caulfield12 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 https://www.yahoo.com/news/the-man-behind-t...-004221154.html The man behind the Trump dossier (now named) was a former British spy and trusted FBI asset Still, U.S. officials said the allegations were not easily dismissed, in part because Steele was a known quantity who had produced reliable information about Russia in the past. “He’s a meticulous professional, and there are no questions about his integrity,” said one U.S. official who has worked with Steele. “The information he provided me [about Russia] was valuable and useful.” A senior law enforcement official declined to talk about the nature of Steele’s relationship with the FBI. But the official confirmed that he was known to the FBI and that the bureau had already obtained copies of his reports months before Sen. John McCain handed FBI Director James Comey a dossier of Steele’s material in December. Asked why a two-page summary of the uncorroborated reports was included as part of last week’s intelligence briefing on Russian hacking, the official said that “it was an intelligence community decision” to do so after officials learned that his reports had been widely circulating among members of Congress and journalists. “It seemed very clear that these were going to see the light of day in the next couple of weeks,” the official said. The conclusion was that “it might be a good idea to tell [Trump] about them before they were publicly released.” The official declined to share U.S. officials’ current thinking about the reliability of the material, saying it is still being investigated. “It’s part of the larger look at the Russian influence campaign,” the official said. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden said the decision to include the material in the briefing was justifiable in light of the expectation that it was likely to leak. “Are you going to tell the guy?” Hayden said, referring to Trump. “You almost owe it to him.” Besides the news media, other intelligence services were likely to get their hands on the material. “It’s awkward, but duty kind of dictates that you tell him.” Still, Hayden added, the rules about what intelligence to share — or not share — appear to be shifting in the Trump era. “We’re off the map here,” he said. All that begs the question of what the public should make of Steele’s reports, in light of the “hall of mirrors” atmosphere that surrounds much intelligence reporting about the Kremlin. The format of the reports tracks the writings of professional intelligence reports, with each claim tied to a particular source, even if the sources (per standard procedure) are never identified. Steve Hall, a former top Russia operations officer for the CIA until 2015, said he found aspects of Steele’s reports to be credible, especially as they related to the Kremlin’s plans for hacking the U.S. election. “I find some of it indeed has the ring of truth,” said Hall. But, he added, “other parts of it are problematic.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) This begs the question why the FBI, at the behest of the Obama administration, didn't begin a more formal investigation of Trump a long time ago? One would guess that it's because nobody took seriously how much of a threat Trump was to actually win the election. If Hillary hadn't been "leading" for much of the 18 months prior to November, one wonders if they would have taken a different (albeit more political) approach. https://www.yahoo.com/news/marco-rubio-gril...-174525761.html The scariest part of this whole article is that Dr. Ben Carson and especially Jeff Sessions are in the "top half" in terms of the future Cabinet popularity ratings. Tillerson at the bottom, unsurprisingly. Of course, it's almost human nature for Americans to consider military leaders to be more likable than typical Wall Street/finance/banking figures in the last 10-15 years. Edited January 12, 2017 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 09:48 PM) This begs the question why the FBI, at the behest of the Obama administration, didn't begin a more formal investigation of Trump a long time ago? One would guess that it's because nobody took seriously how much of a threat Trump was to actually win the election. If Hillary hadn't been "leading" for much of the 18 months prior to November, one wonders if they would have taken a different (albeit more political) approach. Um...I have a different and fairly obvious alternate theory about why the FBI might not have been investigating Donald Trump... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Anywho, a BBC reporter wrote this today seemingly attaching a bit more credibility? And the former MI6 agent is not the only source for the claim about Russian kompromat on the president-elect. Back in August, a retired spy told me he had been informed of its existence by "the head of an East European intelligence agency". Later, I used an intermediary to pass some questions to active duty CIA officers dealing with the case file - they would not speak to me directly. I got a message back that there was "more than one tape", "audio and video", on "more than one date", in "more than one place" - in the Ritz-Carlton in Moscow and also in St Petersburg - and that the material was "of a sexual nature". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 09:35 PM) Anywho, a BBC reporter wrote this today seemingly attaching a bit more credibility? What's the Eastern European version of Interpol? Or that means a "spy shop" working out of an autonomous Eastern European nation? I would think the Baltic States, in particular, would be interested in anything they can dredge up on Russia, Trump and/or their connection/s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 09:31 PM) Um...I have a different and fairly obvious alternate theory about why the FBI might not have been investigating Donald Trump... Well, let's wait and see how many of the top FBI echelon maintain their positions...that should be telling. Interestingly, the new season of HOMELAND is based on the "presidential transition" between election and inauguration, but their hypothetical example has an isolationist/negotiations over "boots on ground" (think female Rand Paul) as President-Elect. Deals with the issue of the CIA and NSA trying to maintain their own clandestine/black ops in the face of a soon-to-be oppositional leadership on foreign policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg775 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 05:04 PM) Where is Greg to drop his "anyone but Hillary she is corrupt" post while we all talk about Trump refusing to divest while talking about making deals with Dubai and saying we learned a lot from that hacking Look, my position on Trump is clear. I did not vote for him. BUT I did not vote for Hillary. I feel she is just as bad as Trump, yes I do. My other statement is if they can find something REAL to impeach him on, by all means do so. I am not in favor of Pence replacing him. I am in favor of Obama remaining president a year (if Trump did something illegal with the Russians and Pence is on the same ticket so he can't take over) and an emergency election next November if Trump is kicked out of office. You say the logical succession would apply here and Pence has to be President. I say IF Trump is guilty of something, this is unprecedented, hence Congress should be able to concoct my scenario in a national emergency. Edited January 12, 2017 by greg775 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (greg775 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 10:51 PM) Look, my position on Trump is clear. I did not vote for him. BUT I did not vote for Hillary. I feel she is just as bad as Trump, yes I do. My other statement is if they can find something REAL to impeach him on, by all means do so. I am not in favor of Pence replacing him. I am in favor of Obama remaining president a year (if Trump did something illegal with the Russians and Pence is on the same ticket so he can't take over) and an emergency election next November if Trump is kicked out of office. You say the logical succession would apply here and Pence has to be President. I say IF Trump is guilty of something, this is unprecedented, hence Congress should be able to concoct my scenario in a national emergency. This isn't the Revolutionary War. What is the "national emergency?" Lack of faith in government and elections? Well, that's been the case since 1968 and definitely since Watergate. We can't just change the US Constitution (in this case, an amendment) and allow Obama to stay on another year. We also can't change the fact that they would have to PROVE Mike Pence was involved in SOMETHING REAL (in other words, colluded or was part of a conspiracy with Russia) and that would make Paul Ryan of Wisconsin the president. In terms of impeachment, we do have Clinton, Nixon (if not for preemptive resignation), Andrew Johnson...but that's IT. John Tyler came awfully close. 2/45 works out to be about 4.4%. None have been ultimately successful. The House impeached Johnson on February 24, 1868, three days after he dumped his secretary of war, a radical Republican named Edwin M. Stanton, allegedly in violation of the Tenure of Office Act. The U.S. Senate acquitted Johnson later that year by a narrow margin. Johnson was spared conviction and ouster from office by a single vote. See JFK book "PROFILES IN COURAGE" for more details, Greg. Why Impeachment Isn't More Common Impeachment is a very somber process in American politics, one that has been used sparingly and with the knowledge that lawmakers enter it with an extraordinary burden of proof. The result, the removal of an American president chosen by the citizenry, is unprecedented. Only the most serious of offenses should ever be pursued under mechanisms for impeaching a president, and they are spelled out in the Constitution of the United States: "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." Edited January 12, 2017 by caulfield12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/polit...WT.nav=top-news How a Sensational, Unverified Dossier Became a Crisis for Donald Trump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MexSoxFan#1 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) If ever this country needed a military coup d' etat to save it from an absolute buffoon sh*tshow... We were recently in Argentina visiting my wife's family and every single relative and/or family friend of her's always eventually asked me how we possibly could have voted for someone like Trump. In my attempt to defend America's reputation, I quickly reminded them that he got 3 million less votes than Clinton but our outdated and stupid election process gifted Trump the presidency. Yes, the world is laughing at us and they do think we are a bunch of idiots. Hard to argue otherwise ATM Edited January 12, 2017 by MexSoxFan#1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caulfield12 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/11/opinions/tru...nley/index.html Trump Nailed It (press conference analysis) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Hurtin Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Supposedly, US intel warns Israel not to share intel with Trump. Fear = Trump > Russia > Iran http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4906642,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 01:21 AM) If ever this country needed a military coup d' etat to save it from an absolute buffoon sh*tshow... We were recently in Argentina visiting my wife's family and every single relative and/or family friend of her's always eventually asked me how we possibly could have voted for someone like Trump. In my attempt to defend America's reputation, I quickly reminded them that he got 3 million less votes than Clinton but our outdated and stupid election process gifted Trump the presidency. Yes, the world is laughing at us and they do think we are a bunch of idiots. Hard to argue otherwise ATM Not sure why the world is laughing at us when pretty much every other country has done something as equally (if not more) stupid. Yes Trump seems like he is a disaster, but he was elected and that is what makes a Republic. We didnt change the rules when we didnt like the outcome, we didnt have a military coup. We accept the results and we do what we can within our system of checks and balances to make sure that even if a "fool" is elected President, that we do not all go down with the ship. Sometimes people need to learn a hard lesson before they can really make a change. IF this is the "worst" that has happened to our Republic in the last 200+ years, it still makes us one of, if not, the best freely elected societies. Edited January 12, 2017 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RegionSox Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 09:53 AM) Not sure why the world is laughing at us when pretty much every other country has done something as equally (if not more) stupid. Yes Trump seems like he is a disaster, but he was elected and that is what makes a Republic. We didnt change the rules when we didnt like the outcome, we didnt have a military coup. We accept the results and we do what we can within our system of checks and balances to make sure that even if a "fool" is elected President, that we do not all go down with the ship. Sometimes people need to learn a hard lesson before they can really make a change. IF this is the "worst" that has happened to our Republic in the last 200+ years, it still makes us one of, if not the best, freely elected societies. Yeah especially with a country like Argentina. They don't exactly have a long history of democracy. Just look at the dirty war in the 1970s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 10:53 AM) Not sure why the world is laughing at us when pretty much every other country has done something as equally (if not more) stupid. Yes Trump seems like he is a disaster, but he was elected and that is what makes a Republic. We didnt change the rules when we didnt like the outcome, we didnt have a military coup. We accept the results and we do what we can within our system of checks and balances to make sure that even if a "fool" is elected President, that we do not all go down with the ship. Sometimes people need to learn a hard lesson before they can really make a change. IF this is the "worst" that has happened to our Republic in the last 200+ years, it still makes us one of, if not, the best freely elected societies. Because we have a lot more nuclear weapons. It doesn't destroy the world when Argentina files for bankruptcy or the Philippines elects a person who goes around personally killing people. The world d*mn near blew itself up 9 years ago because we invented something called a Credit Default Swap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 11:14 AM) Because we have a lot more nuclear weapons. It doesn't destroy the world when Argentina files for bankruptcy or the Philippines elects a person who goes around personally killing people. The world d*mn near blew itself up 9 years ago because we invented something called a Credit Default Swap. Not sure how this at all is relevant to whether we are more or less foolish than other countries. So I guess its okay if a small country is horrific, like NK, because well they dont have as many nukes as we do. Interesting perspective on whether a country has a good/bad government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted January 12, 2017 Author Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 09:53 AM) Not sure why the world is laughing at us when pretty much every other country has done something as equally (if not more) stupid. Yes Trump seems like he is a disaster, but he was elected and that is what makes a Republic. We didnt change the rules when we didnt like the outcome, we didnt have a military coup. We accept the results and we do what we can within our system of checks and balances to make sure that even if a "fool" is elected President, that we do not all go down with the ship. Sometimes people need to learn a hard lesson before they can really make a change. IF this is the "worst" that has happened to our Republic in the last 200+ years, it still makes us one of, if not, the best freely elected societies. OH man, much worse has happened than this in the past 200 years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internment_of...anese_Americans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_segreg...e_United_States (1-3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauly_Shore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Um, Encino Man and In The Army Now are classics. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 Things that you want to believe are coincidences but you wonder how the Hell... Power goes out on Senate Democrat during questioning of CIA director nominee just as he's about to say the word Russia C-Span suddenly switched from broadcasting C-Span to broadcasting 10 minutes of Russia TV, the state propagandist channel. How the Hell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 02:51 PM) Things that you want to believe are coincidences but you wonder how the Hell... Power goes out on Senate Democrat during questioning of CIA director nominee just as he's about to say the word Russia C-Span suddenly switched from broadcasting C-Span to broadcasting 10 minutes of Russia TV, the state propagandist channel. How the Hell? Hackers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 04:54 PM) Hackers? If so, then that's a damning indictment on Obama's admn for allowing Russia to literally take control of our federal government's operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 04:55 PM) If so, then that's a damning indictment on Obama's admn for allowing Russia to literally take control of our federal government's operations. How is Obama responsible for CSPAN? Last I checked the govt isnt responsible for private companies and their internet security. Can I blame Obama cause Russian's hacked my Steam account (true story.)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigSqwert Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 02:59 PM) How is Obama responsible for CSPAN? He is not. Dude was just trolling per his M.O. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 12, 2017 -> 05:00 PM) He is not. Dude was just trolling per his M.O. I dont think Jenks is a troll. I do think he may not have known that CSPAN is not run by the govt and therefore hacking the CSPAN server isnt something Obama could control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenksismyhero Posted January 12, 2017 Share Posted January 12, 2017 (edited) I was referring to the hearing room lights. And I was mostly kidding. I think it would be impossible to hack a single room of lights. Edited January 12, 2017 by JenksIsMyHero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts