Well as you know Trump got the nomination and at that point the information was no longer needed by repubs. The dossier was not phony as some information was verified to be true.
The dossier alleges:
· That Russia was responsible for the
DNC email hacks[71][72][73]and the recent appearance of the stolen DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks,
[71][74] and that the reason for using WikiLeaks was "
plausible deniability".
[75] (Dossier, pp. 7–8)
True
· That "the operation had been conducted with the full knowledge and support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team."
[76][75] (Dossier, p. 8)
Well all we know for sure is Trump said " I hope Russia finds those missing emails and hours later there was a hacking attack on the DNC and other demos email accounts.
Trump tower meeting was set up to find dirt on Trump but it didn't pan out
After the emails were released, the Australian diplomat Alexander Downer informed the U.S. government that, in May 2016 at a London wine bar, Trump campaign staffer George Papadopoulos had told him that the Russian government had a large trove of Hillary Clinton emails that could potentially damage her presidential campaign.
· That after the emails were leaked to WikiLeaks, it was decided to not leak more, but to engage in misinformation: "Rather the tactics would be to spread rumours and misinformation about the content of what already had been leaked and make up new content."
[77](Dossier, p. 15)
who knows but sounds reasonable. It is known that they had infiltrated the RNC servers but no information was every released by the hackers concerning republicans.
· That Trump's foreign policy adviser
Carter Page had "conceived and promoted" the idea of "leaking the DNC e-mails to WikiLeaks during the Democratic Convention" "to swing supporters of Bernie SANDERS away from Hillary CLINTON and across to TRUMP."
[78][79][80] (Dossier, p. 17)
There was damning emails that made the DNC look bad especially when it concerned Bernie
· That the hacking of the DNC servers was performed by Romanian hackers ultimately controlled by Putin and paid by both Trump and Putin.
[81][82] (Dossier, pp. 34–35)
well partial true with who did the hacking but I do not know if Putin or trump paid for it but obviously someone did
That Trump's personal attorney,
Michael Cohen, had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague in August 2016,
[71][83][84]where he arranged "deniable cash payments" to the hackers and sought "to cover up all traces of the hacking operation",
[81][82] as well as "cover up ties between Trump and Russia, including
Manafort's involvement in Ukraine
I believe that was false but I really do not know as I haven researched it.
So some of the dossier is True and some of it is false. But a dossier is nothing more than a collection of information during an investigation. The validity has to be verify by authorities if they are to be used in a court of law.
With all due respect...you have no more idea if it was the Russians who hacked the DNC servers or if it was someone who worked at the DNC and was outraged about the way the Clinton supporters in the DNC had treated Bernie Sanders. To be quite blunt...I lean towards the latter because it's the only reason I can think of why the DNC wouldn't allow the FBI to examine the supposedly hacked servers. That person wouldn't have had to have been "paid" as you allege! They would have done so out of righteous anger. Tell me that there weren't a lot of pissed of Sanders people at that point of the campaign!
Your claim that Cohen had a secret meeting with Kremlin officials in Prague has been debunked long ago. Cohen has never BEEN to Prague and stated as such under oath. That's an example of Steele taking facts...like Cohen traveling to Europe...and then weaving that fact with lies...that Cohen met with Kremlin officials in Prague.
The dossiers were put out to compliant media outlets by Steele as legitimate. It wasn't until his ass was sued in British court by some of the people he'd defamed in the dossiers that Steele changed his tune and started saying that the dossiers were simply raw intelligence that hadn't been verified and shouldn't be taken at face value! Until he was put under oath, Steele was claiming what was in the dossiers was true...which of course is what he was PAID to do by the Clinton camp to smear Donald Trump right before the election!
It is well documented that it was the Russian. If you do not trust the US intelligences community then who do you trust the local spin masters who didn't investigate anything but have an opinion.
I never claimed or said that Cohen was in Praque as the dossier says. It appears to be false but hey I will admit that it appears to be inaccurate info and there is no verifiable truth to it. Cohen has denied it under oath so I do not have a problem with it. It is irrelevant .
I have said that SOME of the dossier points have been proven ie the Russian hacking of the DNC and Hillary associates. When you put this with the knowledge that the RNC was also hacked but no data was release it does make you go hmmmm.
Well that is his defense in a public court but people in the know do know what a dossier is. It's unsubstantial accounts. It is not a legal document that will hold up in court. Now if it defamed Russian then it is up to the court to decide.
I just proved that there is no such documentation.
2. The Hillary campaign screamed that they had been hacked, but refused to allow any government agencies to inspect the supposedly hacked servers
yet we know exact what happen. Russians operatives working for the Russian intelligence directorate, the GRU, sent dozens of targeted spearphishing emails in just five days to the work and personal accounts of Clinton Campaign employees and volunteers, as a way to break into the campaign’s computer systems. Using credentials that they stole they hacked into the DNC computers. Some 70 gigabytes of data were exfiltrated from Clinton’s campaign servers and some 300 gigabytes of data were obtained from the DNC’s network. Much of the information was eventually released thru various outlets including wikileak.
Still state your source where she denied for them to inspect the SUPPOSEDLY hacked servers. IT doen't make sense for her to not let them do their job especially when she was the victim of a crime.
Coincidence that they hack her computer and DNC computers within hours of Trump boasted that he hope Russian Finds those emails
. "
Why wouldn’t the Democratic Committee allow the FBI to check their servers during the investigation of the DNC breaches during the 2016 election?
The DNC maintains there’s a simple answer to this question: According to the group, the FBI
never asked to see their servers. But FBI Director James Comey
told the Senate Intelligence Committee back in January that the FBI did, in fact, issue “multiple requests at different levels” to the DNC to gain direct access to their computer systems and conduct their own forensic analysis.
....the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation. Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firm’s investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI.
.... if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. "
The FBI Relied on a Private Firm’s Investigation of the DNC Hack—Which Makes the Agency Harder to Trust
“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack
No hack possible!!!!!
And that's from the Liberal mag, The Nation......
"After studying Russian leadership for 40 years, focusing on Putin in particular, Cohen said it was hard for him believe that the Russian president would have done such a thing.
"I could find not one piece of factual evidence," he said. "The only evidence ever presented was a study hired by the Clintons -- the DNC -- to do an examination of their computers. They [Crowdstrike] concluded the Russians did it. Their report has fallen apart." He added, "Why didn't the FBI do their own investigation?"
Tucker pointed out that even Republicans say that seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies (including Coast Guard Intelligence!) have concluded that Russian intelligence was behind this.
"They say that, but it's bogus," Cohen argued. "When Clapper, the director of national intelligence, signed that report in January, technically he represents all seventeen. I'll bet you a dime to a nickel you couldn't get a guest on, unprepared, who could name ten of them. This figure -- seventeen -- is bogus!"
Prof. Cohen: Not One Piece of Factual Evidence That Russia 'Hacked the Election'
================================================
".... if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. "
The FBI Relied on a Private Firm’s Investigation of the DNC Hack—Which Makes the Agency Harder to Trust
===================================================
1. "Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told host Chuck Todd that he was not aware of evidence showing the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russian government to influence last November’s presidential election.
TODD: Well, that’s an important revelation at this point.
Let me ask you this, does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question,
whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russia officials?
CLAPPER: We did not include evidence in our report, and I say our, that’s NSA, FBI and CIA with my office, the director of national intelligence that had anything — that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was there no evidence of that including in our report.
TODD: I understand that, but does it exist?
CLAPPER: Not to my knowledge.
TODD: If it existed, it would have been in the report?
CLAPPER: This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government. But at the time, we had no evidence of such collusion.
TODD: But at this point, what’s not proven is the idea of collusion?
CLAPPER: that’s correct."
Fmr Obama DNI Clapper: Evidence of Trump-Russian Collusion Doesn't Exist to His 'Knowledge' - Breitbart
2. "While many Democrats frequently say Russia “hacked” the presidential election, National Security Administration Director Adm. Michael Rogers and FBI Director James Comey both confirmed today that Russian activities had no impact on tallying votes in states."
FBI, NSA: 'No evidence' Russia manipulated US vote tallying - The American Mirror
3. Democrat Feinstein, too
7.Now for the technical proof that the Left lied.
“…decisive findings, made public in the paper dated July 9, concerned the volume of the supposedly hacked material and what is called
the transfer rate—the time a remote hack would require. The metadata established several facts in this regard with granular precision: On the evening of July 5, 2016, 1,976 megabytes of data were downloaded from the DNC’s server.
The operation took 87 seconds. This yields a transfer rate of 22.7 megabytes per second.
These statistics are matters of record and essential to
disproving the hack theory. No Internet service provider, such as a hacker would have had to use in mid-2016, was capable of downloading data at this speed. Compounding this contradiction, Guccifer claimed to have run his hack from Romania, which, for numerous reasons technically called delivery overheads, would slow down the speed of a hack even further from maximum achievable speeds.
…a survey published August 3, 2016, by
www.speedtest.net/reports is highly reliable and use it as their thumbnail index. It indicated that
the highest average ISP speeds of first-half 2016 were achieved by Xfinity and Cox Communications. These speeds averaged 15.6 megabytes per second and 14.7 megabytes per second, respectively. Peak speeds at higher rates were recorded intermittently but still did not reach the required 22.7 megabytes per second.
“A speed of 22.7 megabytes is simply unobtainable, ….what we’ve been calling a hack is impossible.” A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack
Can't you stop yourself from lying????
What the heck are you.....a Liberal?????
