[W:775]Trump: ‘I think I’d take’ damaging info on 2020 rival from foreign operatives

[HumblePi]

The dossier is not confirmed or verified. Never has been.
Look-- if you wish to believe Russia is great Satan Jr. that's ok. But don't turn around and put your trust in them when it is politically convenient. It just makes things look silly.

I don't trust the Kremlin, never have and never will. Russia won't help the US with anything except choose a president. The dossier is a series of reports—16 in all—that total 35 pages. Written in 2016, the dossier is a collection of raw intelligence. Steele neither evaluated nor synthesized the intelligence. He neither made nor rendered bottom-line judgments. The dossier is, quite simply and by design, raw reporting, not a finished intelligence product.

The dossier is similar to an FBI 302 form or a DEA 6 form. Both of those forms are used by special agents of the FBI and DEA, respectively, to record what they are told by witnesses during investigations. The substance of these memorandum can be true or false, but the recording of information is (or should be) accurate. In that sense, notes taken by a special agent have much in common with the notes that a journalist might take while covering a story—the substance of those notes could be true or false, depending on what the source tells the journalist, but the transcription should be accurate.

Here's the specific areas that the dossier corroborated by the special counsel.

The dossier reports:

Over the period March-September 2016 a company called [redacted] and its affiliates had been using botnets and porn traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs, steal data and conduct “altering operations” against the Democratic Party leadership. Entities linked to one [redacted] were involved and he and another hacking expert, both recruited under duress by the FSB, [redacted] were significant players in this operation.

Additionally, when referring what was contained in the dossier, the Mueller report states:

The Russian regime had been behind the recent leak of embarrassing email messages, emanating from the Democratic National Committee (DNC), to the Wikileaks platform. The reason for using Wikileaks was "plausible deniability" and the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of Trump and senior members of his campaign team.

The indictment of 12 officers of the Russian Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (GRU) corroborates these allegations from Steele’s sources. In particular, the indictment alleges:

3. Starting in at least March 2016, the Conspirators used a variety of means to hack the email accounts of volunteers and employees of the U.S. presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton (the “Clinton Campaign”), including the email account of the Clinton Campaign’s chairman.

4. By in or around April 2016, the Conspirators also hacked into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (“DCCC”) and the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”). The Conspirators covertly monitored the computers of dozens of DCCC and DNC employees, implanted hundreds of files containing malicious computer code (“malware”), and stole emails and other documents from the DCCC and DNC.

5. By in or around April 2016, the Conspirators began to plan the release of materials stolen from the Clinton Campaign, DCCC, and DNC.

6. Beginning in or around June 2016, the Conspirators staged and released tens of thousands of the stolen emails and documents. They did so using fictitious online personas, including “DCLeaks” and “Guccifer 2.0.”

7. The Conspirators also used the Guccifer 2.0 persona to release additional stolen documents through a website maintained by an organization ([Wikileaks]), that had previously posted documents stolen from U.S. persons, entities, and the U.S. government. The Conspirators continued their U.S. election-interference operations through in or around November 2016.

The indictment further alleges:

On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, wrote to a person who was in regular contact with senior members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, “thank u for writing back … do you find anyt[h]ing interesting in the docs I posted?” On or about August 17, 2016, the Conspirators added, “please tell me if I can help u anyhow … it would be a great pleasure to me.” On or about September 9, 2016, the Conspirators, again posing as Guccifer 2.0 referred to a stolen DCCC document posted online and asked the person, “what do u think of the info on the turnout model for the democrats entire presidential campaign.” The person responded, “[p]retty standard.”

 

[pamak]

It makes perfect sense if Russia's true motive was to sew chaos and mistrust in the election and the elective process. You are assigning what you "think" their motives were to them and you may be wrong.

See my previous post...

Helping Trump become president does not prohibit Russia from sowing chaos. It is not an either or situation. They could do both at the same time and they could sow chaos without harming Trump;s chances to win the election or they could try to sow chaos by harming Trump's reputation AFTER the latter became president!

 

[pamak]

I don't trust the Kremlin, never have and never will. Russia won't help the US with anything except choose a president. The dossier is a series of reports—16 in all—that total 35 pages. Written in 2016, the dossier is a collection of raw intelligence. Steele neither evaluated nor synthesized the intelligence. He neither made nor rendered bottom-line judgments. The dossier is, quite simply and by design, raw reporting, not a finished intelligence product.

The dossier is similar to an FBI 302 form or a DEA 6 form. Both of those forms are used by special agents of the FBI and DEA, respectively, to record what they are told by witnesses during investigations. The substance of these memorandum can be true or false, but the recording of information is (or should be) accurate. In that sense, notes taken by a special agent have much in common with the notes that a journalist might take while covering a story—the substance of those notes could be true or false, depending on what the source tells the journalist, but the transcription should be accurate.

Here's the specific areas that the dossier corroborated by the special counsel.

The dossier reports:

Over the period March-September 2016 a company called [redacted] and its affiliates had been using botnets and porn traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs, steal data and conduct “altering operations” against the Democratic Party leadership. Entities linked to one [redacted] were involved and he and another hacking expert, both recruited under duress by the FSB, [redacted] were significant players in this operation.

Additionally, when referring what was contained in the dossier, the Mueller report states:

The Russian regime had been behind the recent leak of embarrassing email messages, emanating from the Democratic National Committee (DNC), to the Wikileaks platform. The reason for using Wikileaks was "plausible deniability" and the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of Trump and senior members of his campaign team.

The indictment of 12 officers of the Russian Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (GRU) corroborates these allegations from Steele’s sources. In particular, the indictment alleges:

3. Starting in at least March 2016, the Conspirators used a variety of means to hack the email accounts of volunteers and employees of the U.S. presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton (the “Clinton Campaign”), including the email account of the Clinton Campaign’s chairman.

4. By in or around April 2016, the Conspirators also hacked into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (“DCCC”) and the Democratic National Committee (“DNC”). The Conspirators covertly monitored the computers of dozens of DCCC and DNC employees, implanted hundreds of files containing malicious computer code (“malware”), and stole emails and other documents from the DCCC and DNC.

5. By in or around April 2016, the Conspirators began to plan the release of materials stolen from the Clinton Campaign, DCCC, and DNC.

6. Beginning in or around June 2016, the Conspirators staged and released tens of thousands of the stolen emails and documents. They did so using fictitious online personas, including “DCLeaks” and “Guccifer 2.0.”

7. The Conspirators also used the Guccifer 2.0 persona to release additional stolen documents through a website maintained by an organization ([Wikileaks]), that had previously posted documents stolen from U.S. persons, entities, and the U.S. government. The Conspirators continued their U.S. election-interference operations through in or around November 2016.

The indictment further alleges:

On or about August 15, 2016, the Conspirators, posing as Guccifer 2.0, wrote to a person who was in regular contact with senior members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, “thank u for writing back … do you find anyt[h]ing interesting in the docs I posted?” On or about August 17, 2016, the Conspirators added, “please tell me if I can help u anyhow … it would be a great pleasure to me.” On or about September 9, 2016, the Conspirators, again posing as Guccifer 2.0 referred to a stolen DCCC document posted online and asked the person, “what do u think of the info on the turnout model for the democrats entire presidential campaign.” The person responded, “[p]retty standard.”

Since the dossier came from multiple sources, one cannot simply dismiss or accept the dossier in its totality. Some parts were corroborated and others were not. Since information originated by different sources , there was a range of credibility and accuracy of information.

 

[SLC]

I explained it in numerous posts.

All the intelligence assessments say it together with the fact that Trump' s position which fit the Russian objectives perfectly!

When one admirer Putin AFTER the latter gave orders to invade Crimea and intervene in Ukraine

and when one is criticizing EU at a time when Ukraine was thinking to join the EU

and when one criticizes the fact that the US spends money to defend other nations at a time when US radars for antiballistic defense were spreading to countries near Russia,

and when the name "Clinton" is associated with the period of the Russian humiliation by a Clinton administration at a time where they were very weak and could not oppose the US in anything (recall the Clinton campaign against Serbia which was a traditional ally of Russia)


then you do not need a PHD in political science to see that from the Russian interests point of view, it was obvious that "it was a good bet" (to use your expression) that Trump was much better for POTUS than Hillary

Well HRC signed off on the sell of 20% of the United State's uranium to Russians then the Russian gave $143,000,000.00 to the Clinton Foundation. And Bill made $500,000 for a speech to the Russians and got a private meeting with Putin himself. So the Russians seem to like the Clinton's also.

 

[SLC]

Since the dossier came from multiple sources, one cannot simply dismiss or accept the dossier in its totality. Some parts were corroborated and others were not. Since information originated by different sources , there was a range of credibility and accuracy of information.

When telling a lie liars frequently include portions of truth but ultimately its just a lie.

 

[pamak]

Well HRC signed off on the sell of 20% of the United State's uranium to Russians then the Russian gave $143,000,000.00 to the Clinton Foundation. And Bill made $500,000 for a speech to the Russians and got a private meeting with Putin himself. So the Russians seem to like the Clinton's also.

Actually, to a Russian company which could to even export the material to Russia. And in fact this decision was not even Clinton's sole decision. if you actually bothered to read credible sources instead of right-wing propaganda, The State Departmen was just one of the numerous agencies which had to agree for the deal. And the State Department was not even the head agency in that committee. It is not "a good bet" to believe that this negates all the Russian political objectives described in my quote. As for Bill making $500,000 from Russians, this is peanuts compared to Trump's dealings in Russia.

 

[pamak]

When telling a lie liars frequently include portions of truth but ultimately its just a lie.

So, the FBI had a good reason to investigate the allegations to separate the truth from the lies, right?
And Steele made the right decision to pass the dossier to the Americans, right?

 

[SLC]

See my previous post...

Helping Trump become president does not prohibit Russia from sowing chaos. It is not an either or situation. They could do both at the same time and they could sow chaos without harming Trump;s chances to win the election or they could try to sow chaos by harming Trump's reputation AFTER the latter became president!

Nor does helping HRC become president by providing damaging fake dirt. They also could have exposed the fact that HRC colluded with Russia for fake Russian dirt to win the 2016 election had she won. Great blackmail material!
.

 

[SLC]

So, the FBI had a good reason to investigate the allegations to separate the truth from the lies, right?
And Steele made the right decision to pass the dossier to the Americans, right?

They should have investigated Steele and his dossier and not Trump. Hell the Dossier talks about the Russian consulate in Miami Florida and there is not Russian Consulate in Miami. Steele was a suspect source from the beginning . He admitted he was desperate to see Trump lose.

 

[pamak]

Nor does helping HRC become president by providing damaging fake dirt. They also could have exposed the fact that HRC colluded with Russia for fake Russian dirt to win the 2016 election had she won. Great blackmail material!
.

What blackmail material?

Did you see Clinton getting any real damage by the Steel dossier after it was exposed?
Do you really think that this actually damages Clinton or Trump?

Clinton did not even meet Steele! MnCain knew more than Clinton about the dossier!

AS I said before, helping Clinton win makes zero sense for Russians.

With Clintons president, he Russians risked way heavier (or for longer time) sanctions since Clinton was wayyy more hostile to Putin and the Russian intervention n Ukraine and Crimea,

The Russians were risking a stronger US support to the EU and Ukraine when the latter was thinking to join the EU

And the Russians were also risking a more visible US presence in countries close to Russia since the US would be more willing to stick with the policy of defending Europe.


Only an idiot Russian politician would choose to accept the above risks!

 

[HumblePi]

Kellyanne's husband knows very well that our intelligence agencies never go too deep into cyber-intelligence with Trump because, not only does he have a big mouth and will casually let out our most secure intelligence secrets, but also because they're wary that he's still a Russian asset.

 

[pamak]

They should have investigated Steele and his dossier and not Trump. Hell the Dossier talks about the Russian consulate in Miami Florida and there is not Russian Consulate in Miami. Steele was a suspect source from the beginning . He admitted he was desperate to see Trump lose.

They had already collaborated with Steele in the past since he had a career in the British Intelligence services and had actually a good reputation too. As I , and YOU said, the dossier had mixed lies and truth. Steele himself did not present the dossier as "intelligence", He presented as raw information which requires farther investigation. So, you did not answer my question. I will repeat: Did the FBI did the right thing to investigate the dossier?

 

[Athanasius68]

I explained it in numerous posts.

All the intelligence assessments say it together with the fact that Trump' s position which fit the Russian objectives perfectly!

When one admirer Putin AFTER the latter gave orders to invade Crimea and intervene in Ukraine

and when one is criticizing EU at a time when Ukraine was thinking to join the EU

and when one criticizes the fact that the US spends money to defend other nations at a time when US radars for antiballistic defense were spreading to countries near Russia,

and when the name "Clinton" is associated with the period of the Russian humiliation by a Clinton administration at a time where they were very weak and could not oppose the US in anything (recall the Clinton campaign against Serbia which was a traditional ally of Russia)


then you do not need a PHD in political science to see that from the Russian interests point of view, it was obvious that "it was a good bet" (to use your expression) that Trump was much better for POTUS than Hillary

As per the indictments of those Russians, Mueller said this plot was devised in 2014.
So it had nothing to do with Trump. It had to do with creating chaos.
But maybe the interests conjoined. That could also be why out allies sent anti-TruMp info to DC. Everyone was trying to influence the election.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Nor does helping HRC become president by providing damaging fake dirt. They also could have exposed the fact that HRC colluded with Russia for fake Russian dirt to win the 2016 election had she won. Great blackmail material!
.

Really? When and how exactly did the Russians approach the Clinton campaign with an unsolicited offer of "dirt" on their political opponent to which they had happily indicated an open receptivity to the offer?

 

[Athanasius68]

They had already collaborated with Steele in the past since he had a career in the British Intelligence services and had actually a good reputation too. As I , and YOU said, the dossier had mixed lies and truth. Steele himself did not present the dossier as "intelligence", He presented as raw information which requires farther investigation. So, you did not answer my question. I will repeat: Did the FBI did the right thing to investigate the dossier?

The objection here is that they didn't investigate the dossier. They investigated Trump, using the dossier as evidence or at least justification.

 

[SLC]

What blackmail material?

Did you see Clinton getting any real damage by the Steel dossier after it was exposed?
Do you really think that this actually damages Clinton or Trump?

Clinton did not even meet Steele! MnCain knew more than Clinton about the dossier!

AS I said before, helping Clinton win makes zero sense for Russians.

With Clintons president, he Russians risked way heavier (or for longer time) sanctions since Clinton was wayyy more hostile to Putin and the Russian intervention n Ukraine and Crimea,

The Russians were risking a stronger US support to the EU and Ukraine when the latter was thinking to join the EU

And the Russians were also risking a more visible US presence in countries close to Russia since the US would be more willing to stick with the policy of defending Europe.


Only an idiot Russian politician would choose to accept the above risks!

If you conspire with someone to hire someone to kill your spouse . Are you any less guilty? HRC conspired collude with Russians for dirt on Trump. She did it by using intermediates. That does not make her any less guilty.

 

[Athanasius68]

Really? When and how exactly did the Russians approach the Clinton campaign with an unsolicited offer of "dirt" on their political opponent to which they had happily indicated an open receptivity to the offer?

What's the issue here? Is it really that it's ok to get political dirt from Russia IF the dirt was passed through the hands of an American, or a foreign national from an allied country?

 

[Atomic Kid]

What's the issue here? Is it really that it's ok to get political dirt from Russia IF the dirt was passed through the hands of an American, or a foreign national from an allied country?

Except that Clinton campaign didn't get this so called "dirt". Because unlike Junior, Steele reported and passed on what he had come across to the FBI instead of the Clinton campaign. So one did the right and honorable thing. And one didn't. Not hard to figure out which is which either.

 

[Ouroboros]

Did not read thru the thread, but I have no doubt Trump supporters are out in force/denial.

While your system of Govt is different from mine, Canadian, here the leader of the Govt. PM would have been sent off some time ago. The Party would have replaced him/her.
No doubt the same would be true in other 1st world democracies.

Replaced for what crime precisely?

 

[Ouroboros]

You are confused, the law says that the "thing of value" must be a gift from a foreign agent, or a foreign national.


It's perfectly legal for a candidate to hire a foreign firm to do oppo work.

But, if someone, say, a Russian, offers you gifts that will help you win an office, we can see the color of this portrait if vastly different.

Here, the "oppo" from Russia is a subterfuge to commit espionage, to offer you the work product of that espionage, in the hopes that your presidency will benefit Russia, and your accepting that gift, even considering it, looking at it, implicates you in a serious crime


Moreover, Steele took his work to the FBI, to McCain, and others, It was floating around intel circles in congress for months. It's called "public domain".

Apparently you, nor Trump and his ilk, are unable to grasp the difference.

So what gifts of value did Trump receive? I don't think the Mueller report mentions those.

 

[Ouroboros]

Not for his lack of trying. although trump did disseminate and embellish information that he knew Russia had stolen. He was their "useful idiot."

What information did Russia steal and when did Trump disseminate it?

 

[Ouroboros]

See my previous post...

Helping Trump become president does not prohibit Russia from sowing chaos. It is not an either or situation. They could do both at the same time and they could sow chaos without harming Trump;s chances to win the election or they could try to sow chaos by harming Trump's reputation AFTER the latter became president!

But if Russia's primary purpose in all of their intelligence operations is to foment chaos, then none of the drivel about "they liked Trump because he said nice things about Putin" matters in the slightest.

I don't believe for a minute that Russia cared about whether Trump liked them, or whether he supported tyrannies. They wanted to get what they could out of him, just as they did with Obama.

 

[Ouroboros]

Since the dossier came from multiple sources, one cannot simply dismiss or accept the dossier in its totality. Some parts were corroborated and others were not. Since information originated by different sources , there was a range of credibility and accuracy of information.

I read that only one item in the dossier was affirmed credibly.

 

[Ouroboros]

So, the FBI had a good reason to investigate the allegations to separate the truth from the lies, right?
And Steele made the right decision to pass the dossier to the Americans, right?

The FBI's motives may have been pure, while those of the DNC were not.

 

[Ouroboros]

They should have investigated Steele and his dossier and not Trump. Hell the Dossier talks about the Russian consulate in Miami Florida and there is not Russian Consulate in Miami. Steele was a suspect source from the beginning . He admitted he was desperate to see Trump lose.

Have you an online souorce for Steele's remark about Trump? Most writeups I've seen assert that he didn't care one way or the other about American politics.