aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

What if literally running their copy by DNC members, or worse, RECEIVING their talking points and editorial from the Democrats? "Fellow travelers" is ambiguous, but what if something that absurd is going on--it would certainly explain the almost plagiarist sounding repetition of phrases if there are distributed "what to say" write-ups like that from the DNC.

---

Not seeing the actual crime in such collaboration. Sure, it violates every journalistic ethics rule in the book but is it really a criminal enterprise? Is it bribery or extortion? What was the quid pro quo? That's where I am getting hung up.

For a RICO case there has to be an underlying criminal act(s) and willing participants to that criminal enterprise.

Not seeing it, quite yet.

---

People are confusing collusion with actually being a criminal offense. Unless you're working on wall street or big banking collusion is a talking point.

To get a RICO on a media outlet or any reporter is a steep hill to climb. They would have to tie in money laundering, not just doing it for a profit, because that's what media does it for. They have to tie in something actually criminal. Trying to build a criminal case against anything close to just running bogus news, false narratives, flat out lies, whatever, is a hill you will never climb. The written word is as deadly as a bullet, but more protected than the life of an unborn child. To go after a media journalist/outlet whatever with RICO is a stretch beyond comprehension. That's just an old meter maid $0.02

Quote:

---

To get a RICO on a media outlet or any reporter is a steep hill to climb. They would have to tie in money laundering, not just doing it for a profit, because that's what media does it for. They have to tie in something actually criminal. Trying to build a criminal case against anything close to just running bogus news, false narratives, flat out lies, whatever, is a hill you will never climb. The written word is as deadly as a bullet, but more protected than the life of an unborn child. To go after a media journalist/outlet whatever with RICO is a stretch beyond comprehension. That's just an old meter maid $0.02

---

Yeah, I'm just not seeing it as to the press.

Now the Clinton Foundation is another matter altogether. Plausible RICO case under pay-to-play while Hillary is Sec State. But they likely won't go there because Obama did the same thing while in office. Set up his foundation and sold nights in the Lincoln bedroom to celebrities willing to fork over $500,000 or so. Sounds familiar, doesn't it??

I have been trying to catchup after being out of pocket.

How is what the Russians did any different than what Steele did? He pushed fake news and isn't a citizen. He tried to get involved in the election. Is it because he was paid through a law firm?

Completely agree.

backintexas2013 said:

---

I have been trying to catchup after being out of pocket.

How is what the Russians did any different than what Steele did? He pushed fake news and isn't a citizen. He tried to get involved in the election. Is it because he was paid through a law firm?

---

Well, yes and no. The use of the law firm as the intermediary can conceal some crimes but not all. Perkins, Coie's problem is on the campaign finance side and violations of federal election laws. That's the criminal portal in which their other activities could come to light, IMO.

Donna Brazile gave enough hints in her book to warrant an investigation of how the Hillary For America campaign moved money around, in violation of campaign finance laws. Marc Elias, Perkins, Coie partner, is an election law specialist with a reputation for skirting those laws, however. He may have done just enough to cover his butt, criminally speaking.

Hopefully, we'll see.

HOw is what Steele did not being a foreigner interfering with the election? I guess I am missing something.

backintexas2013 said:

---

HOw is what Steele did not being a foreigner interfering with the election? I guess I am missing something.

---

The fact that I think the FBI was paying him, of which they've denied, claiming the withheld payment because he leaked his connection to the press. Whether they did or they didn't is really beside the point, if they intended to and then balked on the payment after the deed was done, because he shoots his mouth of. Fact being he was here working on a visa granted by the state department working as a contractor for the federal government whether they paid him or not.

Secondly, going after him is going to be costly to many, because he will not hold his mud. If Sessions goes after him with stiff time, he will sing and the collateral damage will be devastating. This isn't just 5 or 6 rogue agents trying to tip the scales, this leads straight to the oval office.

backintexas2013 said:

---

HOw is what Steele did not being a foreigner interfering with the election? I guess I am missing something.

---

Because he was on the FBI's payroll for a time? One of the reasons the FBI had to back away when Steele's multiple contacts with media members came to light. (Or became undeniable for them.)

Further, using Nellie Ohr as the cut-out between Fusion, GPS and the FBI/DOJ (that ham radio license is problematical, in my view) kept Fusion behind the scenes as a non-lobbyist. Not saying that doesn't stink to high heaven but just that it is in a gray area, as things stand now.

There's much more to come out, hopefully. Like if Mueller has Fusion on his payroll.

The problem here is that the Congressional and Senate oversight committees agreed to limit their scope to events preceding Mueller's appointment as to that last question. Would be interesting to know.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/02/20/robert_mueller_continues_using_the_steele_dossier.html

Quote:

---

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is continuing to use a controversial 35-page dossier financed by the Democratic National Committee and the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign as a "road map" for investigative leads, sources familiar with his investigation say.

Mueller's team has also used information gleaned from surveillance court-approved wiretaps on former Trump adviser Carter Page that were secured by citing material in the dossier, the sources say.

And a detail previously reported last fall that Mueller's investigators traveled overseas last year to debrief the dossier's London-based author, Christopher Steele, a former British spy takes on a new cast with the disclosure this month that FBI agents abruptly stopped using Steele as an informant in late 2016 after concluding that he had lied to them....

Mueller's use of the dossier opposition research described by former FBI Director James Comey as largely "salacious and unverified" was reported by several news outlets last year. But word that Mueller has continued relying on it despite the House memo and other disclosures raises new questions about the special counsel's investigation as it expands beyond indictments last week of 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies....

Fitton added that it's imperative to know if Mueller hired Steele or any of the "researchers" he worked with on the dossier, including Glenn Simpson, the journalist-turned-opposition researcher who hired Steele on behalf of Clinton and the DNC....

Congressional investigators say Simpson, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, has been feeding Democratic leaders in both the House and Senate investigations tips regarding Trump and his associates, including former campaign chairman Paul Manafort. Last fall, Simpson urged Democrats specifically to look into the bank records of Deutsche Bank, which has financed some of Trump's businesses, because he suspects some of the funding may be linked to Russia.

Around the time Simpson was working with Democratic investigators, Mueller subpoenaed Deutsche Bank for financial records on Manafort and other individuals affiliated with Trump....

---

This raises serious questions about Mueller's investigation. How can he use an opposition research paper to pursue his investigation, let alone wiretap info obtained via the illegal/fraudulent Carter Page FISA warrant? If this is true...

What if he's trying to verify the dossier as he uses it as the road map... how much has been shown to be BS vs unverified?

Do we know what was in the Steele dossier? I've seen claims that it was debunked. How so?

hawk1689 said:

---

Do we know what was in the Steele dossier? I've seen claims that it was debunked. How so?

---

I'm not calling you out personally. Well, not just you, at least. But, how do people not know that the entire dossier was published by Buzzfeed last January? I am amazed at how many people have asked this question over the past year.

hawk1689 said:

---

Do we know what was in the Steele dossier? I've seen claims that it was debunked. How so?

---

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3259984-Trump-Intelligence-Allegations.html

Here's the dossier.

hawk1689 said:

---

Do we know what was in the Steele dossier? I've seen claims that it was debunked. How so?

---

Well there are two possibly three lawsuits against Buzzfeed about the false stuff in the dossier.

We also know Steele isn't very bright. He kept talking about Alpha bank which is a Greek bank when now they think he meant Alfa bank. I think Alpha Bank has raised a stink because of how wrong Steele was but I would have to look.

I'm not buying this.

THAT he is using the dossier?

Quote:

---

This raises serious questions about Mueller's investigation. How can he use an opposition research paper to pursue his investigation, let alone wiretap info obtained via the illegal/fraudulent Carter Page FISA warrant? If this is true...

---

If that is true, it is the clearest evidence that his intent is not criminal prosecutions but impeachment material.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

This raises serious questions about Mueller's investigation. How can he use an opposition research paper to pursue his investigation, let alone wiretap info obtained via the illegal/fraudulent Carter Page FISA warrant? If this is true...

---

If that is true, it is the clearest evidence that his intent is not criminal prosecutions but impeachment material.

---

I know people still think I'm crazy. But, that is exactly the look I'd want to give off if I was really investigating Clinton/Podesta. Especially the MSM

GCP12 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

This raises serious questions about Mueller's investigation. How can he use an opposition research paper to pursue his investigation, let alone wiretap info obtained via the illegal/fraudulent Carter Page FISA warrant? If this is true...

---

If that is true, it is the clearest evidence that his intent is not criminal prosecutions but impeachment material.

---

I know people still think I'm crazy. But, that is exactly the look I'd want to give off if I was really investigating Clinton/Podesta. Especially the MSM

---

Good point. If the dossier is a "road map", it would make sense if he was truly looking into Russian collusion!

OneNightW said:

---

GCP12 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

This raises serious questions about Mueller's investigation. How can he use an opposition research paper to pursue his investigation, let alone wiretap info obtained via the illegal/fraudulent Carter Page FISA warrant? If this is true...

---

If that is true, it is the clearest evidence that his intent is not criminal prosecutions but impeachment material.

---

I know people still think I'm crazy. But, that is exactly the look I'd want to give off if I was really investigating Clinton/Podesta. Especially the MSM

---

Good point. If the dossier is a "road map", it would make sense if he was truly looking into Russian collusion!

---

Every leak that comes out of the investigation points to Trump.

"Bannon is interviewing" "Mueller is looking into Jared's finances" "Mueller is looking into Trump's finances" "Mueller is looking at obstruction"

Every indictment has more connections to Podesta/Clinton than they do Trump. Mueller/Gates worked with Podesta far longer than they worked with Trump. And the indictments cover their time with Podesta. Not Trump. Papadopolous is connected to the Australian Clinton Foundation donor. The lawyer just indicted is connected to Obama's WH counsel.

Only "connection" to Trump is Flynn. That indictment looks more and more likely to be dropped by the day.

I'm just sayin...

Well I can't speak for all of the others who didn't know. I personally have only been following the story for about two weeks. I try to stay balanced in my viewpoint. I've been using this thread for updates as there appear to be many on here that follow closer than I. I believe the evidence is pointing towards HRC and other DNC leadership being in the wrong, however, there is a whole lot of questionably credible info. being put out there in this thread by the right wingers too. I was just hoping for some guidance to concrete "debunking" of the dossier.

hawk1689 said:

---

Well I can't speak for all of the others who didn't know. I personally have only been following the story for about two weeks. I try to stay balanced in my viewpoint. I've been using this thread for updates as there appear to be many on here that follow closer than I. I believe the evidence is pointing towards HRC and other DNC leadership being in the wrong, however, there is a whole lot of questionably credible info. being put out there in this thread by the right wingers too. I was just hoping for some guidance to concrete "debunking" of the dossier.

---

https://www.yahoo.com/news/comey-salacious-trump-dossier-didnt-want-j-edgar-hoover-situation-163632208.html

Quote:

---

During a January meeting at Trump Tower in New York, Comey briefed the president-elect on the existence and circulation of a dossier containing "some salacious and unverified material" on Trump. This was a reference to reports that Russian intelligence had compiled material on Trump that could have been used to blackmail him. A secondhand account of that material was obtained by a private investigator and was subsequently leaked to the media.

---

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-frustrated-lawmakers-pressed-fbis-mccabe-for-answers-on-trump-dossier-they-got-nothing/article/2644225

Quote:

---

There are some important things the public doesn't know about the so-called "Trump dossier," such as whether the FBI used information from the dossier to win court permission to spy on Americans. But the most important question about the dossier is the simplest: Is it true?

In a seven-hour interview with the House Intelligence Committee Wednesday, FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe repeatedly declined to answer whether the bureau has been able to verify the substantive allegations in the dossier, or even to identify a substantive allegation that has been corroborated, according to sources familiar with the questioning.

---

FBI director and deputy director good enough? Or does Trump need to prove a negative for you to believe it's complete garbage?

I talked a little about it. He was completely wrong on the bank.

He stated Cohen was in Czech and Cohen had proven he has never been there but someone with the same name was there.

Steele admitted he couldn't verify some of the info he included. He tried to get the media to run with it but they wouldn't until buzzfeed did and now they are facing multiple lawsuits.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4385691/2-22-18-US-Status-Report.pdf

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4385690/2-22-18-Manafort-Gates-Indictment-EDVA.pdf

False tax returns & bank fraud. I haven't gone into the details yet.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/22/mccain-associate-takes-fifth-on-trump-dossier-questions.html

Quote:

---

McCain associate takes Fifth on Trump dossier questions

A former State Department official and associate of Sen. John McCain has invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to testify in connection with questions from the House Intelligence Committee about the anti-Trump dossier's Russian sources, according to a law enforcement source.

David J. Kramer, who is a central player in how the unverified Trump dossier made its way to the FBI in late 2016, testified before the committee in December in a closed-door session, indicating he had information about the dossier's sources. A subpoena was issued for mid-January, as first reported by The Washington Examiner.

The law enforcement source confirmed, however, that Kramer did not appear and has exercised his Fifth Amendment rights.

Yet Kramer gave a videotaped deposition last December in separate civil litigation against BuzzFeed about the dossier and his contact with the former British spy who compiled it, Christopher Steele. Steele was hired by opposition research firm Fusion GPS to write and research the dossier, with funding from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign.

According to British court records obtained by Fox News as part of its ongoing investigation of the Trump dossier, Kramer was personally briefed in late November 2016 by Steele in Surrey, England. After that briefing, Steele told the British court that an arrangement was made so that Fusion GPS -- co-founded by Glenn Simpson would provide hard copies of the dossier to McCain via Kramer. Shortly afterward, the dossier was given to the FBI, which already had its own copy from Steele.

---

Eat **** McCain

Hawk- I think the more important thing to take away from this is not whether elements of the dossier are true or not. Don't get me wrong, that is important. What's most important is that it appears that NONE of the info was verified or substantiated in anyway by the FBI when they used it to get a FISA warrant. They simply took campaign oppo research from Dems and passed it off as having been separately sourced (Issikoff column) and never fully explained the true origins to the judge.

It would be like if the RNC in '08 made up a bunch of unverified info about Obama that claimed he had ties to terrorism, gave that info to the FBI who then used it to gain a FISA warrant to spy on members of Obama's campaign.

Why would he plead the fifth? What do they think he did? Maybe lied to the fbi about the dossier?

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

This raises serious questions about Mueller's investigation. How can he use an opposition research paper to pursue his investigation, let alone wiretap info obtained via the illegal/fraudulent Carter Page FISA warrant? If this is true...

---

If that is true, it is the clearest evidence that his intent is not criminal prosecutions but impeachment material.

---

If so, what exactly is the objection to Trump shutting down the thing after all, and literally running on "If you like what I am doing, are America First, hate the PC-Left, and the Mainstream Media --- just ignore the fabricated hit job they are trying to do on me and vote straight anti-Democrat (straight GOP or Libertarian) in November and give me the majority I need to drain the swamp." ???

In other words risk the blowback from the Left which is not seeking compromise anyway.

GCP12 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

This raises serious questions about Mueller's investigation. How can he use an opposition research paper to pursue his investigation, let alone wiretap info obtained via the illegal/fraudulent Carter Page FISA warrant? If this is true...

---

If that is true, it is the clearest evidence that his intent is not criminal prosecutions but impeachment material.

---

I know people still think I'm crazy. But, that is exactly the look I'd want to give off if I was really investigating Clinton/Podesta. Especially the MSM

---

That is the more favorable interpretation. And with Mueller, it is really hard to tell. This entire thread began with him doing something more legit----firing a weasel. So you could be right.

People writing articles about Mueller using this oppo garbage as a road map, will not legitimize it not matter hard they try. They don't know if Mueller is using it or not. If I had to bet, I would say not. The media is desperate to try and make it true because they are all complicit in chumming the water with this garbage and know that all their bank accounts are in FGPS's bank records. Not a lot legally can be done to them, but if they think their numbers are in the crapper already wait until the bank records show they are all in on it.

Why are they filling tax fraud charges? Half of Obamas cabinet didn't pay taxes and all they got was a penalty free loan.

Agnzona said:

---

Why are they filling tax fraud charges? Half of Obamas cabinet didn't pay taxes and all they got was a penalty free loan.

---

They gonna nab Sharpton and Jackson while they're at it?

What a joke.

Dale Earnhardts Stache said:

---

Agnzona said:

---

Why are they filling tax fraud charges? Half of Obamas cabinet didn't pay taxes and all they got was a penalty free loan.

---

They gonna nab Sharpton and Jackson while they're at it?

What a joke.

---

Says Hi!

Again, what I've read points to this whole investigation being a farce. That being said, unverified does not mean untrue.