It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
He was hired by the FBI to be an informant to gather info on Russian criminals. He wants to testify about what he learned in that role.
The Justice Department waited until December of 2015 – five years after the first evidence of criminal wrongdoing-- to offer a plea bargain and jail sentence for the Russian executive in charge of Tenex.
I assume what he says will be fact checked, so of he is lying because he is biased, it will be easy to see through.
What I'm curious about is what happens if he testifies that he heard some rumors from some Russians? Will that be treated like the contents of the dossier? As unvetted raw intel? Or will Trump supporters be falling all over themselves claiming it's definitive proof of wrongdoing by Hillary? I tend to think the latter.
To me, I don't have a problem with the dossier as a jumping off point as long as that's all it is. Clearly any information from it should be corroborated before being used in any sort of legal action (including obtaining a FISA warrant). I feel the same way about what CS-1 might have to say. The difference here is that if Manafort goes on trial, nobody is going to be reading excerpts from the dossier to jurors and claiming that they're facts.
It can't be used as testimony.
What are the evidentiary standards for testimony in a congressional probe? Are there any at all? And how can you prove perjury in a hearsay claim? So what's to stop him from saying pretty much *anything* ?
14. In 2011, as part of the third contract with CS-1, MIKERIN claimed a wire transfer to WISER TRADING had been lost and directed CS-1 to make wire payments to a new recipient company. This company, LEILA GLOBAL LIMITED, is incorporated in the United Kingdom, but its bank accounts are in Latvia. LEILA's primary director is a Russian national. In coordination with Latvian and U.J. law enforcement authorities, I determined that LEILA is managed by a Cyprus-based, shell holding company connected with two Latvian national directors...
19. Subsequent to (redacted)'s death in August 2011, the FBI met with his widow and requested her permission to examine the contents of a safe over which (redacted)' maintained control. The widow consented and, in October 2011, allowed the FBI to examine and photograph the contents of the safe, which she reportedly handed over to MIKERIN shortly afterwards. Among the contents of the safe were a checkbook belonging to MIKERIN for his Citibank account along with a debit card for this account; bank routing information for LEILA and WISER, documents pertaining to the HEU Agreement; an email to (redacted) from an email account know to facilitate...
There won’t be facts with this but political opinions operated by very powerful people who believe they are the ones who are correct.
originally posted by: Gryphon66
It's past time to stop the reality denial that has become the standard in the modern political discourse.
These indictments will remind everyone that there is truth that is sustained by evidence, and that all the political lies are smoke that can be blown away by just a little puff of truth and factual evidence.
That is why so many liars pile into every one of these threads, and they have a two word instruction set:
Those of us who care about the truth and rational debate must fight these liars at every turn not with more opinion but with cold hard facts.
originally posted by: matafuchs
BIg Headline....All Filler....No content....Please don't ask about Uranium....Any indictment handed down will be thrown out of court and laughed at but that does not mean it will not happen.
A waste of time and resources....and money.
As Daily Caller notes, CNN’s reporting on the Trump-Russia dossier leaves out the crucial fact that there are the close ties between the network and the opposition research firm at the center of the dossier controversy.
CNN’s main reporting on the dossier has been led by its justice correspondent Evan Perez.
On the whole, the reporting has been favorable to Fusion and seemed to push that the dossier could be credibie.
Perez’s reporting relies mostly on unnamed sources. He, however, fails to ever note in his reporting his relationship to the Fusion principals.