It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


It Looks Like The James Bond Behind The Dossier Let A Putin Stooge Do All The Work

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 06:15 PM

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Perfectenemy

What is curious, that when Feinstien leaked the partial
Transcript, I am thinking that was a ruse to,keep
people from looking at the actual release.

Like a decoy of sorts. Very sneaky!

Sneaky Diane, well Trump nailed that one right.

Ghostly Diane fits her more now. Did you see her at the vote for reopening the government? It's like she has seen Death itself.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 06:24 PM
So, did the Kremlin actually supply this guy with fake information to cause a bunch of chaos in the USA or did they intend this info to discredit the Democratic party here eventually?

I would bet our government feeds people that work for Russia gathering propaganda a lot of bs.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 06:24 PM
Where did they get the data originally? Wouldn't that source still be available? I don't know. I'm asking.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 06:27 PM

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 06:28 PM

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 06:42 PM
a reply to: MteWamp
That's a girl!~

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 06:50 PM
a reply to: Grambler

So super spy Steele actually was just repeating what a trump hater PR guy from fusion who had worked on behalf of Putin was telling him.

Where in the transcript is anything that backs this up? I've read most of the House transcript (and the entire Senate transcript), including the parts about Baumgartner and what I read is actually at odds with this assertion made by Sperry?

In the dossier, Baumgartner is likely the unnamed “friend” or “close colleague” of the alleged Russian insider sources, who we’re led to believe “confided” in that “mutual friend” who we’re told, in turn, communicated directly to Steele the unproven rumors about Cohen, Manafort and Page.

First off, notice that it says "Baumgartner is likely the unnamed..." — why does it say "likely?" It says likely because Sperry is speculating. What's that speculation based on? Nowhere does it say that Baumgartner was at any point even working with Steele. Baumgartner didn't travel to Russia as part of the Trump research either.

page 138 & 139 of the House transcript:

I mean there is one in particular who did some work on both cases as a subcontractor. I actually think within my staff there is not much overlap. We have a long-standing relationship with a subcontractor named Ed Baumgartner who has a degree in Russian from Vassar, I think. And I don't know if you would call him a linguist, he is not a translator, but he works for us on Russian things involving the Russian language.

So I don't read or speak Russian. So we retained Ed to -- originally in the Prevezon case to do some interviews in Moscow, I think, and retrieve some records from Russia. And other Russian language-related tasks as part of the litigation and discovery process.

Q. So Mr. Baungartner went to Russia on your behalf in the Prevezon mater.

A. With the lawyers, yes.

Q. And he worked on the Perkin Coie matter as well?

A. Eventually. So by the spring of 2016 the Prevezon thing was on hold, and basically focused on this appellate hearing, which didn't involve a lot of Russia stuff. And then it basically everything to stayed until the decision was -- anyway, in any event, I don't recall Edward working on -- I recall him working on Prevezon and not on the other matter. There came a time when the Prevezon matter was less active and we had a need for more work on the other matter. And I specifically remember assigning him to do work in the summer or fall of 2016 on Michael Cohen's business connections to Russia and Ukraine and his father-in-law's background in Russia. And so he worked on both. And I think Edward might have also worked on some Manafort stuff, although I am less clear on that.

Q. Did he travel to Russia on your or Fusion's behalf in connection with the Trump research?

A. Did he travel -- no. Not that I know of.

Why would Simspon pay Steele $160k for information from Baumgartner who was already in Fusion GPS's employ? I'm not going to excerpt the whole transcript here but he says that Steele didn't name his sources but he does say that Steele was drawing on a network of sources in Russia.

If Baumgartner didn't go to Russia as part of the Trump research, then what exactly is his role here?

page 46 of the House transcript:

MR. SIMPSON: Yes, I mean, because we've not had liberty to talk about all these things, there's been a lot of misconception about this whole process. So, you know, it's a much broader project where we're not just looking at Russian and we're not just doing Russia stuff with Chris. We're doing our own Russia work.

So, you know, in addition to things like finding someone who can look into a Mexican, you know, suit factor to see how they treat their workers, we are are scanning Russian newspapers or newspapers all around the world for information about these subjects. I have staff who prepares white papers on various subjects.

So without, you know, being too specific about it, in terms of the work product, you know, Chris' memos -- I mean, I guess it would be helpful to explain. So Chris' memos are raw field memoranda, They're form interviews with his source network. I didn't tell him what to write, you know, I didn't edit them. They're what came into me from him. And they're, you know, to my knowledge, the only drafts.[ex/]

Simpson's statements (and Occam's Razor) about Baumgartner suggest that he was doing the "our own Russia work" for Fusion GPS.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:01 PM
a reply to: burntheships

We really need to start filing charges on everyone involved in this mess.

As far as people on the left being incapable of accepting facts that this whole Trump Russia bs is made up I leave them with this -

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:13 PM
a reply to: theantediluvian

I agree with you that I do not see this as a smoking gun that Baumgartner is the subcontractor that simpson is saying steele is referring to. He could be, but this is not definitive proof.

Nevertheless, it is clear that Steele did not personally go to moscow, and simpson admits he relied on other sources and subcontractors for his info.

Again, if Fusion is one of the groups listed in the fisa explanation of 702's being abused by giving the info to private contractors, it will be damning.

aside from that, Steele will not reveal his sources, but admits to having some subcontractors, so why would his reputation have any effect on the legitimacy of the evidence?

Especially given that we know the some of the sources of the most serious claims were Kremlin agents.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:15 PM

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Where did they get the data originally? Wouldn't that source still be available? I don't know. I'm asking.

As you are aware, pursuant to House Intelligence Committee subpoenas, on THREE (3) occasions, the FBI was unable to provide ANY supporting evidence.

The "data" was made up by Hillary "we will hang" Clinton and her stooges....with the memo about to come out, it's curtains...flee while you can got caught....
edit on 22-1-2018 by M5xaz because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:36 PM
a reply to: Grambler

Do you recognize the name Joe diGenova from anywhere? How about his wife's name — Victoria Toensing?

They're the ones who started representing the FBI's IC in the Mikerin case and were promising all this bombshell information was forthcoming. How'd that one go? Kinda fizzled.

He made the rounds back in 2016 saying Hillary Clinton wouldn't be able to finish the race because she was going to be indicted. He also made the rounds, making all sorts of discredited claims during the Benghazi years of investigation.

Before that? Well back in '98 they were pushing false rumors to news outlets about Bill Clinton.

The Washington Post - The Power Couple at Scandal's Vortex

Perhaps no recent incident has drawn as much interest and speculation as diGenova's role as an anonymous source for the Dallas Morning News. The melodrama began when Toensing was approached by an intermediary for a Secret Service agent who was said to be willing to testify that he saw Clinton and Lewinsky in a compromising situation. DiGenova passed this on to Morning News reporter David Jackson ("Joe and I exchanged a few words over that," Toensing says), and the paper published the story in its Internet edition, attributing the account to an unnamed lawyer "familiar with the negotiations." But by then the intermediary had told Toensing the agent was backing off.

Hours later, the Morning News retracted the report, saying the "longtime Washington lawyer" had said the information was "inaccurate."

Toesing involved herself in the Valerie Plame affair, claiming that no crime had been committed because Plame's status wasn't covert — except it turned out that was false.

These two pop up in the right-wing media all the time making claims but their claims never seem to be borne out and they never seem to accomplish anything but getting themselves on TV.

Setting all that aside. Nothing about that document suggests Fusion GPS at all. I suppose it's not impossible that the one part could be a reference to CrowdStrike but other than this hack with a long history of saying random things, is there anything that actually suggests that they are references to CrowdStirke?

And if you'll remember, the name "Palantir" was too long for the second redacted company name, so I think it's safe to assume that CrowdStrike wouldn't have fit there either. (and the first redacted company name was only 4 characters).


Also, remember that this unauthorized access was discovered in MARCH and discontinued in APRIL?

So unless everything about all the timelines are COMPLETELY wrong, it wouldn't make sense that the document refers to either CrowdStrike or Fusion GPS. The names don't fit. The dates don't fit.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:38 PM

originally posted by: visitedbythem
a reply to: MteWamp
That's a girl!~

Sorry 'bout that. I don't think the possibility even made into conscious thought at the time.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:38 PM
a reply to: Grambler

I remember Rogers and his visit to Trump.
I was sure there was a thread on that here somewhere...

Hopefully, releasing the memo will help narrow
all of those involved that were part of these violations!

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:43 PM

But it turns out the primary subcontractor worked not for Steele but for Simpson at Washington-based Fusion GPS, and he contributed key material for the investigation of Trump underwritten by the Clinton campaign

Basically they used Steele as a stooge.

To legitimize their bull snip.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:44 PM
a reply to: theantediluvian

First on digenova. Yeah, it seems like his wife was correct about her client. Another person was charged in relation to uranium 1.

Thats fine if you want to dismiss him because he is biased, Perhaps he does have reason to lie, and I am certainly not taking his word as gospel, but it seems to have some credence given the publicly shown evidence.

However, he is just a private guy. Strange how all of the bias on the Mueller team has many people concerned far less. Not only donations to Hillary or Obama, but worked for her team in the past, sent texts messages about insurance policies and secret societies. Not to mention the bias of Simpson and Fusion GPS.

As I have said for months, if the shoe was on the other foot, and there was an investigation into hillary with some many pro trump people, the left would be outraged. Here we see even the suggetsion of some guy with an opinion being biased for trump is enough to raise some eye brows.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:47 PM
a reply to: theantediluvian

On the fisa document.

Yes, you showed that that one space was small. It could have said GPS, FGPS, Fusion, etc.

The timeline argument you are making makes no sense to me.

AYes, they were giving private contractors fisa info BEFORE the dossier. That means that info could have been used a couple of months later to help compile the dossier.

Just because it ended in March, when digenova claioms the fbi went to the fisa court because Rogers was about to out them, doesnt mean that crowdstrike and FGPS (see how that works) couldnt have been the companies mentioned.

Again, I will want to see proof, but again, if they were the companies mentioned in this fisa document, it is again damning.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:56 PM
a reply to: theantediluvian

and slightly off topic.

But at what point to you start to get a little disturbed by all of the coincidences that are adding up?

Deleting evidence,

charging on side with lying and the other letting have a pass,

text messages discussing insurance policies and secret societies (apparently),

stonewalling congress on info about the dossier and fisa warrant,

comey leaking to the press to get an independent investigation,

all of the shadiness in the hillary investigation including texts saying lynch knew no charges would be filed,

Muellers fbi apparently not telling CFIUS about people investigated in U1

massive leaks that make trump look bad,

admissions by the fisa court that the FBI was inappropriately giving private contractors info,

and so on.

At some point I think although we cant have access to the evidence because it has been classified or deleted, you have to say its just one coincidence too many.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 07:59 PM
Putting all my assumptions and any perceived partisanism aside in terms of whether I agree with the use of this dossier, or even believe any of the info within it...

I’m almost 100% certain this guy broke British Law and his Sworn Oath as an Intelligence Agent (former agent even)...
Official Secrets Act, which applies to MI5/6 and military personnel.

I’ll edit this post soon with an excerpt from the Act that I believe he violated with this dossier.
Gimme 5 mins.

Edit as planned;

1)A person who is or has been
a)a member of the security and intelligence services; or
(b)a person notified that he is subject to the provisions of this subsection, is guilty of an offence if without lawful authority he discloses any information, document or other article relating to security or intelligence which is or has been in his possession by virtue of his position as a member of any of those services or in the course of his work while the notification is or was in force.

Bolded details by myself to highlight where I believe the violation applies.

This is very serious business, and I have no idea why this hasn’t been touched on before...
By anyone, whether here debating, or/and especially the officials from the US & UK.

Severe breach of protocol.

edit on 22-1-2018 by Hazardous1408 because: Noted.

edit on 22-1-2018 by Hazardous1408 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 08:06 PM
Yes, the only Russian active measures, the only KGB influence, was found in that dossier.

posted on Jan, 22 2018 @ 08:11 PM
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

While I wouldn’t go so far myself, yet at least...

There is still no doubt whatsoever that the Law was flaunted with this dossier, across the board it would seem.
The fact that most of it is gossip, as opposed to hinting towards any illegality, just solidifies my belief that it should be discarded instantly.

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in