Michael Cohen denies report of secret Prague trip: 'Mueller knows everything!'

[Vern]

Did the judges on the FISA court sort through the store-bought democrat spy document to determine what was fact and what was fiction? No. Why not? Because the leftist Obamanites submitting the document did not tell the judges they never verified anything in particular in the document. If this whole mess was not a matter of public record I admit I would have a very hard time believing such corrupt crap was being carried out by our government law enforcement officers.

thank you for the vague "nuh uh" but I don't see how it addresses anything I've posted. and I see you're clinging to the "steele dossier is the basis of the FISA warrant" narrative. I guess you missed the trump stooge Nunes telling you that the dossier was not the basis of the FISA warrant.

The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/372022-read-the-controversial-memo-just-released-by-republicans

don't feel bad, most conservatives didn't know that. Fox news didn't really want you to know that.

 

[marke]

thank you for the vague "nuh uh" but I don't see how it addresses anything I've posted. and I see you're clinging to the "steele dossier is the basis of the FISA warrant" narrative. I guess you missed the trump stooge Nunes telling you that the dossier was not the basis of the FISA warrant.

The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/372022-read-the-controversial-memo-just-released-by-republicans

don't feel bad, most conservatives didn't know that. Fox news didn't really want you to know that.

You focus on one report and leave a whole lot of facts out. This is from the New York Times, July 21, 2018, Carter Page FISA Documents Are Released by Justice Department. I want to point out several key facts alluded to in this news article. First, for two years democrats and leftists in the Justice Department have refused to give Congress these documents which they were then forced by court order to release to the public. How did democrats know the Steele dossier had no bearing on the FISA warrant before these documents were made public? They didn't. They lied, which is not unusual since they have been obstructing the congressional investigation for years.

Another point to be made is that the democrats framed Carter Page in a FISA application which gave them access to spy on Trump and their spying never turned up anything on Carter page to justify their application in the first place. Here is a quote from the article:

Mr. Page has denied being a Russian agent and has not been charged with a crime in the nearly two years since the initial wiretap application was filed.

The Justice officials relied on the fabricated Steele document when submitting their FISA application for a warrant to spy on Steele, based largely on the lies contained in the notorious democrat fabricated lying spy document. Here is another quote from the NYT article:

The fight over the surveillance of Mr. Page centered on the fact that the F.B.I., in making the case to judges that he might be a Russian agent, had used some claims drawn from a notorious Democrat-funded dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/21/us/politics/carter-page-fisa.html

Carter Page is currently suing the DNC and Perkins Coie law firm, producers of the now infamous Steele dossier, for defamation of character. Page has never been charged with a crime in spite of being slandered by democrat dogs seeking to use him to bring down Trump. In fact, Page has never even been interviewed by Mueller. That is how bad this is. I hope he tears those democrat dogs a new opening in their bad bottoms.

 

[OpportunityCost]

Whether you like it or not, most of the elements in the Steele dossier have been proven correct. Cohen in/near Prague is the cherry on the top of the muffin.

Please prove that with a decent source. Most information I have looked at has said at least according to knowledge available to the public, very little of it has been verified.

 

[Oborosen]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/27/michael-cohen-denies-mcclatchy-report-secret-pragu/

President Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen is denying the latest report from McClatchy News Service that he traveled to the Prague in summer 2016 to collude with Russians on the U.S. presidential election.

Democratic-financed British ex-spy Christopher Steele wrote in his anti-Trump dossier that Cohen secretly went to the Czech capital and met with Vladimir Putin aides to arrange cash payments to Russian hackers.
=======================================================
The supposed meeting between Cohen & a Putin representative concerning cash payments to the Russians may not have been in Prague itself but nearby. So technically he may not have traveled to Prague, just a hotel or guest house in the Prague area where his cell phone ID was picked up & automatically recorded.

News service McClatchy also reported that Russians talked about his trip in intercepted communications.

Great, more possibly manufactured crap to bog down the rest, or possibly even taint the investigation.

First it was the Steele dossier somehow generating corroborations as time went on, when it failed to deliver initially.
I can see this whole load doing the same eventually. With the desperation of the democratic party and their allies, making it more and more obvious that this is possibly just another fabrication as most of their attacks have been.

Despite the fact that corroboration isn't even a crime. Though if you want to do some shady **** and get away with it, you better have that little D on your name tag, or else your goose is cooked.

 

[Oborosen]

Steel also estimated that the dossier was 70%-90% true. So, 30% could be false. Or 10% could be false.

Think about this for a moment! Would you hand over a paper to your boss, or a professor, and tell them "Meh, it's about 70% correct."?


Um, wut?

Would you expect to get paid for such shoddy work? Expect credit for it?

Of course not. But the dossier has become the keystone to the Trump haters' case that he colluded with Russia.

It's more likely at this point that allies to Trump's opposition manufactured those corroborating reports as time went on.

It's just a hunch, but given the way that they've been acting all this time. I definitely wouldn't put it past the democrats to do such a scummy thing.

 

[Vern]

You focus on one report and leave a whole lot of facts out. This is from the New York Times, July 21, 2018, Carter Page FISA Documents Are Released by Justice Department. I want to point out several key facts alluded to in this news article. First, for two years democrats and leftists in the Justice Department have refused to give Congress these documents which they were then forced by court order to release to the public. How did democrats know the Steele dossier had no bearing on the FISA warrant before these documents were made public? They didn't. They lied, which is not unusual since they have been obstructing the congressional investigation for years.

Another point to be made is that the democrats framed Carter Page in a FISA application which gave them access to spy on Trump and their spying never turned up anything on Carter page to justify their application in the first place. Here is a quote from the article:

Mr. Page has denied being a Russian agent and has not been charged with a crime in the nearly two years since the initial wiretap application was filed.

The Justice officials relied on the fabricated Steele document when submitting their FISA application for a warrant to spy on Steele, based largely on the lies contained in the notorious democrat fabricated lying spy document. Here is another quote from the NYT article:

The fight over the surveillance of Mr. Page centered on the fact that the F.B.I., in making the case to judges that he might be a Russian agent, had used some claims drawn from a notorious Democrat-funded dossier compiled by Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence agent.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/21/us/politics/carter-page-fisa.html

Carter Page is currently suing the DNC and Perkins Coie law firm, producers of the now infamous Steele dossier, for defamation of character. Page has never been charged with a crime in spite of being slandered by democrat dogs seeking to use him to bring down Trump. In fact, Page has never even been interviewed by Mueller. That is how bad this is. I hope he tears those democrat dogs a new opening in their bad bottoms.

Your post is incoherent and deluded and (this is key) has nothing to do with my original point that the dossier has turned out to be quite accurate. And nothing you posted changes this simple fact

The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016

Lets review the information your conservative masters "protected" you from

the Steele dossier has turned out to be quite accurate
Papadopoulos was the basis of the FBI investigation

Until you can acknowledge those simple document facts, your posts will always be incoherent and deluded.

 

[marke]

Your post is incoherent and deluded and (this is key) has nothing to do with my original point that the dossier has turned out to be quite accurate. And nothing you posted changes this simple fact

The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016

Lets review the information your conservative masters "protected" you from

the Steele dossier has turned out to be quite accurate

Total baloney. Even stupid corrupt Comey admitted he never verified anything in the dossier before he and his mob of corrupt Obamanites used it to secure a FISA warrant, supposedly to spy on Page who never did anything wrong and was never questioned by Mueller, in order to spy on Trump for the Clinton campaign. Not even Nixon was that corrupt.

Papadopoulos was the basis of the FBI investigation

Totally lying democrat bull****. Democrats set up Papadopoulos for the purpose of securing a collusion charge against Trump. It did not work. Stupid wicked democrats.

Until you can acknowledge those simple document facts, your posts will always be incoherent and deluded.

 

[Vern]

Total baloney. Even stupid corrupt Comey admitted he never verified anything in the dossier before he and his mob of corrupt Obamanites used it to secure a FISA warrant, supposedly to spy on Page who never did anything wrong and was never questioned by Mueller, in order to spy on Trump for the Clinton campaign. Not even Nixon was that corrupt.

Totally lying democrat bull****. Democrats set up Papadopoulos for the purpose of securing a collusion charge against Trump. It did not work. Stupid wicked democrats.

Yea, sorry mark, you seem to be determined to stay in your delusional bubble. You just don't get to ignore the liar and trump stooge Nunes telling you "The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016." And you don't get ignore that the Steele Dossier has turned out to be quite accurate. But yet you do. Your angry whining and flailing changes no facts. This is a debate forum. You make a point and back it up like I did. What you're looking for a pre-teen conservative chatroom.

 

[marke]

Yea, sorry mark, you seem to be determined to stay in your delusional bubble. You just don't get to ignore the liar and trump stooge Nunes telling you "The Papadopoulos information triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016." And you don't get ignore that the Steele Dossier has turned out to be quite accurate. But yet you do. Your angry whining and flailing changes no facts. This is a debate forum. You make a point and back it up like I did. What you're looking for a pre-teen conservative chatroom.

Go ahead and post your evidence to support the claim that specific portions of the dossier have been found accurate by qualified investigators. What details in the dossier have been determined by the same investigators to be false?

I'll wait for you to try to respond.

 

[Mr Person]

Mueller has produced almost nothing and he is AT LEAST 300% overdue with a ruling on the main charge.

This is abuse of the nation for political gain.

Either that or shear incompetence again.

THE FAILED INTELLIGENTSIA!

Definitely not tons of indictments, guilty pleas, witnesses turned states evidence, and most certainly not Manafort's conviction. Right.

:roll:





I think we've heard enough from hiearchies of boofing or whatever your swill keeps oozing from.


MEATY PARSIMONIOUS LIMPING!

 

[Vern]

Go ahead and post your evidence to support the claim that specific portions of the dossier have been found accurate by qualified investigators. What details in the dossier have been determined by the same investigators to be false?

I'll wait for you to try to respond.

poor marke. when I posted the proof that parts of the dossier had been quite accurate, your first reply to deflect to the lying conservative Fisa warrant narrative. Only when your deflection blew up in your face did you then move the goal posts to "qualified investigators". See marke, that's just you looking for any excuse to avoid an honest and intelligent discussion of the facts. I don't need a "qualified investigator" to see trump's subservience to Putin exactly as predicted by the dossier. Oh and the link I posted had this

What’s more, the Steele dossier itself has been deemed credible at the highest levels of the US intelligence community, to the point where both Presidents Obama and Trump were briefed on it before its existence was made public. Independent intelligence experts have pointed out that many of its claims — though not the pee tape — have been confirmed by subsequent investigations.

Yea, not matter how angrily you whine, flail, deflect and try to move the goal posts, the dossier has been quite accurate and parts "confirmed by subsequent investigations."

 

[Vern]

Go ahead and post your evidence to support the claim that specific portions of the dossier have been found accurate by qualified investigators. What details in the dossier have been determined by the same investigators to be false?

I'll wait for you to try to respond.

hey marke, where'd you go? I responded. Help me understand why you think cowardly cutting and running is acceptable your obedient narratives blow up in your face. If you had any integrity, you'd admit you were wrong. Oh wait, you're a conservative. Nevermind.

 

[marke]

poor marke. when I posted the proof that parts of the dossier had been quite accurate, your first reply to deflect to the lying conservative Fisa warrant narrative. Only when your deflection blew up in your face did you then move the goal posts to "qualified investigators". See marke, that's just you looking for any excuse to avoid an honest and intelligent discussion of the facts. I don't need a "qualified investigator" to see trump's subservience to Putin exactly as predicted by the dossier. Oh and the link I posted had this

What’s more, the Steele dossier itself has been deemed credible at the highest levels of the US intelligence community, to the point where both Presidents Obama and Trump were briefed on it before its existence was made public. Independent intelligence experts have pointed out that many of its claims — though not the pee tape — have been confirmed by subsequent investigations.

Yea, not matter how angrily you whine, flail, deflect and try to move the goal posts, the dossier has been quite accurate and parts "confirmed by subsequent investigations."

Biased CNN democrat party hacks are not qualified investigators. Try again.

 

[marke]

hey marke, where'd you go? I responded. Help me understand why you think cowardly cutting and running is acceptable your obedient narratives blow up in your face. If you had any integrity, you'd admit you were wrong. Oh wait, you're a conservative. Nevermind.

Let's simplify. List the parts of the dossier than have been verified to be accurate by qualified impartial investigators. Then list the parts that have not been verified. Simple. To hell with MSNBC reporters say. Let's examine the facts.

 

[Vern]

Biased CNN democrat party hacks are not qualified investigators. Try again.

Let's simplify. List the parts of the dossier than have been verified to be accurate by qualified impartial investigators. Then list the parts that have not been verified. Simple. To hell with MSNBC reporters say. Let's examine the facts.

Marke, your obedient flailing doesn't change the facts that A. a sentient being can see that the dossier has been quite accurate and B. it "has been deemed credible at the highest levels of the US intelligence community". On a related side note can you confirm you believed "President Obama was born in Kenya", "he wanted to kill old people", "republicans want to cut the deficit" and the vile and disgusting "stand down" lies. thanks in advance.

 

[marke]

Marke, your obedient flailing doesn't change the facts that A. a sentient being can see that the dossier has been quite accurate and B. it "has been deemed credible at the highest levels of the US intelligence community". On a related side note can you confirm you believed "President Obama was born in Kenya", "he wanted to kill old people", "republicans want to cut the deficit" and the vile and disgusting "stand down" lies. thanks in advance.

I'm tired of the leftist lying about the fake dossier. Don't listen to the anti-American Trump-hating hedonists, just tell me who confirmed what parts of the fake dossier and what parts were found to be fabrications. Don't continue to avoid the truth and stop repeating the lying propaganda from the main stream democrat propagandists.

 

[Vern]

I'm tired of the leftist lying about the fake dossier. Don't listen to the anti-American Trump-hating hedonists, just tell me who confirmed what parts of the fake dossier and what parts were found to be fabrications. Don't continue to avoid the truth and stop repeating the lying propaganda from the main stream democrat propagandists.

Poor con. You asked for proof that the dossier was accurate. I showed the parts that turned out to be quite accurate. Its why you deflected to lying conservative narrative concerning FISA warrants. You only moved the goal posts to “wah wah I want an investigator to verify it” when the lying conservative narrative concerning FISA warrants blew up in your face. I then showed you that “investigators” think it’s accurate. So you then move the goal posts to “wah wah I want their names”. Besides cowardly deflecting from my original post showing parts of the dossier has been quite accurate, it had a name.

“Steele and his company appear serious and credible,” John Sipher, a 30-year veteran of the CIA, wrote at Slate in September. “Well before any public knowledge of these events, the [Steele dossier] identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to reportedly discuss the receipt of stolen documents.” [/I]
https://www.vox.com/world/2017/10/27/16552458/trump-russia-clinton-steele-cambridge-analytica

Now I’m sure you’ll obediently move the goal posts to “wah wah, what are his hobbies, interests and pet peeves”. Anyhoo, the problem you are having is you're in a cult so no evidence will ever be good enough. In the future just post “wah wah librul media” it’ll save you the time of trying to think up excuses to ignore reality.

 

[marke]

Poor con. You asked for proof that the dossier was accurate. I showed the parts that turned out to be quite accurate. Its why you deflected to lying conservative narrative concerning FISA warrants. You only moved the goal posts to “wah wah I want an investigator to verify it” when the lying conservative narrative concerning FISA warrants blew up in your face. I then showed you that “investigators” think it’s accurate. So you then move the goal posts to “wah wah I want their names”. Besides cowardly deflecting from my original post showing parts of the dossier has been quite accurate, it had a name.



Now I’m sure you’ll obediently move the goal posts to “wah wah, what are his hobbies, interests and pet peeves”. Anyhoo, the problem you are having is you're in a cult so no evidence will ever be good enough. In the future just post “wah wah librul media” it’ll save you the time of trying to think up excuses to ignore reality.

I will rephrase. Give me the name of at least one guy who claims to have proven at least one point of the democrat dossier.

 

[Vern]

I will rephrase. Give me the name of at least one guy who claims to have proven at least one point of the democrat dossier.

marke, I have to assume you cant read. besides the fact that you simply have to open your eyes to see trump's subservience to putin, you somehow missed this

John Sipher, a 30-year veteran of the CIA, wrote at Slate in September. “Well before any public knowledge of these events, the [Steele dossier] identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to reportedly discuss the receipt of stolen documents.”

 

[marke]

marke, I have to assume you cant read. besides the fact that you simply have to open your eyes to see trump's subservience to putin, you somehow missed this

John Sipher, a 30-year veteran of the CIA, wrote at Slate in September. “Well before any public knowledge of these events, the [Steele dossier] identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to reportedly discuss the receipt of stolen documents.”

Some guy claimed the Steele document contained info which was already assumed to be true from public claims made by biased parties who invested heavily in the creation of the 'spy' document? Did the CIA prove Assange got the emails from Russia? Absolutely not. The CIA never investigated the DNC computers to find out anything so they do not know anything.

Did the CIA prove Russia bought ads on social media? Who cares? All sorts of foreign nationals may be buying ads on social media for all sorts of reasons. So what? To influence an election? Obama sent paid government employees to Israel on government time with government money for the purpose of influencing that election. Democrats claim influencing other elections and even influencing American elections for democrats is not a crime but influencing elections in favor of republicans is a crime. That is their political bias making them think those hypocritical thoughts.

What specifics and what evidence did John Sipher offer to support his apparently biased claim? Was he friends with Peter Strzok and/or other corrupt Trump haters in American law enforcement? Was he friends with those who invented the "opposition research" product?

 

[Vern]

Some guy claimed the Steele document contained info which was already assumed to be true from public claims made by biased parties who invested heavily in the creation of the 'spy' document? Did the CIA prove Assange got the emails from Russia? Absolutely not. The CIA never investigated the DNC computers to find out anything so they do not know anything.

Oh marke, you are woefully uninformed on the issue of the dossier. Its why you have to resort to asking "questions". You do that because you really want to believe what you’re posting but you cant make a point and back it up. Russia being behind the hack is just common knowledge. The reason you are still clueless about that and the dossier is because your conservative masters aren’t really keeping you up to date and (this is key) you don’t want to know the truth. anyhoo, let me try to get you up to speed

U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to try to help President Donald Trump win, in part by hacking and releasing emails embarrassing to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and spreading social media propaganda.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ying-to-undermine-u-s-elections-idUSKBN1EW0TA

It includes details on how the Russians, using an encrypted file with instructions, delivered their trove of hacked emails to WikiLeaks, the online anti-secrecy organization led by Julian Assange that became the main platform for the Russians to display their trove of hacked emails.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...3ce89036c78_story.html?utm_term=.db138337ee64

I await your next obedient whining and flailing.

 

[Mr Person]

I will rephrase. Give me the name of at least one guy who claims to have proven at least one point of the democrat dossier.

^
I'm always amazed that even in this day and age, there are still internet posters who think they're somehow scoring a point by either signalling that they will reject any evidence that contradicts their spew or in fact rejecting said evidence, and then demanding that another poster provide them with "evidence".



Seriously, marke, who do you think you're fooling here? Your words are right there on the page. You constantly shifted the goalposts, and Vern provided a nice summary of that reeking dishonesty. Trump could admit everything lie on TV, and you'd just say that Obama and Mueller tricked him into doing it, then ignore it.

 

[marke]

Oh marke, you are woefully uninformed on the issue of the dossier. Its why you have to resort to asking "questions". You do that because you really want to believe what you’re posting but you cant make a point and back it up. Russia being behind the hack is just common knowledge.

"Common knowledge" in this case simply means a democrat propaganda lie commonly believed by undiscerning individuals incapable of critical examination of story tales for evidence of facts or truth.

The reason you are still clueless about that and the dossier is because your conservative masters aren’t really keeping you up to date and (this is key) you don’t want to know the truth. anyhoo, let me try to get you up to speed

U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to try to help President Donald Trump win, in part by hacking and releasing emails embarrassing to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and spreading social media propaganda.

Wrong. Partisan hacks and lying media dogs offer their unsupported opinions as though the entirety of the Justice Department is speaking with one mouth. That is a lie. Nobody has ever tied Assange to Russians or to Trump in his release of DNC emails. Democrats know the truth about the inside job which is why they adamantly refused to allow invealstigators access to the very computers which would settle the case once for all.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ying-to-undermine-u-s-elections-idUSKBN1EW0TA

It includes details on how the Russians, using an encrypted file with instructions, delivered their trove of hacked emails to WikiLeaks, the online anti-secrecy organization led by Julian Assange that became the main platform for the Russians to display their trove of hacked emails.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...3ce89036c78_story.html?utm_term=.db138337ee64

I await your next obedient whining and flailing.

Russia did not hack the DNC computers to get the massive trove of emails given to Assange. It had to have been an inside job, according to forensics experts not on the democrat payroll.

 

[marke]

Oh marke, you are woefully uninformed on the issue of the dossier. Its why you have to resort to asking "questions". You do that because you really want to believe what you’re posting but you cant make a point and back it up. Russia being behind the hack is just common knowledge. The reason you are still clueless about that and the dossier is because your conservative masters aren’t really keeping you up to date and (this is key) you don’t want to know the truth. anyhoo, let me try to get you up to speed

U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to try to help President Donald Trump win, in part by hacking and releasing emails embarrassing to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and spreading social media propaganda.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ying-to-undermine-u-s-elections-idUSKBN1EW0TA

It includes details on how the Russians, using an encrypted file with instructions, delivered their trove of hacked emails to WikiLeaks, the online anti-secrecy organization led by Julian Assange that became the main platform for the Russians to display their trove of hacked emails.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...3ce89036c78_story.html?utm_term=.db138337ee64

I await your next obedient whining and flailing.

Your investigators claimed they found evidence of Russian hacking. Nothing in those reports ties those separate incidents to the one involving Assange's earlier release of insider DNC emails.

 

[marke]

^
I'm always amazed that even in this day and age, there are still internet posters who think they're somehow scoring a point by either signalling that they will reject any evidence that contradicts their spew or in fact rejecting said evidence, and then demanding that another poster provide them with "evidence".



Seriously, marke, who do you think you're fooling here? Your words are right there on the page. You constantly shifted the goalposts, and Vern provided a nice summary of that reeking dishonesty. Trump could admit everything lie on TV, and you'd just say that Obama and Mueller tricked him into doing it, then ignore it.

It is not Trump who is exposing the crooked dossier for what it is. It is dozens of republican congressmen, conservative spokespeople and qualified unbiased investigators.