What parts of the dossier have been corroborated?

a reply to: Grambler

So ats members are getting the idea that parts of the dosser are corroborated from the intelligence community and not the media.

And they are answering your question :

The only parts that aren't substantiated are the prostitutes claims and Cohen being in Prague

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: burgerbuddy

And the part where Trump paid the russians 12 million bucks for dirt on hillary.

Proof?

Anonymous sources.

a reply to: Grambler

I think the real issue here is that if large parts of the dossier are found to be fabricated, the document as a whole is corrupt. We know that the dossier was created as a smear tactic, the fabricated portions help to ferrit that out. At this point, the dossier can only be a detractor for alternative sources- so I fully believe any talk of corroboration is moot, the well has essentially been poisoned.

a reply to: onthedownlow

Unless corroborated items lead the investigation(s) in important avenues. The dossier probably is not considered evidence, but it could well have some bread crumbs to follow. Or not.

What's the hurry to find out?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

Then it seems you have your answer.

"The FBI, NSA and CIA disagree, as do Igor Diveykin, Paul Mannafort, Araz Agalarov, Emin Agalarov, Mikhail Kalugin and all the supporting evidence to back up the claims that the Kremlin groomed Trump.

The only parts that aren't substantiated are the prostitutes claims and Cohen being in Prague"

Happy now? This thread is pointless?

Really? The claim on that post that all of it has been substantiated except Cohen is a sufficient answer for you?

Sorry you don't like the thread buddy!

I will try harder for you next time!

a reply to: Grambler

The claim on that post that all of it has been substantiated except Cohen is a sufficient answer for you?

No.

But then, I'm not expecting "sufficient" answers from anyone on ATS in regard to the investigation(s).
Why are you?

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: Grambler

I think the real issue here is that if large parts of the dossier are found to be fabricated, the document as a whole is corrupt. We know that the dossier was created as a smear tactic, the fabricated portions help to ferrit that out. At this point, the dossier can only be a detractor for alternative sources- so I fully believe any talk of corroboration is moot, the well has essentially been poisoned.

And the whole investigation is based on false pretenses, which they all knew was false.

They should be fired and disbarred and return the taxpayers money they stole.

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Grambler

So ats members are getting the idea that parts of the dosser are corroborated from the intelligence community and not the media.

And they are answering your question :

The only parts that aren't substantiated are the prostitutes claims and Cohen being in Prague

Thatts not an answer.

All of it except Cohen has been proven true.

So it has been corroborated that trump was offered billions by russians, he agreed to their deal, etc?

Of course it hasn't.

So that member was ignorant or lying.

They aren't going to find anything except maybe person a travelled to this country where person b happens to live. Other than that, just rumors and lies bought by the DNC from Russian intelligence. That's the irony of this entire story. The Democrats and our own intelligence agencies are using Russian bought misinfo and using it as a guide to impeach a democratically elected president of the United States. Either Putin is the greatest counter intelligence agent in modern history or Trump haters are the biggest useful idiots known to mankind.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: onthedownlow

Unless corroborated items lead the investigation(s) in important avenues. The dossier probably is not considered evidence, but it could well have some bread crumbs to follow. Or not.

What's the hurry to find out?

It's not a matter of hurry.

Its a question of do we want a system of indefinite investigations into a political party that use oppostion research, some of which can be easily disproven?

I say no.

Again, as the article in the op shows, it seems there is a good chance this dossier was used at least in part to obtain a did a warrant by Obamas admin against his political rivals team to spy on them.

Saying we'll it's not evidence just bread crumbs is not good enough.

Of that's the best that can be said of the dossier, and we them find out that it was used for did a warrants or in other ways to start the investigation, surely you will be outraged

a reply to: mkultra11

Yes. As I said in this thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

At the very least, we know that by far, and it's not even close, that the biggest way the Russians have effected our poltical system is by having their agents give info in the dossier.

Therefore the people that paid for the dossier, and used it, are more responsible for russian meddling than anything else.

But those same people would rather blame russian Facebook ads and Pokemon.

a reply to: Phage

I am mostly interested if the dossier was the probable cause behind the FISA warrants. I do believe that the whole investigation is damaging to national security, and if it was a political tactic purely aimed at destroying an opponent regardless of merit or the lack there of, the real criminal element are those who paid for and used the dossier. Time is of the essence, and we must ask our selves how long such games should be allowed to continue. There is either ample evidence at this point, or there is nothing

There should be a place we can place large bets as to who is going to go down. President Trump? Or Hillary, Bill, and Barack. That's 3 to one odds. Ill put my money on the three blind mice going down in flames

a reply to: Grambler

These are the main things you need to know:

1. The FBI has failed 3 times to Congress on subpoenas regarding "dossier" sources
2. Peter Fritsch and Thomas Catan, co-founders and heads of Fusion GPS, invoked
their Fifth Amendment rights "to every question asked of them"
3. Steele has resisted to provide his sources
4. Fusion GPS has PAID journalists to circulate the story
5. FusionGPS has refused to provide their bank records

The conclusion is obvious.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

The claim on that post that all of it has been substantiated except Cohen is a sufficient answer for you?

No.

But then, I'm not expecting "sufficient" answers from anyone on ATS in regard to the investigation(s).
Why are you?

Because I expect anyone I am discussing something with to be able to back up claims.

By you rationale, I suppose you also find all of your discussions on climate change to be worthless as no one in ats will be able to effect real change.

Of course you know those discussions are worth while because we are capable of having discussions among ourselves that intecelually relevant.

And so I will keep asking for people to back up claims like this.

You keep calling that worthless, fine by me.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

Here was one from today I saw.

So, instead of inquiring of that member, you decided to create a thread?

I did ask that member.

I have asked many members who say this.

I was given no response.

It's pretty obvious that most people who bring up the Dossier as a proven document:

a) Don't know the origins of the Dossier and the timeline of it.
b) Say it's been corroborated but do a horrible Job of backing up said claims.
c) Do a great job of trying to switch the topic when you press them on proving details of the Dossier.

a reply to: M5xaz

Yes great post.

But when provided with that, many say we know parts of the dossier have been corroborated, and nothing you list proves the dossier is not worth looking at.

Thats why I want to know what parts they say are corroborated.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

TRUMP-RUSSIA ‘GOLDEN SHOWER’ DOSSIER IS NOW BEING INVESTIGATED BY SPECIAL COUNSEL ROBERT MUELLER
By Jason Le Miere On Thursday, October 5, 2017 - 11:01 - Newsweek

Trump's bodyguard's testimony raises new questions about the most salacious allegations in the dossier
Natasha Bertrand Nov 10, 2017, 10:22 AM ET - Business Insider

Democrats desperate to prove debunked Russian dossier’s sex charge against Trump

By Rowan Scarborough - The Washington Times - Sunday, November 26, 2017

These are all from the recent few months.

anyone else noticing this trend where intelligent, logical people are now trying to defend the indefensible and just destroying any respect or merit their words may have warranted in the past? i get the feeling their subconscious is fully aware of the hypocrisy of their argument because there is very little effort being put in on their part whereas just a few months ago they were foaming at the mouth in any conversation to do with politics.

a reply to: Grambler

The most specific reporting I have read is that the "substantive" portions have not been verified.

sub·stan·tive
adjective
ˈsəbstən(t)iv,səbˈstan(t)iv/Submit
1.
having a firm basis in reality and therefore important, meaningful, or considerable.

S&F OP


***

ETA: A link for what I've read.

FBI and Justice Department officials have told congressional investigators in recent days that they have not been able to verify or corroborate the substantive allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign outlined in the Trump dossier.