It wasn't a hoax

Yet you link to this breathlessly hyped tripe. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2022/feb/1/john-durham-going-deep-into-russiagate/

 

I consider it a factual update.

 

Fake News. The Dossier was a lying hoax and everyone knew it. That you are still feigning ignorance isn't particularly believable.

AP reports:

“The Steele dossier has been largely discredited since its publication, with core aspects of the material exposed as unsupported and unproven rumors. A special counsel assigned to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia probe has charged one of Steele’s sources for the dossier with lying to the FBI, and has also charged a cybersecurity lawyer who worked for Hillary Clinton’s campaign with lying to the FBI during a 2016 meeting in which he relayed concerns about Alfa Bank.”

Just weeks ago this would have only appeared in what the lying propagandists who labor for the benefit of the Democrat Party call “right-wing” Russian disinformation publications. If all their lies were unintentional the lying fake news media that coordinated in insurrection against a duly elected president with "intelligence" officials would be scraping the floor with apologies.

Remember when lying Adam Schiff (D-Nutburger) called Tucker Carlson a “Russian asset” on live TV?

"The oligarchs who sued got what they wanted: acknowledgement that the whole Russian dossier story was baloney." Anyone who claims to still believe it is a liar or a fool, but why choose?

To quote Harry Reid when caught lying about Romney not paying taxes: “It worked, didn’t it?”

​

 

You are cherry picking, from the same WaPo article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...2fc476-a1b6-11ec-aeb0-3cf77f9cee6d_story.html

But recent sanctions filed against the oligarchs and the bank amid Russia’s war with Ukraine may have complicated their path toward proving defamation.

On Tuesday, lawyers for Fusion GPS asked a federal judge to dismiss the case, noting that sanctions “illustrate in stark detail that the alleged defamatory statements are true, and surely must persuade any reasonable trier of fact that none of these Plaintiffs will ever succeed in meeting their burden of proving these statements false.”

You see, the entire premise of the article you linked to was that the Oligarchs dropped the lawsuit for fear that the Dossier might prove to be true in some aspects the Oligarch's didn't want to pursue because the trial would allow prosecutors to probe.

the salient fact that Steele never presented as evidence, it was presented as RAW intel, and the degree on which it was relied to in the FISA warrants was some, but not so much that the IG deemed the warrants weren't predicated.

Thing is, you keep looking for crimes, yet you have failed to present any, by the FBI, by Joe Biden, or any one else.

Was the FBI sloppy on it's warrants? Sure, in general, that seems to be the case, but it wasn't specific to the Page warrants, it was the FBI in general, so no bias was determined by Horowitz.

But, this horse has been beaten to death. Y'all need to let it rest .

And what do you care? Trump is the most corrupt president n history and you don't seem to mind. What do you care?

 

Utter fallacious nonsense. The Russia-Trump hoax as perpetrated by Hillary and fully supported by Obama and his administration is as obvious, clear and prima facie as the nose on your face. It was designed as a hoax and implemented (very adroitly I'll add) like a hoax.

Eric Fromm, a political hack dressed up like a conservative, taps dances and farts all around the claim, picking up little insignificant crumbs here and there and ballyhooing them as if they meant something. Yet he never (per your excerpt) gets around to stating straight out that the Steele dossier and all of its trappings was not a hoax.

BTW, if you don't think the Atlantic is not a heavily biased progressive, left, Democrat rag you need to get out more often. The best that can be said about it it is better than Nation.

 

That your notion o Trump Russia not being a fraud is itself fraudulent.

 

No, because the Mueller Report is not fraudulent, and thus the Trump Russia narrative cannot be a hoax.

 

Those two thoughts are mutually exclusive. It is highly unlikely that the Mueller report was even partially fraudulent, but it was totally part of the hoax, though it is unclear if Mueller fully was aware of that...... though he probably suspected..

 

Speaking of mutually exclusive thoughts.............

Had Mueller not been remarkably fair (some would say partisan), something Ken Starr was not, he would have charged Donnie J with conspiring with Russian operatives in his quest to get unspecified dirt on Hillary. Alas, he deemed Big Fat Don's offspring to be too stupid to know he was breaking the law.

 

Mueller was not totally fair by a long shot, though I agree more fair-minded than Starr. Every one of Mueller's assistants were rabid junk yard dog died in the wool Democrat Trump haters -- allowed but hardly fair. The rest of your post is just the normal idle reveries. Mueller did not make those charges because he had no legal charges to make since no law was broken. Being fair had nothing to do with it.

 

It was all based on a fraud ergo yes it is a fraud. You can't even have obstruction of justice if there was no underlying crime to investigate in the first place.

 

Well, it's 100% a fact that you are incorrect on the latter assertion, that increases the likelihood you are incorrect on the former assertion.

"Obstruction Of Justice" is a stand alone crime. That is a fact.

https://www.findlaw.com/criminal/criminal-charges/obstruction-of-justice.html

 

You can not have obstruction of justice if there was no predicate for an investigation in the first place. Obstruction can only be a stand alone crime, though it seldom is, if the obstruction itself prevented the investigation of the crime. Ie if there was no crime to investigate there should have been no investigation to begin with.

 

/Thread

Way to nuke the OP so quickly. lol

 

Even if all of them were Dems......which they weren't........https://www.politifact.com/factchec...-checking-donald-trumps-claims-about-Mueller/

..........we both know that's just an unsubstantiated smear tactic substituting for actual evidence of bias.

 

I said there was nothing wrong with it, but it did indicate a bit of unfairness and clearly bias, which also per se is not necessarily wrong. All attorneys show bias..

Citing politifact to me is a waste of your time.

 

Citing any factual material to you is a waste of time.