Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheL8Elvis said:
Of course you don't refute or discuss anything in the report, just poisoning the well is good enough for you.
Click to expand...

I do so below.

“As I understand it, a good deal of his information remains unproven, but none of it has been disproven, and considerable amounts of it have been proven,” Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in an interview with Reuters.

It seems likely that in the end, we'll get the opportunity to see just how much of the dossier has been corroborated/proven.

And remember, parts of the Steele dossier have been confirmed
Also, NBC’s Ken Dilanian reminds us that PARTS of the Steele dossier seem to line up with known facts. For example, Dilanian notes:

The dossier discusses Trump’s attempts to secure business deals in Russia, saying, “Regarding TRUMP’s claimed minimal investment profile in Russia, a separate source with direct knowledge said this had not been for want of trying. TRUMP’s previous efforts had included exploring the real estate sector in St Petersburg as well as Moscow…” We now know that despite Trump saying he had no deals in Russia, his organization was trying to build Trump Tower Moscow during the Republican primaries.
Click to expand...

We haven't heard anything about St. Petersburg, and guessing that Trump had explored the real estate sector in Moscow is hardly going out on a limb much. Plus the Trump Tower Moscow idea never got further than scribblings on a piece of paper.

The dossier says a “senior Russian diplomat withdrawn from Washington embassy on account of potential exposure in US presidential election operation/s.” According to McClatchy, Mikhail Kalugin was recalled from his post as head of the embassy’s economics section in August of 2016. BBC reported that U.S. government sources identified Kalugin as a spy, though NBC News has not confirmed this.
Click to expand...

Kalugin was withdrawn in August 2016. The section of the dossier reporting this is dated September 14, 2016. This is simply reporting what was already known.


The dossier asserts that in early August 2016, “a Kremlin official involved in US relations commented on aspects of the Russian operation to date,” discussing attempts to compromise Jill STEIN of the Green Party; TRUMP foreign policy adviser Carter PAGE; and former DIA Director Michael Flynn, by inviting them to Moscow. Flynn and Stein spoke at the RT gala in 2015, Flynn having been paid. Page gave a Kremlin-friendly speech in Moscow in July 2016 while he was advising the Trump campaign.
Click to expand...

This is what the dossier has to say about the above:

Speaking separately, also in early August 2016, a Kremlin official involved in US relations commented on aspects of the Russian operation to date. Its goals had been threefold - asking sympathetic US actors how Moscow could help them; gathering relevant intelligence; and creating and disseminating compromising information ('kompromat'). This had involved the Kremlin supporting various US political figures, including funding indirectly their recent visits to Moscow. S/he named a delegation from Lyndon LAROUCHE; presidential candidate Jill STEIN of the Green Party;TRUMP foreign policy adviser Carter PAGE; and former DIA Director Michael Flynn, in this regard and as successful in terms of perceived outcomes.
Click to expand...

I don't think that Stein and Flynn's attendance at the RT gala in December 2015 (a public affair, with pictures in the newspapers and everything) counts as a recent visit to Moscow, as of August 2016. Certainly not one that is corroborating (probably it undercuts the dossier's claim, since there have been no reports of any visits in 2016). As for Carter Page, his visit to Moscow was also public knowledge, although he was a very minor figure in the campaign, so perhaps the fact of the FBI's focus on him lends some credibility to the dossier's claim. On the other hand, the FBI's focus on him might be because of the dossier's claim, in which case the FBI's interest would not be corroborating at all.
 
Last edited:
TheL8Elvis said:
Let me spell it out for you:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/26/polit...ie-wasserman-schultz-trump-dossier/index.html
On Tuesday, that law firm, Perkins Coie, wrote in a letter that it had retained Fusion GPS as part of its representation of the Clinton campaign and the DNC.

Perkins Coie retained Fusion GPS - not the Clinton campaign and DNC. When asked previously,m the Clinton campaign and DNC denied knowledge. Now, apparently they don't deny knowledge. Presumably, that suggests they found our recently.
Click to expand...

Or that they were lying before, and now they can't lie anymore. I think that's the more plausible explanation, don't you? How could the campaign not know (and Podesta was the Chairman of the campaign) that their main law firm had dug up such salacious material on Trump? You don't think Marc Elias, who apparently does double duty as Podesta's personal lawyer, in addition to being the campaign's general counsel, would have mentioned the allegations of collusion with Russia, or, at the least, the fact that Trump was paying Russian prostitutes to pee on his bed?
 
sunmaster14 said:
Or that they were lying before, and now they can't lie anymore. I think that's the more plausible explanation, don't you? How could the campaign not know (and Podesta was the Chairman of the campaign) that their main law firm had dug up such salacious material on Trump? You don't think Marc Elias, who apparently does double duty as Podesta's personal lawyer, in addition to being the campaign's general counsel, would have mentioned the allegations of collusion with Russia, or, at the least, the fact that Trump was paying Russian prostitutes to pee on his bed?
Click to expand...

So yeah, the only evidence exists in your head. Thanks !
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
The fourth sentence of the second paragraph.
Click to expand...

Here it is (my emphasis added):

Finally, now that the appropriate client representatives have been informed of the specifics of our engagement with Fusion GPS, and with their consent, Perkins Coie therefore authorizes you to disclose the following:
Click to expand...

If they could have eliminated the words I bolded, they certainly would have. They couldn't, so they didn't. They're weasel words which allow liberal journalists to claim that they suggest something they really don't.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
So yeah, the only evidence exists in your head. Thanks !
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure why you engage with me about substantive issues. Almost everybody else on your side has learned their lesson not to do it. It only results in embarrassment for you, while at the same time giving me an opportunity to more fully flesh out and support my opinions (which evidently cause you distress).
 
sunmaster14 said:
If they could have eliminated the words I bolded, they certainly would have. They couldn't, so they didn't. They're weasel words which allow liberal journalists to claim that they suggest something they really don't.
Click to expand...

You're the one who seems to be suggesting that the words say something specific.
 
Last edited:
sunmaster14 said:
I'm really not sure why you engage with me about substantive issues. Almost everybody else on your side has learned their lesson not to do it. It only results in embarrassment for you, while at the same time giving me an opportunity to more fully flesh out and support my opinions (which evidently cause you distress).
Click to expand...


I'll admit that you're on quasi-the-thing-I-can't-name but that doesn't mean I don't read your posts just for the yucks.
 
The Washington Examiner is reporting that the The Free Beacon originally funder Fusion GPS.

Lawyers for the conservative publication Washington Free Beacon informed the House Intelligence Committee Friday that the organization was the original funder for the anti-Trump opposition research project with Fusion GPS.

The Free Beacon funded the project from the fall of 2015 through the spring of 2016, whereupon it withdrew funding and the project was picked up by the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign.

The original arrangement between the Free Beacon and Fusion GPS involved opposition research into multiple Republican candidates, not just front-runner Donald Trump.
Click to expand...
 
sunmaster14 said:
I'm really not sure why you engage with me about substantive issues. Almost everybody else on your side has learned their lesson not to do it. It only results in embarrassment for you, while at the same time giving me an opportunity to more fully flesh out and support my opinions (which evidently cause you distress).
Click to expand...

Is that what you think happens?

Hmm. :thumbsup:
 
sunmaster14 said:
I'm really not sure why you engage with me about substantive issues. Almost everybody else on your side has learned their lesson not to do it. It only results in embarrassment for you, while at the same time giving me an opportunity to more fully flesh out and support my opinions (which evidently cause you distress).
Click to expand...

You are not in touch with people's general perception of you.
 
NoahFence said:
According to CNN, the grand jury has approved charges against unnamed persons related to Russia.
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I believe it was Wednesday night that Rachel Maddow was speculating that TrumpCo's recent behavior -- trying desperately to discredit Mueller and deflect attention with the uranium deal -- might portend something in the wind.
 
sunmaster14 said:
I'm really not sure why you engage with me about substantive issues. Almost everybody else on your side has learned their lesson not to do it. It only results in embarrassment for you, while at the same time giving me an opportunity to more fully flesh out and support my opinions (which evidently cause you distress).
Click to expand...

Bwhahahahah

If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell

You are at step 3.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom