Could it be that he was desperate to not get Trump elected because of his research? If I find that a teacher at a local school is a serial child molester, and try to turn him into the police, should they discount my evidence because I’m desperate to get him fired?
Could be…as I said upthread. I would hope that a spy wouldn’t form a conclusion like that without verifying the information. Did he consider that it was Russian propaganda since he was paying Kremlin sources?
No, the former head of British espionage in Russia never considered that spies would lie to him. You broke the whole thing wide open.
…is that a quote from Steele? Is that what he actually said, or is that the Ohr’s perception of what Steele was feeling? Its being portrayed as the former but a plain text reading of the memo suggests the latter. If it is the latter: then you are putting an awful lot of value on a cherry-picked out-of-context bit of information.
Steeles boss made it clear that they only went to the FBI in the first place because they believed the information that they had showed a strong likelihood that the Trump campaign was compromised. They had no obligation to do so. So of course he had passionate beliefs. He thought the democratic processes in the biggest most powerful country in the history of the world were being messed with: and they had evidence to back it up. Why would you expect him to be “impartial?”
They stopped co-operating with the FBI because they started to develop the belief that the FBI might be compromised. (The Nunes Memo suggests otherwise: ironically without the underlying information from the FBI we can’t actually verify this.)
I think its an entirely reasonable position for someone to hold. And after a year of the Trump administration it appears to be entirely the correct position to hold.
Cite for the payments please.
And of course he considered it. And he would have considered that his sources could be mistaken, and he would consider that his sources could be lying to him and he would be considering that he was being fed false information. Which is why he didn’t rely on single sources.
Since you typically make no verifiable claims on this board, and instead just ask question after question, finally you say something for which I can say, cite?
No, seriously. Explain how expertise is a fallacious argument.
That would be a shame. Oh wait.
Also, even if the Democratic Memo is incorrect, why does it even matter?
I didn’t read much ahead but I do hope that people pointed and laughed at this hilarious equivocation.
Oddly enough, a sizable number of pundits in various media have not been as charitable as our fine Trump Water-Carrier.
Besides the fact that I didn’t say “grave”, perhaps you can say what exceptionally grave damage a blown counter-intelligence investigation can do to National Security?
Lotsa folks gonna be "re"considering their intel supply channels now.
That makes precisely no sense. Would you kindly elaborate?
Really?
Say the FBI suspects that the SVR is recruiting a member of the DOD that has access to military secrets. They don’t know who the person is, but are building a file based partially on phone taps. The case gets blown somehow. SVR changes up how they contact their agent and the chances of catching the guy are now much smaller. Result is Russia has defense secrets.
Counterintelligence is really fucking highly classified. Compartmented for sure.
Do you understand the concept of trust? If you think you do, then try to understand the concept of trusting people who would just as soon see you dead.
I’m trying to figure out if this is an insult or an accusation of trolling. I’m going to go with insult. This is a warning for personal insults. If you feel you must, the BBQ Pit is right around the corner.
[/moderating]
GOP will publicly discuss top secret information for political reasons. The UK specifically said they’d reconsider information sharing.
Add that to the Israelis and Dutch that we know of.
Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen would be grave, if extreme, examples. People can die if moles or foreign agents are not identified in time, whether they be U.S. intelligence agents or foreign moles providing crucial intelligence to the U.S. In both of their cases, other individuals were suspected and sometimes even placed under surveillance or falsely accused of being foreign moles for the leaks done by Ames or Hanssen.
My apologies for stepping out of line.
Honest question:
Why is this relevant regarding a warrant against Carter Page?
And yet nothing of substance concerning Trump has been verified to date. Steele admitted that the claims were not verified. I think that if he was so sure Trump was colluding with the Russians then he is a fool.
…well of course. One of Steeles sources is now dead. Dead people are a poor source of intel.
…give me a break. Is that what you are relying on?
“The ex-British intelligence agent who authored the opposition research dossier on President Donald Trump and Russia did not pay the sources he used to compile the document, Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson testified to congressional Russia investigators, multiple sources familiar with the matter told CNN.”
Fusion claims they didn’t pay their sources. Your cite has somebody claiming that he had “learned” that Fusion had paid their sources. I’ll take the congressional testimony over hearsay thanks.
Do you mean “nothing of substance at all” or “nothing of substance” from the dossier?
Cite please? Which claims in particular? To what standard of verification?
I don’t think you know what Steele was thinking at all. I’m not even sure you’ve read the dossier in question. Have you?