Media Leak Strategy by FBI and DOJ?


None of it’s been disproven.


Nothing in the dossier has been corroborated. Even Steele under oath stated that it was nothing but “raw intel” and that at best it’s 50/50.


I disagree. I’m not prone to conspiracy theories. I am more fact based and logic driven. Show me evidence, and I’ll evaluate it appropriately.


That is untrue. The part of the dossier used as a part of the FISA warrant application revolved around Carter Page’s interactions with certain people in Russia. In his Congressional testimony, he essentially corroborated these parts of the Steele memorandum.

Additionally, give this a read. It is a year old, but it explains how even a year ago, large parts of the dossier had borne out as accurate.

As outsiders without the investigative tools available to the FBI, we can only look at the information and determine if it makes sense given subsequent events and the revelation of additional information. Mr. Steele did not have the benefit of knowing Mr. Trump would win the election or how events might play out. In this regard, does any of the information we have learned since June 2016 assign greater or less credibility to the information? Were the people mentioned in the report real? Were their affiliations correct? Did any of the activities reported happen as predicted?

To a large extent, yes.

The most obvious occurrence that could not have been known to Orbis in June 2016, but shines bright in retrospect is the fact that Russia undertook a coordinated and massive effort to disrupt the 2016 U.S. election to help Donald Trump, as the U.S. intelligence community itself later concluded. Well before any public knowledge of these events, the Orbis report identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to discuss the receipt of stolen documents. Mr. Steele could not have known that the Russians stole information on Hillary Clinton, or that they were considering means to weaponize them in the U.S. election, all of which turned out to be stunningly accurate .

Just as a small sampling from the article.


None of the accusations that page had done anything illegal were corroborated in any way,l had they been he’d have had charges filed against him long ago.


Don’t pull a muscle carting those goalposts down the field.

You claimed nothing in the dossier had been corroborated. That is a factually untrue statement. Do you admit that now? That you were mistaken?


And the subject was accusations of illegal activity.

Give it up, that’s a pathetic argument on your part.


Nonsense. You are once again moving goalposts to try and weasel out of your inaccurate claim that no parts of the dossier had been corroborated. Which is a factually untrue statement.

So, do you now admit that parts of the dossier have in fact been corroborated? Will you stop making the claim to the contrary going forward? Or will you continue to repeat this lie? :thinking:


I didn’t move anything I quoted my own post.


Yes. You quoted your goalpost move. Which came after your false claim that none of the dossier had been corroborated.

Do you now admit that parts of the dossier have in fact been corroborated? Will you stop posting the lie that none of it has been?


You can’t properly connect the dots if you only spend 2-3 minutes at a time on it.

Therefore it’s rather obvious that you’re relying on someone else to connect the dots for you.

Come on, man!


No allegations made in the dossier have been corroborated. Page traveling to Europe is not a criminal act.


That is a false statement. Plenty of the HUMINT in the series of memorandums have been corroborated. Why do you continue to promote something verifiably untrue? Did you not read the link I provided that clearly proves your statement false?

No one made the claim that Page travelling to Europe was a criminal act. Nice strawman though.


None of the allegations of illegal activity have been corroborated… None.


Again, that is untrue. The Russian attacks on our election that were directed by Putin, and which criminal indictments have been issued, were corroborated.

What is the end goal here for you? Just to run interference for Trump or something? To downplay the Russian attacks on the DNC and their efforts to help Trump get elected, and to damage Clinton? I don’t see the reasoning or logic behind intentionally trying to lie to everyone about this. When the actual facts prove definitively you are wrong. Are you just doubling down on promoting this fallacy because you’re a contrarian? What is it exactly?


None of the allegations about collusion have been corroborated, my only goal is to be accurate with the facts.

Putin’s attack has zero to do with any illegal activity on the part of Trump of his campaign.


…cept I pointed out the discrepancies that didn’t add up long before ANY source did. Now as more emails and more info gets leaked out in a drip, drip, drip fashion, it’s becoming easier for all…even you.


You keep moving the goalposts and narrowing the criteria for what counts as corroboration of the dossier.

So once and for all, do you admit that parts of the dossier have been corroborated, or not? No parsing or narrowing here. Just a simple admission that yes, parts of the dossier have in fact been corroborated?


I keep returning to the basis of the dossier and the claims of collusion.

Everything else is superfluous.


Who paid for it? Is the author from the United States? Did this foreign entity collaborate with any other foreign entities in creating the dossier? Was it used to influence an election? Seriously…where is the real collusion IYO?