It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why the Dossier may be the most serious political scandal the US has ever seen.

page: 5
130
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: FauxMulder

Michael Steele had a very good reputation.

You guys are on the wrong side of James Bond on this one...and the Bond Villain is in the White House...

"Gold Middle Finger"



Note: I have a blistering headache right now. Gotta sign off.

edit on 26-10-2017 by AboveBoard because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

I'm just enjoying the hypocrisy from those on the left.


Funny. I'm enjoying the hypocrisy here from everyone on the right. The same people who were saying "everyone does it" when it came to Donald Jr seeking out damaging information on Clinton are now saying the Clintons doing the same thing is the most serious political scandal our country has ever known.

Funny..

Never mind that republicans are the ones who initially funded the dossier. But hey, who cares about that right?


Thats easily turned around.


Exactly. Which is why it's evidence of nothing but pure hypocrisy. I don't expect many on the right to see that though.

Where's the threads about unmasking the republicans who initially funded the dossier? They paid more than the DNC did for it. So they're just as guilty, if not more, right?


Yes as far as the funding.

This was discussed on the first page.

The most guilt though lies with the sitting President Obama who used a dossier paid for by political rivals to get fisa warrants to survey his rival.

As has already all been explained.


+2 more 
posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Grambler

So you've now concluded, with really no evidence to speak of, that the Steele Dossier formed the basis for every action taken by not just the FBI but the entire IC?

I suppose if that were true, that would be appalling. But I really think you're just speculating wildly based on poor assumptions and the suggestion that the Steele Dossier might have had been used in some way by the FBI when obtaining the FISA warrant for Manafort — which hasn't been proven.

You've got a whole train of carts before the horse.


Well I admitted as much in the OP.

But two things.

One, we have evidence from a lot of sources earlier in the year saying this was possibly used for Fisa warrants.

See Jadedandcynacils post on the last page.

Second, then I assume you too are outraged at the FBI's stonewalling of not replying to congressional subpoenas.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I don't think it's that big of a deal.

I mean sure, if you live in lala land where everything you believe must be first confirmed by the TV set, than yeah, I bet this looks like a big scandal.

But if you can think for yourself and realize the type of corruption involved with the government, like it's collusion with pharmaceutical corporations or the military contractors, or how it runs the illegal drug market, or how it covers up any real X-files and we never find out anything, you'll realize this Russia Hillary thing is small potatoes and serves as a mere distraction from really important scandals, like the sex slave trade or similar.

In fact Hillary is so small potatoes that they'd plot to sacrifice her just to keep the small minded average people who need a TV to formulate a belief system occupied and pacified. It's a pacifier for the children, essentially. Hillary is a no body and meaningless in the grand scheme of global dominion. She is made out to look like a power player but she's not, she's just a political puppet used by the real powers that be hiding in the shadows.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Based on the "assumption" that the dossier was used as evidence to get a warrant in a secret court.....

Suppose this was a regular court.

The prosecutor plans on submitting 35 pages of evidence against you.

You defense is able to prove that some parts of the 35 pages are incorrect.

What do you think that judge is going to do?

Allow the prosecutor to submit it, knowing that parts of it are false?

Is he going to tell them to just delete the false parts and re-submit the parts not proven to be true or false?

Or is he going to reject the whole thing because it contains false information?

It is not hard to figure out.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

I'm just enjoying the hypocrisy from those on the left.


Funny. I'm enjoying the hypocrisy here from everyone on the right. The same people who were saying "everyone does it" when it came to Donald Jr seeking out damaging information on Clinton are now saying the Clintons doing the same thing is the most serious political scandal our country has ever known.

Funny..

Never mind that republicans are the ones who initially funded the dossier. But hey, who cares about that right?


Thats easily turned around.


Exactly. Which is why it's evidence of nothing but pure hypocrisy. I don't expect many on the right to see that though.

Where's the threads about unmasking the republicans who initially funded the dossier? They paid more than the DNC did for it. So they're just as guilty, if not more, right?

The most guilt though lies with the sitting President Obama who used a dossier paid for by political rivals to get fisa warrants to survey his rival.

As has already all been explained.


Any evidence the FISA warant was specifically because of the dossier? Without that, this is nothing more than a pet theory being pushed as something real, and every Trump supporter here is falling right in step due to confirmation bias.

If you had posted this in the gray area, I probably wouldn't have commented. But since it's in political madness I'm sure you have evidence to back up your claims, right?



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: muzzleflash

I was thinking that this is nothing compared to Iran-Contra.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

I'm just enjoying the hypocrisy from those on the left.


Funny. I'm enjoying the hypocrisy here from everyone on the right. The same people who were saying "everyone does it" when it came to Donald Jr seeking out damaging information on Clinton are now saying the Clintons doing the same thing is the most serious political scandal our country has ever known.

Funny..

Never mind that republicans are the ones who initially funded the dossier. But hey, who cares about that right?


Thats easily turned around.


Exactly. Which is why it's evidence of nothing but pure hypocrisy. I don't expect many on the right to see that though.

Where's the threads about unmasking the republicans who initially funded the dossier? They paid more than the DNC did for it. So they're just as guilty, if not more, right?

The most guilt though lies with the sitting President Obama who used a dossier paid for by political rivals to get fisa warrants to survey his rival.

As has already all been explained.


Any evidence the FISA warant was specifically because of the dossier? Without that, this is nothing more than a pet theory being pushed as something real, and every Trump supporter here is falling right in step due to confirmation bias.

If you had posted this in the gray area, I probably wouldn't have commented. But since it's in political madness I'm sure you have evidence to back up your claims, right?


See my post above.

First, there are articles which have claimed the dossier was used to help get Fisa warrants.

Second, the fact that the FBI is refusing to respond to subpoenas on this is obviously troubling to you, right?



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:41 AM
link   


Obama spied on Trump for political gain


Nothing will come of it, Plausible deniability dictates he'd be negligent not too...at most they'll throw the leakers under the bus...

LBJ spies catch Nixon sabotaging Vietnam Peace Talks



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

I'm just enjoying the hypocrisy from those on the left.


Funny. I'm enjoying the hypocrisy here from everyone on the right. The same people who were saying "everyone does it" when it came to Donald Jr seeking out damaging information on Clinton are now saying the Clintons doing the same thing is the most serious political scandal our country has ever known.

Funny..

Never mind that republicans are the ones who initially funded the dossier. But hey, who cares about that right?


Thats easily turned around.


Exactly. Which is why it's evidence of nothing but pure hypocrisy. I don't expect many on the right to see that though.

Where's the threads about unmasking the republicans who initially funded the dossier? They paid more than the DNC did for it. So they're just as guilty, if not more, right?

The most guilt though lies with the sitting President Obama who used a dossier paid for by political rivals to get fisa warrants to survey his rival.

As has already all been explained.


Any evidence the FISA warant was specifically because of the dossier? Without that, this is nothing more than a pet theory being pushed as something real, and every Trump supporter here is falling right in step due to confirmation bias.

If you had posted this in the gray area, I probably wouldn't have commented. But since it's in political madness I'm sure you have evidence to back up your claims, right?


See my post above.

First, there are articles which have claimed the dossier was used to help get Fisa warrants.


Claimed. Any evidence whatsoever? And if it was part of the reason for the FISA warrant, is that illegal?

This whole thread rests on the dossier being the sole reason for the FISA warrant. And all I've seen here is speculation. Coincidentally, (or not depending on your political leanings) it's the same run-around BS narrative that's plastered across alt-right news "sources" at the moment.

And on every right wing news "source" I've read there seems to be zero evidence of any of this. Just speculation based on confirmation bias.

I wrongly assumed there would be evidence here based on the forum choice. That was my mistake.


+2 more 
posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

I'm just enjoying the hypocrisy from those on the left.


Funny. I'm enjoying the hypocrisy here from everyone on the right. The same people who were saying "everyone does it" when it came to Donald Jr seeking out damaging information on Clinton are now saying the Clintons doing the same thing is the most serious political scandal our country has ever known.

Funny..

Never mind that republicans are the ones who initially funded the dossier. But hey, who cares about that right?


Thats easily turned around.


Exactly. Which is why it's evidence of nothing but pure hypocrisy. I don't expect many on the right to see that though.

Where's the threads about unmasking the republicans who initially funded the dossier? They paid more than the DNC did for it. So they're just as guilty, if not more, right?

The most guilt though lies with the sitting President Obama who used a dossier paid for by political rivals to get fisa warrants to survey his rival.

As has already all been explained.


Any evidence the FISA warant was specifically because of the dossier? Without that, this is nothing more than a pet theory being pushed as something real, and every Trump supporter here is falling right in step due to confirmation bias.

If you had posted this in the gray area, I probably wouldn't have commented. But since it's in political madness I'm sure you have evidence to back up your claims, right?


See my post above.

First, there are articles which have claimed the dossier was used to help get Fisa warrants.


Claimed. Any evidence whatsoever? And if it was part of the reason for the FISA warrant, is that illegal?

This whole thread rests on the dossier being the sole reason for the FISA warrant. And all I've seen here is speculation. Coincidentally, (or not depending on your political leanings) it's the same run-around BS narrative that's plastered across alt-right news "sources" at the moment.

And on every right wing news "source" I've read there seems to be zero evidence of any of this. Just speculation based on confirmation bias.

I wrongly assumed there would be evidence here based on the forum choice. That was my mistake.


Sorry you were disappointed.

Also sorry to see you find the sources listed, CNN, Motherjones etc. to be alt right news sources.

And funny on how you do not comment on the FBI refusing to answers subpoenas about just what this dossier was used for.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: FauxMulder

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: kosmicjack
Why is the FISA warrant considered so suspect? Certainly not because it was precipitated by info gathered by Fusion GPS, a legal U.S. company tasked with gathering intel? It simply provided the prima facia. The warrant required additional proof to be granted.


Well we dont know that because the FBI refuses to comply with congressional subpoenas.

The problem is dossier should not have been used at all, even if it was supplemental. It was paid for by the targets opponents, and used the very countries agents that were accused of colluding with those opponents. If the other evidence was string enough for the Fisa warrant, why use the dossier at all?



No. The dossier was a product of Michael Steele, former MI6 Agent held in high esteem,


Yea, I heard from a friend that his buddy was talking to a prostitute at a bar in Moscow and she told him that another hooker she knows was payed by Trump to pee on the bed that Obama once slept in.

That is considered to be held in high esteem? That's pretty much what the Dossier consisted of. A bunch of hearsay nonsense and not one iota of it can be corroborated.

Seems to me like the DNC that paid for this garbage got hosed by Mr. High Esteem Steele.


And they paid like what $6 MILLION for it?




posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: AboveBoard

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: AboveBoard




Your definition of "foreign agent" is not technically correct. 

It is technically correct.
He is a British citizen.
Not a US citizen.
Either foreign or domestic when it comes to matter of state.
He is foreign and was acting as an agent when he worked on the dossier.


Was he acting on behalf of the Queen or Prime Minister or Parliament?


I never said that he was.... although, for all we lnow he was acting on behalf of RUSSIANS.

The point is, he is not a US citizen. That makes him a foreign agent.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 11:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Grambler

I'm just enjoying the hypocrisy from those on the left.


Funny. I'm enjoying the hypocrisy here from everyone on the right. The same people who were saying "everyone does it" when it came to Donald Jr seeking out damaging information on Clinton are now saying the Clintons doing the same thing is the most serious political scandal our country has ever known.

Funny..

Never mind that republicans are the ones who initially funded the dossier. But hey, who cares about that right?


Thats easily turned around.


Exactly. Which is why it's evidence of nothing but pure hypocrisy. I don't expect many on the right to see that though.

Where's the threads about unmasking the republicans who initially funded the dossier? They paid more than the DNC did for it. So they're just as guilty, if not more, right?

The most guilt though lies with the sitting President Obama who used a dossier paid for by political rivals to get fisa warrants to survey his rival.

As has already all been explained.


Any evidence the FISA warant was specifically because of the dossier? Without that, this is nothing more than a pet theory being pushed as something real, and every Trump supporter here is falling right in step due to confirmation bias.

If you had posted this in the gray area, I probably wouldn't have commented. But since it's in political madness I'm sure you have evidence to back up your claims, right?


See my post above.

First, there are articles which have claimed the dossier was used to help get Fisa warrants.


Claimed. Any evidence whatsoever? And if it was part of the reason for the FISA warrant, is that illegal?

This whole thread rests on the dossier being the sole reason for the FISA warrant. And all I've seen here is speculation. Coincidentally, (or not depending on your political leanings) it's the same run-around BS narrative that's plastered across alt-right news "sources" at the moment.

And on every right wing news "source" I've read there seems to be zero evidence of any of this. Just speculation based on confirmation bias.

I wrongly assumed there would be evidence here based on the forum choice. That was my mistake.


And funny on how you do not comment on the FBI refusing to answers subpoenas about just what this dossier was used for.



Except the FBI isn't refusing to answer any subpoenas..


The FBI has informed House Republicans that it intends to comply with a subpoena issued in August for documents related to the Trump dossier.

"We've been asking for documents from the FBI for months," House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) told a news conference on Thursday.

"And so...the FBI got in touch with us yesterday afternoon, and they have informed us that they will comply with our document requests and that they will provide the documents Congress has been asking for by next week, and we expect the FBI to honor that commitment."

Link

This is breaking news, so I guess you can be forgiven for being wrong on this point.




posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
And funny on how you do not comment on the FBI refusing to answers subpoenas about just what this dossier was used for.


I guess the FBI has never had more than one source ever, nor has it had to protect informants or sensitive information or information portals ever.......

Like has been mentioned above, you've made a wonderfully reasoned argument based entirely on hearsay. I guess that's enough evidence for some.

And as mentioned above in this case they are acquiescing to the request.
edit on 43pm17fpmThu, 26 Oct 2017 12:02:50 -0500America/ChicagoThu, 26 Oct 2017 12:02:50 -0500 by Wayfarer because: breaking news!


+1 more 
posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Great!

But clearly your own source shows you they had refused to respond to questions asked in since August until today.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

I was scratching my head at CNN and Mother Jones being considered alt-right. I thought I had a pretty good handle on the term as it had been used but apparently not.

Another thing Fusion GPS is tied up in that has been somewhat lost in the shuffle:


In 2013, Veselnitskaya hired the law firm BakerHostetler to represent Prevezon, a Russian holding company based in Cyprus accused by the US government of laundering stolen cash into New York City real estate. Browder told prosecutors that the laundered money was stolen from Russia as part of the tax-fraud scheme that Magnitsky uncovered.

To rebut that claim, BakerHostetler hired Fusion to dig up dirt on Browder, he says. The wealthy investor, who renounced his US citizenship in 1998, has since characterized Fusion's work for BakerHostetler as a "smear campaign" against him and Magnitsky carried out "in advance of congressional hearings on the Global Magnitsky Act."


Business Insider (is this alt-right?)

I'm thinking that Fusion GPS just might have a bigger role in all of this than they've been ascribed thus far.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 12:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: Grambler
And funny on how you do not comment on the FBI refusing to answers subpoenas about just what this dossier was used for.


I guess the FBI has never had more than one source ever, nor has it had to protect informants or sensitive information or information portals ever.......

Like has been mentioned above, you've made a wonderfully reasoned argument based entirely on hearsay. I guess that's enough evidence for some.

And as mentioned above in this case they are acquiescing to the request.


I first said that that the question was if they used this for fisa warrants.

I didn;t just make up the question though, as has been posted sources were saying the FBI used this dossier to help get fisa warrants
(Apparently CNN and motherjones are alt right sources though to be ignored).

I said that this is why it was ridiculous that the FBI was refusing to asnwer these questions.



posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: underwerks

Great!

But clearly your own source shows you they had refused to respond to questions asked in since August until today.


Ahh, so now it's "What took them so long?"



Carry on.



+3 more 
posted on Oct, 26 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: underwerks

Nice spin!!!

Notice the article that you cited was from today after noon, saying that just today that the FBI responded that they will finally comply.

Notice my thread was made well before noon today.

For you to try to spin that I was somehow misleading is ridiculous.

Now that the FBI is going to respond, and if they admit they did use the dossier as part of the justifications for Fisa warrants, then surely you will admit that this is outrageous, right?



new topics

top topics



 
130
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join