Trump Dossier Author Steele Visited State Dept in Oct '16

a reply to: xuenchen

Well he had to come by and pick up his check.

I loved it when he would say " the first time i heard about that was on the news" aw the bs was strong with that one.

a reply to: bastion

In the UK the claims are automatically assumed to be false, the onus is onus is on the defendant to prove their statement to be true.

So the fact that the defendant (steele) allowed the court record to show the allegations are presumed false (english law) and did not submit a statement that they were NOT false means nothing?

Thanks for your information with respect to this incident, it is much appreciated.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
So, if anyone is keeping score here ...

Strzok and another FBI agent went on a mission to London to receive information from the Australian ambassador about Trump Campaign members that had been turned or were cooperating with Russian agents.

Also, the reason this was kept secret was to insure that no leaks about the inquiries got out to the public to damage Trump's campaign as the leaks, and Comey crap had done to Clinton's.

Wow, isn't that ironic.

would you please source the campaign members that had been "turned" ( like a vampire?)(sorry couldn't resist)?
i have read about Papadopoulos
he sounds like a scoundral...www.rollingstone.com...
was he "turned"?
who else is on your "turned" list?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Sorry for taking so long. Had a A/C job pull in last minute that I couldn't pass up.


The way you joked around and took jabs at other posters with Silly was embarrassing. At least it should have been, coming from a poster who's posts I have starred many of.

I also noticed after she ran off you went back to your normal posting self. We all know how Silly is.
Seeing another member enabling her in her tactics just hit me wrong I guess.

Notice she hasn't been back with the evidence for her dossier verification claims?

a reply to: DBCowboy

Obama was also unaware of Clinton's server ... despite having emailed her on it multiple times.

originally posted by: Simon_Boudreaux
a reply to: Gryphon66

Sorry for taking so long. Had a A/C job pull in last minute that I couldn't pass up.


The way you joked around and took jabs at other posters with Silly was embarrassing. At least it should have been, coming from a poster who's posts I have starred many of.

I also noticed after she ran off you went back to your normal posting self. We all know how Silly is.
Seeing another member enabling her in her tactics just hit me wrong I guess.

Notice she hasn't been back with the evidence for her dossier verification claims?

They don't need 'no stinking facts'. No, they need diversion and accusations along with name calling , "you right wing NAZI's." In the negative attacks that are oh so cruel and misleading to boot, there are more proof of the brainwashed left making the right look like saints.

well progs, "you've got to change your evil way, Ba- by!".. "Every word that I say is true, you got to change, Ba By!"

We see you not having the facts right Your stuff is just not what you tell us but what you don't admit too. The spinning the fraction of truth which you might have ends into total BS that is just grandstanding. It is game over for that whole method of trying to play people for fools.

I am thinking if the lot of you spinning double standards and crying for the wrong things are EXPOSED, that the rest of us can just start there.

Can't keep doing things the left does that actually hurt an economy and its citizens forever and expect things to improve. Those jobs did come back POTUS Obama.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Simon_Boudreaux

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: shooterbrody

Please stop embarrassing yourself.

You really should take your own advice.

Really? Because I can admit that I made a mistake? Some of you should try it sometime.

Here's the thing: Shooterbrody's article [sic] stated that an English Court had determined that the contents of the Peegate Dossier were false and based that on a quote from the court procedings.

The article, and Shooterbrody (and myself, it turns out) misunderstood that statement because of one fact, helpfully pointed out by Bastion ... in the UK, libel requires that the Defendant prove their defamatory statements to be true.

The phrase "assumed to be false" speaks to a point of British law, not to the summation of the Crown on the accuracy of the entire Steele Dossier.

There, is that better for ya?

Why do you keep ignoring my post linking to Steele's own words in his deposition?

I get it. It's super cool to talk about "presumption of innocence," and all, even when it doesn't apply in civil matters. It also serves to confuse the issue, right? Right?

Let me be crystal-f'ing-clear for you:

Read my post and the link to Steele's own words in his deposition.

Hint... He says that nothing in the dossier, "...represent[s]...verified facts."

March 16, 2019

I guess John McCain was a traitor after all...

twitter.com...

That's too bad. I liked how pro-military McCain was.

Kind of interesting to look back at responses in old threads with what we now know 😎

a reply to: xuenchen

So he visited the state department. So what?
Means what?

a reply to: xuenchen

We are supposed to believe that this guy knows what Steele was there for and what they spoke about?
Really?

a reply to: xuenchen

Carter Page was the only one who ever had a FISA warrant so the plural in that sentence is a lie. One trump official (even though trump claims he was never an associate) not officials plural.

Some of the above posts and responses are proving the entire point 😎

It gets better too just wait 😎

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

“Based upon our review of the visitor logs at the State Department, Mr. Steele visited the State Department, briefing officials on the dossier in October 2016,” Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr said during a hearing held to review the U.S. government’s response to Russian meddling in the 2016 election

Do the visitors logs say why a person was there or just have the name and date?
And this links back to the daily caller.

Is this another of your famous hit a pieces foxy?
All outrage (WTF was he doing there of all places!!!) & no substance?
I bet this turns out that he was never even in the states.

What exactly were you betting?

You come on threads and present your opinion as fact on a regular basis but never apologize when you are wrong....

Lol

Learned well from MSNBC and CNN I see.
Didnt they report the Bobby Mueller report was due to be released 6 weeks ago....

Lol

You guys

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Gryphon66

Does the visitors log say why he was there and what they discussed because that just seems a bit extra for a visitors log.

Silly, I don't know. Your point is well-taken that the Daily Wire is media and media is usually questionable in terms of the facts.

My point is that Chris Steele is a well-known government contractor with years of expertise in Russia/Ukraine.

Anything related to Peegate just sends the zealots all cross-eyed... LOL

I have to admit I dont miss the way this guy talked down to everyone and twisted everyone else's words to try to prove ridiculous points....

Lol

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

Carter Page was the only one who ever had a FISA warrant so the plural in that sentence is a lie. One trump official (even though trump claims he was never an associate) not officials plural.

You know this for sure ?

How ? Pray-Tell 😎

a reply to: The GUT

Steele ran his own private investigation firm in the UK. Fired by whom? He was the owner.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: The GUT

Steele ran his own private investigation firm in the UK. Fired by whom? He was the owner.

He was also getting paid by the FBI.

The FBI fired him.

Again we see strange responses well after the fact 😎

a reply to: carewemust

Oh please. Now not only is Hillary a criminal but shes recruiting others to be criminals too?

When does a conspiracy become just too out there to be believed? Whats the cut off point?