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.

 

Dossier author Christopher Steele will be questioned by US investigators

page: 1
29
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+8 more 
posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 10:41 AM
link   
www.foxnews.com...


Former British spy Christopher Steele, the author of the anti-Trump dossier of salacious and unverified claims about the president’s ties to Russia, has agreed to be questioned by investigators from the United States, according to a report in Britain. The Times (UK) cited sources close to Steele on Tuesday in reporting that the 54-year-old is set to be interviewed in London within weeks. The development comes as attention has returned to the dossier authored by Steele -- especially since its more sensational claims were not substantiated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, whose report found no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election.


This is kind of big. Yuge even. If the right questions are asked, this could sink the left. Badly.
Between this and Mueller being questioned about what he knew and when, could overshadow the rest of the investigations by a large margin.
This will need to be looked at closely.




posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

IMO this won't be any different than his British court appearance in which he nor his attorney would argue his dossier was true.
The only question to be asked imo would use that appearance as a starting point, as the brits have purjury laws as well don't they?



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

can you imagine the silly little heads exploding if he admits it was all BS?



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Check his british court case
he already has



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

I'm sure since you always tell the truth that you have a verified source for this claim.

I'm betting without even seeing it that they said unverified and not untrue but I will wait for your source first.

And you know even if you deny it that a lot of the dossier has since been verified but you will continue to lie and say it has not been.

You know like all the parts about Russian interference with the elections that Robert Mueller just submitted a huge report on.

www.cnn.com...

www.newsweek.com...



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:11 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Bring us a source to check it with. You must have seen it right?



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:24 AM
link   
It'll be fun to watch Don Lemon's head explode -- possibly literally -- once Steele admits that his "research" was a bunch of baseless rumors he pick up in on 4chan and internet chat rooms.



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:32 AM
link   
Network dudes post....

If Steele shows up, he apparently didn't the last time. As well, some idiot judge has kicked one of the defamation/libel suits to the curb, with prejudice (apparently the case can't be brought again unless Steele committed perjury). Right now, Steele is trying to say that his sources will be impacted by his testifying. What sources would that be, sorcha faal and Hillary Clinton? This clown interfered in US elections and was paid by clinton/DNC to do so. Where's the Justice?

Cheers - Dave



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:35 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme


I'm betting without even seeing it that they said unverified and not untrue but I will wait for your source first.

Steels' actual disposition is linked below.


According to deposition transcripts released this week, Steele said last year he used a 2009 report he found on CNN's iReport website and said he wasn't aware that submissions to that site are posted by members of the public and are not checked for accuracy.


He was pressed on this further: “Do you understand that CNN iReports are or were nothing more than any random individuals’ assertions on the Internet?” Steele replied: “No, I obviously presume that if it is on a CNN site that it may has some kind of CNN status.

When asked about his methodology for searching for this information, Steele described it as “what we could call an open source search,” which he defined as “where you go into the Internet and you access material that is available on the Internet that is of relevance or reference to the issue at hand or the person under consideration.”

Steele said his dossier contained "raw intelligence" that he admitted could contain untrue or even "deliberately false information."

www.washingtonexaminer.com...
www.scribd.com...

edit on 4-6-2019 by eurhythmic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:36 AM
link   
Odds are, he will be found dead in a gym bag at a secure location, which will be ruled as a suicide.

Of course he won't be found until long after he's supposed to talk, where in the meantime he will be assumed to be on run and or in hiding.



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:38 AM
link   
newsprocession.com...



The court has announced they presume the allegations outlined in the dossier to be false, a presumption that neither Steele nor his lawyers have contested in any way. Steele is no longer contending the allegations in his dossier to be true and seems to accept the unrelenting allegations of it being a work of fiction. An excerpt from the order states the following:




“In the [Queen’s Bench] proceedings the key issue is whether Mr. Steele/Orbis were responsible for the publication of the defamatory statement. Thus, the factual enquiry in the English proceedings will not focus on the truth or falsity of the defamatory allegation which is presumed to be false, and the QB Defendants have not contended otherwise.”


what part of presumed to be false used in a british court do you not understand?
what part of the defendants have not contended otherwise do you not understand?

steele himself said this dossier is bs
so starting from that point when did he lie?



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: ADVISOR
Odds are, he will be found dead in a gym bag at a secure location, which will be ruled as a suicide.

Of course he won't be found until long after he's supposed to talk, where in the meantime he will be assumed to be on run and or in hiding.


That would be Gareth Williams, a British intelligence agent who was found dead, stuffed into a duffel bag, which was padlocked on the outside.

London Police ruled it an accident. He was probably killed by Russian agents.
edit on 4-6-2019 by AndyFromMichigan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

I know you really want the pee pee part to be true. But it's likely not.
Don't worry, Trump is mean, and has an orange hue.



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Some of the silliest people will cling to their delusions no matter how many facts are presented to them. It's easier than admitting their entire world view is made up of lies they tell themselves and wish were true despite all evidence to the contrary.

It's quite amusing if I do say so myself.
edit on 4-6-2019 by jadedANDcynical because: Typo

edit on 4-6-2019 by jadedANDcynical because: Another typo. Any more will have to stay



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: ADVISOR
Odds are, he will be found dead in a gym bag at a secure location, which will be ruled as a suicide.

Of course he won't be found until long after he's supposed to talk, where in the meantime he will be assumed to be on run and or in hiding.


That would be Gareth Williams, a British intelligence agent who was found dead, stuffed into a duffel bag, which was padlocked on the outside.

London Police ruled it an accident. He was probably killed by Russian agents.


And everyone knows is completely normal for people to walk into duffel bags and the correct response is to lock it and put a padlock on it... ROFL!!!



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:54 AM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

So you do see, exactly how likely it is.




posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Some of the silliest people will cling to their delusions no matter how many facts are presented to them. It's easier than admitting their entire world view is made up of lies they tell themselves and wish were true no despite all evidence to the contrary.

It's quite amusing if I do say so myself.

LOL, you just described Adam Schiff, who last I heard is still insisting he has tons of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia. Perhaps he should have shared that evidence with Robert Mueller.



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 11:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: ADVISOR
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

So you do see, exactly how likely it is.


Damn right. The British love to uphold tradition, right?



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme


And you know even if you deny it that a lot of the dossier has since been verified but you will continue to lie and say it has not been.

You know like all the parts about Russian interference with the elections that Robert Mueller just submitted a huge report on.

www.cnn.com...

www.newsweek.com...



Do you believe you are lying? Or do you think you are not? I can't figure it out, but am left with only 3 choices:

- you lie for the sake of lying
- you have a hard time understanding what you read
- you just believe what someone says without any critical thought of your own.

The opening of your first link:


Documents unsealed this week lend credence to a theory about Russian election meddling that was first put forward in the Trump-Russia dossier, however they do not corroborate the more explosive claims that the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin in the 2016 campaign.


Not "verified". "Lend credence". And whats worse: Obama was told about this meddling while it was happening and he did NOTHING to stop it. So its not like Steele had to do a deep dig to find this out...it was national news in the US. Remember? "Knock it off"?

Your second link talks about Carter Paige as if he wasn't an FBI informant.

Now to your lie: "a lot is verified"....there are 3 things that are verified. 1 deals with Carter Paige, the FBI employee. 1 deals with Trump having business dealings with someone (not hard to find out as public knowledge). and 1 was that Russian trolls were trying to influence our election (again). Is that a "lot"?



posted on Jun, 4 2019 @ 12:21 PM
link   
He was paid to do a job, it was just a collection of rumors, most that could not be substantuated. Some may have basis to them, but the information was twisted to fit what those paying for it wanted it to say.

You cannot blame him, blame those who ordered the fake Dossier. I hope he tells the story as it happened. No charges can be brought against someone for writing down a collection of claims that were not supposed to have been verifiable. The intent of the Dossier was to disrupt Trumps campaign and presidency. The FBI should never have used that for any official actions, but they did, it seems heads should roll in the FBI for doing that.




top topics



 
29
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join