Hill Testimony Validates Trump Election Tampering

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I don't know enough about her, but Leshchenko was a source, or do you disagree?

Let me know when Solomon's claim is corroborated.

Are you claiming nehlie ohr lied in her testimony?

Q And who were the sources? A I recall a -- they were mentioning someone named Serhiy Leshchenko, a Ukrainian. Q And did they give you any indication as to Leshchenko's connections with them, how they got to know him? Were they doing work for him? A With Fusion GPS? Q Correct. A I am not aware of how they -- Q Were you aware of how they had a connection with him? A I am not aware. Q But you were aware that he was a source of information that was leading to information that they had, that they were then presenting to you as reasons for following up on opposition research or what research -- A Yes. Q -- that is, on President Trump or his family? A My understanding is that some -- yes. And -- yes, it was not necessarily on his family that Leshchenko's research was on. Q Are you aware of what his research, or what his source information included?
COMMITTEE SENSITIVE COMMITTEE SENSITIVE 115A His source information, I am not aware. Q You are just aware that he was a source of -- A Yes. Q -- Glenn Simpson? Or was it a source of Mr. Berkowitz? Or both? A I am not aware of a differentiation between them. Just a source for Fusion GPS.

dougcollins.house.gov...

page 114

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Grambler

Doesnt change the thrust of my post at ll.

Since the first point in your chain of reason is directly contradicted by her testimony, I disagree.

Its is a matter of public record that nehlie ohr confirmed leschenko was a source.

You didnt know that because you discuss these matters while being ill informed, so I think we will all keep that in mind while you grace us with your opinions on the matter.

Nonetheless, Hill was reminded of this publicly known fact and did not dispute it.

a reply to: Grambler

Its is a matter of public record that nehlie ohr confirmed leschenko was a source.

A source for what? The dossier?

You're right, I guess my level of information is low. Can you show me where she said that?
dougcollins.house.gov...

a reply to: Phage

Do you know where the dossier came from?

Fusion god, Glenn Simpson compiling steels work

What did she say in the part I linked?

He was a spruce for Simpson

It’s ok, I under stand the need for you to feign ignorance and play semantics

a reply to: Grambler

Do you know where the dossier came from?

I think so.

I also think that the information from Luschenko regarded Manafort.

Q You mentioned that, at some point, somebody from Fusion GPS told you that they were giving you a tip that was based off of a source that was a Ukrainian source, Serhiy Leshchenko. Is that right?

A Yes. That they were -- that they were giving me some information that had originated with him in some way.

Q Do you recall whether that information related to Mr. Manafort?

A What I'll say is that at the time -- at the same meeting, if I recall correctly, that his name came up, this piece of paper that lists Mr. Manafort's flights was given to me, and I'm not -- I don't recall exactly right now whether they said this particular piece of paper comes from Mr. Leshchenko or not.

Was that in the dossier? I never read it.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
You guys have smeared and slammed every single witness.
Every one is flawed and somehow prejudice against trump.
Its really amazing how many never trumpers trump put on the payroll LOL.

So now this lady is somehow prejudiced because she knows Chris Steele and read the dossier.
Yeah I am sure somewhere that makes perfect sense but not on this planet.

quoted for hilarious irony

originally posted by: Phage


Was that in the dossier? I never read it.

That'd make you a scholar still in the Dems circle. ^_^

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Ukraine burned Manafort no one debates that.

Manafort was guilty.

That’s not election interference, that’s justice ... what you guys are interested in with Biden, right?

a reply to: Phage

Yes there were many claims about manafort in the dossier.

Here is one small section of the dossier showing it

www.documentcloud.org...

Ohr admits Simpson said Leschenko was their contact on Manafort

originally posted by: RexKramerPRT

Is it illegal for companies like Fusion to employ foreigners for the purposes of political research?

I think we can suggest it is illegal for a front runner to create a smear campaign based on faked information. This wasn't just the DNC it was also Hillary as the front runner paying and supporting the fake report to attack Trump. Here is where it gets ugly... They then take the dossier and Obama gets FISA warrants based on it to spy on Trump and his camp, and this is like using the FBI to do a Watergate. We then spend three years trying to prove something that was never there in the first place.....I think Hillary should get a bill for every dollar spent, just like what Chicago is doing with Jussie Smollett to pay for their cost in his fake crime.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Ukraine burned Manafort no one debates that.

Manafort was guilty.

That’s not election interference, that’s justice ... what you guys are interested in with Biden, right?

There is as lot of bad crap with Manafort, as he was supporting the Democrats too back in 2012 and forward with Ukraine. What makes it worst is many of these bad actors that were on Trump's team at first were actually pushed to him by the RNC, so this all get really muddy in trying to figure out who all hated Trump the most...lol

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Ukraine burned Manafort no one debates that.

Manafort was guilty.

That’s not election interference, that’s justice ... what you guys are interested in with Biden, right?

If everything in the dossier was true then I don't care. The problem is they were interested in dirt, not truth. If you publish 100 things and 90 are false and 10 are true then you can not claim you were only interested in uncovering facts.The dossier does have some true things in it, but it is not a document of truth and facts, it's a document of dirt to further an agenda that did not care if the contents were true.

If Trump went to Zelensky and said listen, I just want negative things about Biden, just give me dirt it doesn't matter if it's true or not, I would want Trump to burn too.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

If everything in the dossier was true then I don't care. The problem is they were interested in dirt, not truth. If you publish 100 things and 90 are false and 10 are true then you can not claim you were only interested in uncovering facts.The dossier does have some true things in it, but it is not a document of truth and facts, it's a document of dirt to further an agenda that did not care if the contents were true.

If Trump went to Zelensky and said listen, I just want negative things about Biden, just give me dirt it doesn't matter if it's true or not, I would want Trump to burn too.

Like if Trump suggested that Biden pisses on prostitutes in Ukraine... kind of thing right...lol

The best lies have an ounce of skewed truth in them... You can take a lie put a pinch of truth in it and then go full retard with the next lie, rinse and repeat all the while saying here is a speck of truth so this whole thing is true.

a reply to: Xtrozero

And for that matter it's still going on. Trump is surrounded by people that don't have his best interests or the countries at heart.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Yes it was dirt.

In the course of getting that dirt it was discovered that Russian state agents were involved.

That may not be what Trump said but it is what Giuliani was after pretty obviously ... He's the bad actor near the POTUS on this deal.

What was it Sondland said? "Rudy f-s everything up."

originally posted by: SonOfTheLawOfOne

"Hill says she knows Christopher Steele and had met with him.

Christopher Steele is the ex-British intelligence agent who compiled the anti-Trump dossier.

Hill says today she met with him a few times before 2016, but does not remember the date."

Hill says that a colleague at the Brookings Institution had shown her a copy of the Steele dossier the day before it was published in Buzzfeed News in January 2017.

Hill previously testified in a closed-door hearing that she felt the dossier was a "rabbit hole."

She says at the time she did not know who paid for the dossier, but now says she knows, due to media reports it was Fusion GPS. She says she has read in reports that it was the DNC that helped to fund the dossier.

As we all know, the dossier was a rabbit hole. A rabbit hole that led Mueller and $40 million tax payers dollars nowhere.

The Special Counsel only had one of the Dozen investigators working for him focused on the "Dossier" and even then it was not a full-time responsibility of that investigator.

The FBI was already months into an investigation into Russia's efforts to assist the Trump Campaign by the time the "Dossier" was completed.

The Special Counsel investigation led to Dozens of legitimate indictments, plea deals, jail sentences and exposed the Russian Interference campaign in excruciating detail.

It appears factually inconsistent to claim the Special Counsel investigation was about the Dossier.

Do you dispute any of the above? Because testimony, the SC Report, general reporting and even GOP reports have outlined the timeline exhaustively and very precisely regarding the FBI investigation and the Dossier timing.

a reply to: Caractacus

The investigation started because of papadopolous.

Muellers version is this started when a Russian agent named Mifsud tried to put papadopolous in contact with russians who had emails on hillary.

Mueller admits the fbi interviewed mifsud, and found he lied three times to them.

Instead of mueller choosing to charge the russian spy who started this all, and actually directly infiltrated a Trump associates circle

They charged 12 trolls for posting on facebook and pokemon go.

Yep, sounds like a real worth while investigation.

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Caractacus

The investigation started because of papadopolous.

Thank you for acknowledging it started long before the "Dossier" entered the picture.

You appear better informed than the GOP in the House of Representatives.

a reply to: Grambler

It's this sort of post that destroys integrity with any but the faithful.

www.washingtonexaminer.com...
lol
this is old
pretend it is not trod ground if you like
many here have been paying attention

1) The "dossier" compiled by Christopher Steele (Steele dossier) on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Hillary Clinton campaign formed an essential part of the Carter Page FISA application.

But Senate Judiciary Committee staff, who reviewed the FISA application separately from the House, concluded that the dossier allegations made up the "bulk" of the application. Even a Washington Post article Sunday purporting to debunk the Nunes memo in light of the FISA application conceded that the dossier played "a prominent role" in the FISA application. Finally, the Nunes memo's assertion, noted below, that former FBI number-two Andrew McCabe agreed that "no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the Steele dossier information," was not challenged by Democrats when the Nunes memo was made public.

lol
hill hung the dossier out to dry
the jig is up