayer dollars.
 
Objective Voice said:
In other news, Senator's Lindsey Graham and Chuck Grassley are calling for an investigation of Christopher Steele, the author of the Russian dossier, claiming he lied to federal agencies about leaking information to the press.



Source: GOP senators refer Trump dossier author for federal investigation | Fox News

Got one word for this: SQUIRREL

You can't find any fault with the claims made in the dossier. So, what do you do? Claim that:

1) the dossier is false without any proof. (FBI/SC Mueller is holding its/his cards close to the vest)
2) the dossier's author was a "foreign agent" hired directly by your political foe/rival political party and that such interactions was "the real collusion".
3) the dossier was used as justification for placing certain private U.S. citizens under FBI surveillance. (Q: If the claims made in the document were even remotely true, don't we have a duty and a responsibility to investigate?)
4) the dossier's author violated the law by lying to federal authorities about discussing its contents to reporters/the press

It's like the GOP/Trump/the vein, opportunist Lindsey Graham will stop at nothing to discredit this document and its author. So, now they want to investigate about what??? Whether or not Mr. Steele lied to the FBI about having discussions with the media? What a waste of time, energy and taxpayer dollars.
Click to expand...

1. How does one prove a negative?
2. In light of the fact the dossier is the only evidence of a campaign receiving information from Russia, its not neccessarily an unreasonable comment.
3. Which is a question as yet unanswred.
4. Arent Muellers scalps about lying to federal authorities?
 
iguanaman said:
They were informants within the Russian Govt you mean. Several of whom lost their lives when the dossier was leaked. Putin was very angry when those leaks were revealed. Why would he feed information that incriminates him and makes him a liar? He has consistently denied meddling in our elections.
Click to expand...

Now that is a fancy verbal punt.
 
Absentglare said:
Do you have ANY reason to believe it has checked out?
Click to expand...

Once again, I don't need to, he's innocent until proven guilty. Have you ever considered there is a reason why they aren't trying to check out the alibi?

Hint: it makes the veracity of the dossier look flimsy.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Once again, I don't need to, he's innocent until proven guilty. Have you ever considered there is a reason why they aren't trying to check out the alibi?

Hint: it makes the veracity of the dossier look flimsy.
Click to expand...

Your logic is that he shouldn't have his alibi checked out because he's innocent until proven guilty? By that logic, we can fire all the police, judges, and prosecutors because there's no need to ever investigate anyone for anything. Just presume innocence.

We don't know if Mueller did or did not check out the alibi. What we know is that we have one source saying one thing and the offended source denying the allegation which, as i pointed out, proves nothing.
 
Absentglare said:
Your logic is that he shouldn't have his alibi checked out because he's innocent until proven guilty? By that logic, we can fire all the police, judges, and prosecutors because there's no need to ever investigate anyone for anything. Just presume innocence.

We don't know if Mueller did or did not check out the alibi. What we know is that we have one source saying one thing and the offended source denying the allegation which, as i pointed out, proves nothing.
Click to expand...

You are presuming guilt without the alibi being checked. The simplest answer is the best one, we don't know...yet.

A hint that it is true is that no one is attempting to try very hard to verify or debunk the alibi or it would be used to prop up the dossier as truthful, Occam's razor applies, if it were false we would definitely be hearing about it---meaning, its probably true.
 
OpportunityCost said:
You are presuming guilt without the alibi being checked. The simplest answer is the best one, we don't know...yet.

A hint that it is true is that no one is attempting to try very hard to verify or debunk the alibi or it would be used to prop up the dossier as truthful, Occam's razor applies, if it were false we would definitely be hearing about it---meaning, its probably true.
Click to expand...

That's not true, you're drawing an unwarranted conclusion. There is no evidence to settle the dispute in testimonies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom