Dossier fails the test of time; Trump-Russia collusion claims now called 'likely false'

When FISA court accepted the warrant material, the proof was made.

If you disagree, you need to take it apart piece by piece. If you won't, then don't, but our side will simply smile at you.

 

There are innocent people in jail for the same reason.

 

[wrong post

This article is little more than a paragraph. And it shows that you won't stand by your own post. .On post 113 I asked this question.

You won't answer the question because you have no evidence .

 

What a pile of crap. Peabody asserted in his/her post that the Steele Dossier was garbage. I simply claimed it's not garbage and asked him/her to prove it's 100% garbage since that was his/her assertion. . I don't give a horses rear end about your phony notions or rules. In this venue it has always been OK to ask for proof for ones post. It's that simple.

 

Prove me wrong or go sit in the corner.

 

Logic 101 you can't prove a negative. Burden of proof is on the accusers. Prove you never raped your mother.

 

They want us to prove the the dossier is not true, a logical fallacy. They believe they can make the wildest of accusation and they remain true unless proven untrue. What nonsense,

 

Oh what an eloquent response And yet you still won't stand by your assertion that the Steele Dossier is 100% garbage. It's hard to prove a point when you have no proof. But just to make sure were on the same page this is what I asked you on post 113

[QUOTE="Promise Hero,

 

Hookers peed on a bed, get FISA warrant to investigate collusion.
Makes sense.

 

The affirmative was that FISA was wrong, but that could not be proved.

 

Whose they. I simply asked to prove the post was true. Totally different.

 

I don't know what you are missing here, the burden of proof is on the accuser.

 

Those who claim the accusation in the dossier are true. Do you?

 

The OP asserted the dossier fails the test of time.

The supporters have failed miserably in supporting that assertion.

 

Lol . Duh! on this venue if you make a claim you are the one to back it up. The stupidity is to call something all garbage in the first place. That's dumb knowing you have no way to prove it. On this venue he who makes the initial assertion can be requested to prove his/her post. So lets agree that it should be a called a highly flawed document. That way if I ask for proof you can point out one or several errors without being locked in to proving that document is total garbage or 100 % garbage which is an absolute fallacy. There are very few 100% in life,

 

I already did, your refusal to accept the answer given isn't my problem, it's yours. No one cares what you believe but you.

 

The OP is that the dossier fails the test of time, a positive statement.

Prove it.

 

I asserted my beliefs about the accuracy of the Dossier on this thread.. I believe the document may be 30%-50% accurate and that there is enough evidence to prove this. But also I believe as investigations continue more of the Dossier will be proven to be true but I don't how much. Those who treat the document as static without being aware that more proof may be yet to come show they have no clue as to how to evaluate this Dossier. Some are probably locked into a Trump mindset or talking points . The document is not all garbage which is an already ignorant assertion.

 

This is coming from someone too lazy to read my posts. All of the assumptions about me and my way of thinking are absurd. sloppy sloppy crap.

I would have tried to respond to this post but couldn't find the easy to use quote button. I haven't been on this sight in a long time.

.


Dossier's 10 core collusion accusations remain unverified 20 months later

• The Trump campaign launched an “extensive conspiracy” with the Kremlin to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. To date, no public verification. crap Crap. Flyn, Manafort, Cohen and others have been caught talking to Russians. have been charged with lying to the CIA.

• Mr. Trump, for decades a developer of tall buildings, maintained an eight-year relationship of give-and-take with Russian intelligence. To date, no public verification.

No verification to date this is a meaningless sentence. This report fails to acknowledge many of these cases are a work in progress. " No verification to date" is a laugh.

‌
• Mr. Trump and senior campaign aides actively supported the Russia hacking of Democratic Party computers to steal and release stolen emails. To date, no public verification. Lol of course not. This dumb report fails to take into account that the investigation is still in progress .and stupid in the expectation of evidence. Everyone but the writers of this report.

• Volunteer Carter Page and campaign manager Paul Manafort personally conspired with Moscow to hack the Democrats’ computers. When the hacking began in 2015, neither man was associated with the Trump campaign. Both deny the charge. Mr. Page testified under oath that he had never met or spoken with Mr. Manafort. To date, no public verification of this dossier part.

• Mr. Page, an Annapolis graduate, an energy investor and a former resident of Moscow, traveled to that city in early July 2016 to deliver a public speech at a university. The dossier says he met with two top Kremlin operatives and discussed bribes for working to lift economic sanctions. Mr. Page testified under oath that he had never met nor spoke with them. He has filed libel lawsuits.

• Mr. Trump engaged with Russian prostitutes during a trip to Moscow in 2013. Mr. Trump has denied this numerous times. To date, no public verification.

• Mr. Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen, secretly traveled to Prague in August 2016. His supposed mission: to orchestrate payments with agents of Vladimir Putin to cover up the hacking. At that point, the hacking was known worldwide. Mr. Cohen repeatedly has denied under oath that he took such a trip and showed his passport. He has filed libel lawsuits, including against Fusion GPS. Fusion co-founder Glenn Simpson, who ordered the dossier, has suggested that Mr. Cohen took a private Russian plane and might have been on a yacht in the Adriatic Sea. To date, there has been no public verification of any of this.

• Russian tech entrepreneur Aleksej Gubarev, owner of XBT Holding, hacked the Democrat Party computers with spyware and pornography. He has denied this repeatedly. He sued Mr. Steele for libel in a London court, where the former spy said the information was raw call-in information and not verified.

• Three Russian oligarchs and shareholders in Alfa Bank were involved in Russian election interference and paid bribes to Mr. Putin. They deny the charges and have filed libel lawsuits.

• Mikhail Kalugin was chief of the economic section at the Russian Embassy in Washington. Mr. Steele accuses him of being a spy and of funding the hacking with skimmed-off pension funds. He was supposedly whisked out of Washington when the hacking scandal broke in August. Washington associates of Mr. Kalugin told The Washington Times that the diplomat announced his planned departure 10 months beforehand. He and his family returned to Moscow. He now works in the Foreign Ministry. A former senior U.S. government official told The Times that Mr. Kalugin was never internally identified as a spy.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/12/trump-dossiers-10-core-collusion-accusations-unver/[/QUOTE]

 

wrong post

 

Who in your view is the accuser. Peabody is the one who is accusing the Steele Dozier of being all garbage. But according to your bizarre logic he doesn't have to prove it. According tto your twisted losgic if I called your posts all garbage. I wouldn't have to prove it. That's ok I expect nothin from you but one way twisted self, serving logic. I don't blame you from running away from this post.

 

The op is accusing the Steele Dozier of being garbage but can't prove it. He can't even prove if 50% of it is garbage.

 

Please, read my link, I read yours and it's pure opine. Your are looking for a strawman to erect here in my opinion. Good luck with that.

 

No Trump crimes.

But at least the Dems tried hard. They did everything they could.

 

In a criminal situation, the burden of proof is on the side of the government, not the defendant.