info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Dossier Wielded By Democrats Shows Only Clinton Campaign Collusion With Russians
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Buzzsaw Checkerling
Oct 27, 2017, 10:29:32 AM10/27/17
to
by Rowan Scarborough
October 26, 2017
The Washington Times
For over a year, the Hillary Clinton campaign, other Democrats and
liberal pundits have pummeled President Trump and his men with one main
weapon: a dossier.
Written by former British spy Christopher Steele, who was paid by
opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which received the money from the
Clinton campaign, the 35 pages of memos became the Democrats’ vehicle
to promote supposed Trump-Russia collusion in the presidential election.
The irony: Virtually all of Mr. Steele’s sources are Russian, meaning
Democrats have been indirectly colluding with Moscow disinformation to
bash the Trump team for purportedly doing the same thing.
Since the dossier’s first memo hit town in June 2016, none of its core
collusion charges has been proved. There has been no confirmation by
any public pronouncement or a leak from Congress’ two intelligence
committees or from special counsel Robert Mueller.
That did not stop the Clinton campaign from attacking Mr. Trump.
Neither has it stopped congressional Democrats, especially members of
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, from reading the
dossier’s sensational charges into the Congressional Record and on the
network news. Based on the dossier, they publicly accused people of
felonies while knowing the document remained unverified.
It also did not matter that the Democrats’ targets — Carter Page, Paul
Manafort, Michael Cohen and the president, to name a few — all called
the dossier fiction.
Or that investigative journalist Bob Woodward said it was “garbage.” Or
that former CIA acting Director Michael Morell said the dossier’s
gossip came from paid Kremlin creatures who would say anything for a
buck. Or that three people accused of crimes in the dossier have filed
libel lawsuits.
“As reasonable, intelligent people have understood for some time, the
‘Dodgy Dossier’ was nothing more than a political stunt designed to
undermine the Trump campaign and damage the ‘deplorable’ members of the
Trump movement who supported it,” Mr. Page, who has filed a lawsuit,
told The Washington Times.
“Deplorables” is the label Mrs. Clinton gave to Trump supporters.
“If voters knew the truth in early November 2016, which they began to
more fully understand this week regarding the actual interference in
last year’s election, President Trump’s victory would have
unquestionably exceeded 400 [votes] in the Electoral College,” said Mr.
Page.
Mr. Steele’s accusations were particularly serious against Mr. Page, an
energy investor who had worked in Moscow as a Merrill Lynch banker and
was briefly a Trump campaign volunteer.
The dossier said Mr. Page met with two sanctioned Kremlin figures while
on a well-publicized trip to Moscow in July 2016, that he cut a deal to
end U.S. sanctions in exchange for a brokerage fee, and that he and
then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort orchestrated the hacking of
Democratic Party computers in league with Russian intelligence.
Mr. Page said he never met the two men, had no brokerage agreement, had
never met Mr. Manafort and didn’t know about the hacking until it
became news in June 2016.
A source knowledgeable about the House intelligence committee probe
told The Times that none of Mr. Steele’s collusion scenarios has been
confirmed after months of interviewing witnesses.
Yet Democrats and the left-wing press have continued to vouch for the
dossier, some to this day.
‘Doesn’t add up to me’
Brian Fallon, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign press secretary, said on Twitter
that he wished he could have gone to Europe and helped Mr. Steele
collude with the Kremlin to dig up Trump dirt.
“I regret I didn’t know about Christopher Steele’s hiring
pre-election,” Mr. Fallon said Tuesday. “If I had, I would have
volunteered to go to Europe and try to help him.”
On Thursday, Rep. Adam B. Schiff of California, the ranking Democrat on
the House intelligence committee, continued to defend the dossier and
Mr. Steele.
Of the effort by Republicans to find out who funded the dossier, the
congressman told CNN: “So I think this is a bit of an effort to
discredit Christopher Steele, discredit the dossier, ignore how much of
it has been corroborated already, and ignore the fact that the
intelligence community is operating from a broad array of sources as a
way of basically calling this all a hoax. And it just doesn’t add up to
me.”
Mr. Schiff has been praising Mr. Steele for a year. At a televised
March hearing, he read copiously from the dossier.
Here is one of his citations: “According to Christopher Steele, a
former British intelligence officer who is reportedly held in high
regard by U.S. intelligence, Russian sources tell him that Page has
also had a secret meeting with Igor Sechin, CEO of the Russian gas
giant Rosneft. Sechin is reported to be a former KGB agent and close
friend of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s.”
Mr. Page said this never happened. He wrote a letter to the committee
complaining about Mr. Schiff’s tactics.
The Clinton campaign used dossier misinformation to issue press
statements in September 2016 that said Mr. Page stood as proof of
Trump-Russia collusion.
At that time, Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson and Mr. Steele were
briefing reporters.
Yahoo News wrote about Mr. Page’s supposed crimes, using dossier
misinformation but citing intelligence sources. HuffPost, ABC News and
other press jumped on the story.
“Hillary for America Statement on Bombshell Report About Trump Aide’s
Chilling Ties to Kremlin,” blared the Clinton campaign’s Sept. 23 press
release.
Mr. Page told The Times in July that he believes some Clinton campaign
workers possessed the dossier or its data.
“After the report by Yahoo News, the Clinton campaign put out an
equally false press release just minutes after the article was released
that afternoon,” Mr. Page said. “Of course, the [Clinton campaign
representatives] were lying about it with the media nonstop for many
months, and they’ve continued until this day. Both indirectly as they
planted articles in the press and directly with many TV appearances.”
Meanwhile, then-Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid publicized a letter
he wrote to the FBI calling for Mr. Page to be investigated.
Steele: I never verified the dossier
Indeed, no forum has been a better pro-dossier fan club than the House
intelligence committee and its Democrats.
Rep. Joaquin Castro, Texas Democrat, said at the March hearing: “I want
to take a moment to turn to the Christopher Steele dossier, which was
first mentioned in the media just before the election and published in
full by media outlets in January. My focus today is to explore how many
claims within Steele’s dossier are looking more and more likely, as
though they are accurate.
“This is not someone who doesn’t know how to run a source and not
someone without contacts. The allegations it raises about President
Trump’s campaign aides’ connections to Russians, when overlaid with
known established facts and timelines from the 2016 campaign, are very
revealing,” Mr. Castro said.
Rep. Andre Carson, Indiana Democrat, said, “There’s a lot in the
dossier that is yet to be proven, but increasingly, as we’ll hear
throughout the day, allegations are checking out.”
On MSNBC in March, Rep. Maxine Waters, California Democrat, said she
believed the dossier section on Mr. Trump and supposed sex acts with
prostitutes in Moscow were true.
“Oh, I think it should be taken a look at,” she said. “I think they
should really read it, understand it, analyze it and determine what’s
fact, what may not be fact. We already know that the part about the
coverage that they have on him with sex actions is supposed to be true.
They have said that that’s absolutely true. Some other things they kind
of allude to. Yes, I think he should go into that dossier and see
what’s there.”
Besides Mr. Page, other people targeted by Mr. Steele have rebutted his
charges.
Michael Cohen, Mr. Trump’s personal attorney, was said in the dossier
to have traveled to Prague to orchestrate a cover-up of computer
hacking with Russian agents.
Mr. Cohen has produced receipts that show he was in California at the
time, and his passport shows he has never been to Prague.
The special counsel is investigating the financial dealings of Mr.
Manafort, who has been told he will be indicted. But there has been no
confirmation that Mr. Manafort was involved in Russian hacking, as
reported in the dossier.
Aleksej Gubarev, a Russian-born technology entrepreneur, is suing Mr.
Steele for libel in a London court. The dossier said he created a
botnet to pummel Democratic Party computers with porn and spyware.
In a filing mostly ignored by the pro-dossier U.S. and British media,
Mr. Steele acknowledged in a declaration that he never verified the
information. He also said his work never should have been made public,
as was done by the news website BuzzFeed, which posted the entire
document in January.
The filing could lead one to believe that much of Mr. Steele’s paid
opposition research to destroy the Trump candidacy was based on hearsay
information that was never verified by him.
With a filing in U.S. District Court this week by a Democrat-hired law
firm, the public now knows that the Democratic National Committee and
the Clinton campaign financed the dossier, in part.
Republicans have pounced on the disclosure.
“The Clinton campaign and the DNC paid a firm that’s known for doing
business with the Kremlin for an opposition research file on President
Trump,” said Michael Ahrens, director of the Republican National
Committee’s rapid response team. “The Obama administration took it
seriously, many in the media took it seriously, and it’s served as a
springboard for the Russia investigation we have today. Oh, and the
Democrats have spent the last year lying about it.”
______________
"The tragedy of our current political quagmire is that, yeah, we really
could use an effective, active, and credible press right now. We have
an active one five days out of the week, an effective one five days out
of the month, and a credible one... not that often."
October 26, 2017
The Washington Times
For over a year, the Hillary Clinton campaign, other Democrats and
liberal pundits have pummeled President Trump and his men with one main
weapon: a dossier.
Written by former British spy Christopher Steele, who was paid by
opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which received the money from the
Clinton campaign, the 35 pages of memos became the Democrats’ vehicle
to promote supposed Trump-Russia collusion in the presidential election.
The irony: Virtually all of Mr. Steele’s sources are Russian, meaning
Democrats have been indirectly colluding with Moscow disinformation to
bash the Trump team for purportedly doing the same thing.
Since the dossier’s first memo hit town in June 2016, none of its core
collusion charges has been proved. There has been no confirmation by
any public pronouncement or a leak from Congress’ two intelligence
committees or from special counsel Robert Mueller.
That did not stop the Clinton campaign from attacking Mr. Trump.
Neither has it stopped congressional Democrats, especially members of
the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, from reading the
dossier’s sensational charges into the Congressional Record and on the
network news. Based on the dossier, they publicly accused people of
felonies while knowing the document remained unverified.
It also did not matter that the Democrats’ targets — Carter Page, Paul
Manafort, Michael Cohen and the president, to name a few — all called
the dossier fiction.
Or that investigative journalist Bob Woodward said it was “garbage.” Or
that former CIA acting Director Michael Morell said the dossier’s
gossip came from paid Kremlin creatures who would say anything for a
buck. Or that three people accused of crimes in the dossier have filed
libel lawsuits.
“As reasonable, intelligent people have understood for some time, the
‘Dodgy Dossier’ was nothing more than a political stunt designed to
undermine the Trump campaign and damage the ‘deplorable’ members of the
Trump movement who supported it,” Mr. Page, who has filed a lawsuit,
told The Washington Times.
“Deplorables” is the label Mrs. Clinton gave to Trump supporters.
“If voters knew the truth in early November 2016, which they began to
more fully understand this week regarding the actual interference in
last year’s election, President Trump’s victory would have
unquestionably exceeded 400 [votes] in the Electoral College,” said Mr.
Page.
Mr. Steele’s accusations were particularly serious against Mr. Page, an
energy investor who had worked in Moscow as a Merrill Lynch banker and
was briefly a Trump campaign volunteer.
The dossier said Mr. Page met with two sanctioned Kremlin figures while
on a well-publicized trip to Moscow in July 2016, that he cut a deal to
end U.S. sanctions in exchange for a brokerage fee, and that he and
then-Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort orchestrated the hacking of
Democratic Party computers in league with Russian intelligence.
Mr. Page said he never met the two men, had no brokerage agreement, had
never met Mr. Manafort and didn’t know about the hacking until it
became news in June 2016.
A source knowledgeable about the House intelligence committee probe
told The Times that none of Mr. Steele’s collusion scenarios has been
confirmed after months of interviewing witnesses.
Yet Democrats and the left-wing press have continued to vouch for the
dossier, some to this day.
‘Doesn’t add up to me’
Brian Fallon, Mrs. Clinton’s campaign press secretary, said on Twitter
that he wished he could have gone to Europe and helped Mr. Steele
collude with the Kremlin to dig up Trump dirt.
“I regret I didn’t know about Christopher Steele’s hiring
pre-election,” Mr. Fallon said Tuesday. “If I had, I would have
volunteered to go to Europe and try to help him.”
On Thursday, Rep. Adam B. Schiff of California, the ranking Democrat on
the House intelligence committee, continued to defend the dossier and
Mr. Steele.
Of the effort by Republicans to find out who funded the dossier, the
congressman told CNN: “So I think this is a bit of an effort to
discredit Christopher Steele, discredit the dossier, ignore how much of
it has been corroborated already, and ignore the fact that the
intelligence community is operating from a broad array of sources as a
way of basically calling this all a hoax. And it just doesn’t add up to
me.”
Mr. Schiff has been praising Mr. Steele for a year. At a televised
March hearing, he read copiously from the dossier.
Here is one of his citations: “According to Christopher Steele, a
former British intelligence officer who is reportedly held in high
regard by U.S. intelligence, Russian sources tell him that Page has
also had a secret meeting with Igor Sechin, CEO of the Russian gas
giant Rosneft. Sechin is reported to be a former KGB agent and close
friend of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s.”
Mr. Page said this never happened. He wrote a letter to the committee
complaining about Mr. Schiff’s tactics.
The Clinton campaign used dossier misinformation to issue press
statements in September 2016 that said Mr. Page stood as proof of
Trump-Russia collusion.
At that time, Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson and Mr. Steele were
briefing reporters.
Yahoo News wrote about Mr. Page’s supposed crimes, using dossier
misinformation but citing intelligence sources. HuffPost, ABC News and
other press jumped on the story.
“Hillary for America Statement on Bombshell Report About Trump Aide’s
Chilling Ties to Kremlin,” blared the Clinton campaign’s Sept. 23 press
release.
Mr. Page told The Times in July that he believes some Clinton campaign
workers possessed the dossier or its data.
“After the report by Yahoo News, the Clinton campaign put out an
equally false press release just minutes after the article was released
that afternoon,” Mr. Page said. “Of course, the [Clinton campaign
representatives] were lying about it with the media nonstop for many
months, and they’ve continued until this day. Both indirectly as they
planted articles in the press and directly with many TV appearances.”
Meanwhile, then-Democratic Senate leader Harry Reid publicized a letter
he wrote to the FBI calling for Mr. Page to be investigated.
Steele: I never verified the dossier
Indeed, no forum has been a better pro-dossier fan club than the House
intelligence committee and its Democrats.
Rep. Joaquin Castro, Texas Democrat, said at the March hearing: “I want
to take a moment to turn to the Christopher Steele dossier, which was
first mentioned in the media just before the election and published in
full by media outlets in January. My focus today is to explore how many
claims within Steele’s dossier are looking more and more likely, as
though they are accurate.
“This is not someone who doesn’t know how to run a source and not
someone without contacts. The allegations it raises about President
Trump’s campaign aides’ connections to Russians, when overlaid with
known established facts and timelines from the 2016 campaign, are very
revealing,” Mr. Castro said.
Rep. Andre Carson, Indiana Democrat, said, “There’s a lot in the
dossier that is yet to be proven, but increasingly, as we’ll hear
throughout the day, allegations are checking out.”
On MSNBC in March, Rep. Maxine Waters, California Democrat, said she
believed the dossier section on Mr. Trump and supposed sex acts with
prostitutes in Moscow were true.
“Oh, I think it should be taken a look at,” she said. “I think they
should really read it, understand it, analyze it and determine what’s
fact, what may not be fact. We already know that the part about the
coverage that they have on him with sex actions is supposed to be true.
They have said that that’s absolutely true. Some other things they kind
of allude to. Yes, I think he should go into that dossier and see
what’s there.”
Besides Mr. Page, other people targeted by Mr. Steele have rebutted his
charges.
Michael Cohen, Mr. Trump’s personal attorney, was said in the dossier
to have traveled to Prague to orchestrate a cover-up of computer
hacking with Russian agents.
Mr. Cohen has produced receipts that show he was in California at the
time, and his passport shows he has never been to Prague.
The special counsel is investigating the financial dealings of Mr.
Manafort, who has been told he will be indicted. But there has been no
confirmation that Mr. Manafort was involved in Russian hacking, as
reported in the dossier.
Aleksej Gubarev, a Russian-born technology entrepreneur, is suing Mr.
Steele for libel in a London court. The dossier said he created a
botnet to pummel Democratic Party computers with porn and spyware.
In a filing mostly ignored by the pro-dossier U.S. and British media,
Mr. Steele acknowledged in a declaration that he never verified the
information. He also said his work never should have been made public,
as was done by the news website BuzzFeed, which posted the entire
document in January.
The filing could lead one to believe that much of Mr. Steele’s paid
opposition research to destroy the Trump candidacy was based on hearsay
information that was never verified by him.
With a filing in U.S. District Court this week by a Democrat-hired law
firm, the public now knows that the Democratic National Committee and
the Clinton campaign financed the dossier, in part.
Republicans have pounced on the disclosure.
“The Clinton campaign and the DNC paid a firm that’s known for doing
business with the Kremlin for an opposition research file on President
Trump,” said Michael Ahrens, director of the Republican National
Committee’s rapid response team. “The Obama administration took it
seriously, many in the media took it seriously, and it’s served as a
springboard for the Russia investigation we have today. Oh, and the
Democrats have spent the last year lying about it.”
______________
"The tragedy of our current political quagmire is that, yeah, we really
could use an effective, active, and credible press right now. We have
an active one five days out of the week, an effective one five days out
of the month, and a credible one... not that often."
M.I.Wakefield
Oct 27, 2017, 1:44:36 PM10/27/17
to
"Buzzsaw Checkerling" wrote in message
news:xn0kwptwt...@reader.albasani.net...
> For over a year, the Hillary Clinton campaign,
There is no "Clinton campaign", and hasn't been since November 9, 2016.
> other Democrats and liberal pundits have pummeled President Trump and his
> men with one main weapon: a dossier.
Well, that, the US intelligence community assessment that Russia interfered
in the election -- an assessment which was not based on the dossier -- and
the fact that multiple people in the Trump campaign were less than honest
about their contacts with agents of the Russian government and Russian
businessmen.
> Written by former British spy Christopher Steele, who was paid by
> opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which received the money from the
> Clinton campaign,
Steele's work was originally funded by an un-named Republican candidate.
And after funding from the Democrats ended, Steele thought that his findings
were so important that he continued to work on the document without outside
funding.
> the 35 pages of memos became the Democrats’ vehicle to promote supposed
> Trump-Russia collusion in the presidential election.
But they didn't used the dossier during the election campaign? How odd.
> The irony: Virtually all of Mr. Steele’s sources are Russian,
And some of them have gone missing, at least one has turned up dead, and one
had a sack put over his head before he was dragged out of a meeting in a
government office.
> meaning Democrats have been indirectly colluding with Moscow
> disinformation to bash the Trump team for purportedly doing the same
> thing.
If it is Russian disinformation, you'd have thought that some of it would
have been proven false by now.
> Since the dossier’s first memo hit town in June 2016, none of its core
> collusion charges has been proved.
Nothing significant has been disproved, either.
> There has been no confirmation by any public pronouncement or a leak from
> Congress’ two intelligence committees or from special counsel Robert
> Mueller.
Ha. You may have missed it, given the flood of leaks from the White House,
but Mueller doesn't leak, and neither does anyone working for him ... any
information about what Mueller's investigation has been up to has come from
outside sources.
> That did not stop the Clinton campaign from attacking Mr. Trump.
Again, there is no "Clinton campaign", and hasn't been since November 9,
2016.
> Neither has it stopped congressional Democrats, especially members of the
> House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, from reading the dossier’s
> sensational charges into the Congressional Record and on the network news.
> Based on the dossier, they publicly accused people of felonies while
> knowing the document remained unverified.
There seems to be an organized campaign against Steele's dossier, and the
Mueller investigation ... makes you wonder what people are so afraid of.
https://lawfareblog.com/irrelevance-trump-dossier
news:xn0kwptwt...@reader.albasani.net...
> For over a year, the Hillary Clinton campaign,
> other Democrats and liberal pundits have pummeled President Trump and his
> men with one main weapon: a dossier.
in the election -- an assessment which was not based on the dossier -- and
the fact that multiple people in the Trump campaign were less than honest
about their contacts with agents of the Russian government and Russian
businessmen.
> Written by former British spy Christopher Steele, who was paid by
> opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which received the money from the
> Clinton campaign,
And after funding from the Democrats ended, Steele thought that his findings
were so important that he continued to work on the document without outside
funding.
> the 35 pages of memos became the Democrats’ vehicle to promote supposed
> Trump-Russia collusion in the presidential election.
> The irony: Virtually all of Mr. Steele’s sources are Russian,
had a sack put over his head before he was dragged out of a meeting in a
government office.
> meaning Democrats have been indirectly colluding with Moscow
> disinformation to bash the Trump team for purportedly doing the same
> thing.
have been proven false by now.
> Since the dossier’s first memo hit town in June 2016, none of its core
> collusion charges has been proved.
> There has been no confirmation by any public pronouncement or a leak from
> Congress’ two intelligence committees or from special counsel Robert
> Mueller.
but Mueller doesn't leak, and neither does anyone working for him ... any
information about what Mueller's investigation has been up to has come from
outside sources.
> That did not stop the Clinton campaign from attacking Mr. Trump.
2016.
> Neither has it stopped congressional Democrats, especially members of the
> House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, from reading the dossier’s
> sensational charges into the Congressional Record and on the network news.
> Based on the dossier, they publicly accused people of felonies while
> knowing the document remained unverified.
Mueller investigation ... makes you wonder what people are so afraid of.
https://lawfareblog.com/irrelevance-trump-dossier
Ultra Magnus
Oct 27, 2017, 5:40:12 PM10/27/17
to
On 10/27/2017 11:44 AM, M.I.Wakefield wrote:
> "Buzzsaw Checkerling" wrote in message
> news:xn0kwptwt...@reader.albasani.net...
>
>> For over a year, the Hillary Clinton campaign,
>
> There is no "Clinton campaign", and hasn't been since November 9, 2016.
>
IDIOT!
> "Buzzsaw Checkerling" wrote in message
> news:xn0kwptwt...@reader.albasani.net...
>
>> For over a year, the Hillary Clinton campaign,
>
> There is no "Clinton campaign", and hasn't been since November 9, 2016.
>
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/10/25/hillary-clinton-campaign-still-paying-top-aides-300000-in-year-after-election/
It's bad enough you are ADDICTED to US politics, but your popensity to
outright LIE about them is sinful!
Grow a life, at least pretend to act like a Canucklehead.
You ignore your own nation, absorb your mind into ours.
Literally you dismiss your own walk-in beer cooler of a country as
insignificant to the point you refuse to even engage in commentary or
analysis of your own politics.
You evince the classic Canuck "widdle brudda" mentality, always chasing
after the USA in a desperate attempt to coattail on OUR national affairs.
You demonstrate how bereft Canucks are of any national pride and how
desperately you need to use the USA as a whipping post to excuse
yourselves from your own national blunders and dearth of presence on the
global stage.
it must SUCK to be a Canuck, for sure!
0 new messages