Barr's DOJ Finds Christopher Steele "credible"

[JayJay]

@WuWei

@JayJay

@WuWei

Politico is not mainstream media. Neither is Daily Kos, thinkprogress or mediates.

That’s what you chose to focus on?

Yes. Sources matter. Goes to credibility.

I know…that’s what the fivethirtyeight story mentioned.

But they base it on the reporters themselves and not some arbitrary definition of “mainstream”, “left”, “right”, etc

[WuWei]

@JayJay

@WuWei

@JayJay

@WuWei

Politico is not mainstream media. Neither is Daily Kos, thinkprogress or mediates.

That’s what you chose to focus on?

Yes. Sources matter. Goes to credibility.

I know…that’s what the fivethirtyeight story mentioned.

But they base it on the reporters themselves and not some arbitrary definition of “mainstream”, “left”, “right”, etc

Are you claiming the organizations I listed are mainstream?

[JayJay]

I’m claiming this discussion is an irrelevant diversion.

For simplification’s sake I broke it up into “mainstream” and “CEC” to prove a point…that skepticism in “anonymous sources” vanishes if the story emanates from a media source that says things one wants to hear.

[WuWei]

@JayJay

I’m claiming this discussion is an irrelevant diversion.

For simplification’s sake I broke it up into “mainstream” and “CEC” to prove a point…that skepticism in “anonymous sources” vanishes if the story emanates from a media source that says things one wants to hear.

For accuracy, there is another category: LEC

[AZslim]

@peek-a-boo

The dossier itself exists, thus it isn’t fake. The accuracy of the content is what is being questioned.

You called the contents fake with less.

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

@AZslim

@peek-a-boo

The dossier itself exists, thus it isn’t fake. The accuracy of the content is what is being questioned.

You called the contents fake with less.

Yup…

[DougBH]

There is a big big difference between saying the investigators found Steele to be credible and saying that the investigators fount the information he provided “was not far off”. Not only was the “not far off” in the article referring to Steeles defenders instead of the investigators, but it referred only to that portion related to Page in the fisa warrant application, not to the dossier as a whole.
Of course Steele’s defenders found that information to be not far off, or they wouldn’t be Steeles defenders.

You can find Steele to be credible himself without necessarily accepting much in the dossier itself, which Steele makes a guestimate that some may be right, some infor may be wrong.

That’s why it is a big deal to state that the investigators stated they found the alleged facts in the dossier as a whole to be not far off, when they did not say so.

And, just as with the Mueller report, what the investigators with the DOJ found will finally all come out with the report itself.

[JayJay]

@DougBH

There is a big big difference between saying the investigators found Steele to be credible and saying that the investigators fount the information he provided “was not far off”. Not only was the “not far off” in the article referring to Steeles defenders instead of the investigators, but it referred only to that portion related to Page in the fisa warrant application, not to the dossier as a whole.
Of course Steele’s defenders found that information to be not far off, or they wouldn’t be Steeles defenders.

You can find Steele to be credible himself without necessarily accepting much in the dossier itself, which Steele makes a guestimate that some may be right, some infor may be wrong.

That’s why it is a big deal to state that the investigators stated they found the alleged facts in the dossier as a whole to be not far off, when they did not say so.

And, just as with the Mueller report, what the investigators with the DOJ found will finally all come out with the report itself.

Horowitz’ investigation isn’t about the credibility of the entire dossier.

It’s to discover whether the FBI acted improperly in getting the FISA warrants to tap Carter Page.

It is in that respect that the descriptor “not far off” is being used.

[DougBH]

I agree that that is the extent of the use of the quoted words “not far off” within the article. However, that limit is not given to those words in the OP. In the op those quoted words are inaccurately attributed to the investigators and are not limited to the information provided re Page in the FISA warrant application.
That is why their misuse is indeed a double whammy that creates a totally false impression.

[DougBH]

@H_Arendt

If this internal probe fails to demonstrate the existence of an FBI/CIA/Obama/Clinton conspiracy to spy on and defeat Trump, we will have no choice but to call for an investigation into this investigation as well. What else can we do?

I hope we do not go that route. If the DOJ investigation(s) finds nothing untoward I hope that the Senate does not follow the lead of the House with the Mueller report.

[H_Arendt]

@DougBH

@H_Arendt

If this internal probe fails to demonstrate the existence of an FBI/CIA/Obama/Clinton conspiracy to spy on and defeat Trump, we will have no choice but to call for an investigation into this investigation as well. What else can we do?

I hope we do not go that route. If the DOJ investigation(s) finds nothing untoward I hope that the Senate does not follow the lead of the House with the Mueller report.

The Benghazi precedent suggests the Republican response will be otherwise.

[ohknow35]

@H_Arendt

Since there is no federal crime of “collusion” tell us how it is possible indict someone for it? Collusion was always the word promoted by Trump and Co. because it was a behavior that could not lead to an indictment.

So you mean to tell me mueller and the dimocrats have spent two plus years “investigating” something that’s not even a crime??

Nice admission. Wish the other dimocrats were as honest as you.

[conan]

I suspect Horowitz report will call how bias the FISA process was, lack of condor with shabby source/intel methods, unusual processing etc…but will conclude no laws were broken.

The public must never learn just how corrupt FBI and other top agencies really is. Never!!!

[H_Arendt]

@ohknow35

@H_Arendt

Since there is no federal crime of “collusion” tell us how it is possible indict someone for it? Collusion was always the word promoted by Trump and Co. because it was a behavior that could not lead to an indictment.

So you mean to tell me mueller and the dimocrats have spent two plus years “investigating” something that’s not even a crime??

Nice admission. Wish the other dimocrats were as honest as you.

Nice stretch. What Mueller found was that the Putin regime worked to elect Trump and Trump’s team happily accepted their support. Mueller did not find a conspiracy from eh beginning to make this happen. To put it simply: the Russians attacked our electoral processes and the Trump team accepted their help and made no effort stop an attack on the United States. This makes unique among American Presidents – the only one who not only has not defended the US from foreign attack but will not even admit that the attack occurred.

Feel better now?

[H_Arendt]

@conan

I suspect Horowitz report will call how bias the FISA process was, lack of condor with shabby source/intel methods, unusual processing etc…but will conclude no laws were broken.

The public must never learn just how corrupt FBI and other top agencies really is. Never!!!

Or you might wit to read the Horowitz Report, but given the aversion to reading the Mueller Report I expect most Trump supporters have already decided what they want ti to report and no actual contents are going to overrule that.

[conan]

I’m just judging Horowitz last report. 435 pages of bias withing FBI only conclude bias never effected their decision.

[ohknow35]

@H_Arendt

Nice stretch. What Mueller found was that the Putin regime worked to elect Trump and Trump’s team happily accepted their support. Mueller did not find a conspiracy from eh beginning to make this happen. To put it simply: the Russians attacked our electoral processes and the Trump team accepted their help and made no effort stop an attack on the United States. This makes unique among American Presidents – the only one who not only has not defended the US from foreign attack but will not even admit that the attack occurred.

Feel better now?

So you mean to tell me that not only did Mueller and the dimocrats spend two plus years “investigating” something that’s not even a crime, but they didn’t even charge anyone with anything related to “russian interference” that all happened under the previous administration??

Man, I love this new honesty. If only all dimocrats could be like you.

[JayJay]

@conan

I suspect Horowitz report will call how bias the FISA process was, lack of condor with shabby source/intel methods, unusual processing etc…but will conclude no laws were broken.

The public must never learn just how corrupt FBI and other top agencies really is. Never!!!

Nothing like good ol confirmation bias…

[conan]

Indeed…with touch of reality.

[JayJay]

@conan

Indeed…with touch of reality.

What you have essentially said is you will accept no result as honest unless it’s to completely declare that the FBI broke laws.

Because you have already decided they have…any evidence to the contrary be damned.