Former Obama Official Admits She Lied About Having Evidence of Russian Collusion

disciple Clint · May 27, 2020

Sparagmos said:
They absolutely knew it, they even stayed it in the FISA application (I don’t recall the words they used, may not have been opposition research.).

I agree, that is exactly what I said by linking that article

Sparagmos · May 27, 2020

disciple Clint said:
I agree, that is exactly what I said by linking that article

The article is behind a paywall. I just read your post. The FBI never pretended the dossier was not politically motivated. It was in the FISA application, as I recall.

disciple Clint · May 27, 2020

Arcangl86 said:
Did they know it was false, or did they not yet verify it? Those are not the same thing.

would you like me to repeat what I said?

disciple Clint · May 27, 2020

Sparagmos said:
What is “it”? The dossier is a collection of allegations. By saying that “it” is false, it makes it sound as if you don’t even know what it is. Some of the allegations in the dossier have been found to be true, some have not, and some have not been verified.

It is the dossier. Now can you provide any evidence that any of the allegations have been found to be true?

disciple Clint · May 27, 2020

Sparagmos said:
The article is behind a paywall. I just read your post. The FBI never pretended the dossier was not politically motivated. It was in the FISA application, as I recall.

Good grief, it was fake, the fbi knew it was total garbage and without facts, they used it knowing that.

Sparagmos · May 28, 2020

disciple Clint said:
It is the dossier. Now can you provide any evidence that any of the allegations have been found to be true?

This was hashed out in depth on these forums and if you don’t know, you weren’t paying attention or are in denial of facts. You can read the dossier yourself, read the Wikipedia page, or do a google search to answer that question. The fact that you call it a “fake” leads me to believe that you don’t even understand what it is or what opposition research is.

disciple Clint · May 28, 2020

Sparagmos said:
This was hashed out in depth on these forums and if you don’t know, you weren’t paying attention or are in denial of facts. You can read the dossier yourself, read the Wikipedia page, or do a google search to answer that question. The fact that you call it a “fake” leads me to believe that you don’t even understand what it is or what opposition research is.

Here is my evidence, I am still waiting for yours, any time now.
FBI's spreadsheet puts a stake through the heart of Steele's dossier
The Trump Dossier Is Fake -- And Here Are The Reasons Why

KCfromNC · May 28, 2020

Evan Jellicoe said:
This sounds correct to you, but actually is not, unless by "value" you mean only goods (things) and ignore services, which is primarily what a government provides. Besides, if our federal government did not exist, Lockheed-Martin would cease to exist, since almost all of Lockheed's production is purchased by the government. The same for Raytheon, Northrop-Grumman, and Huntington-Ingalls, along with a fair number of much smaller private companies that sell almost exclusively to the Department of Defense.

Not to mention that who arpa-net thing. What's it called these days?

Sparagmos · May 28, 2020

disciple Clint said:
Here is my evidence, I am still waiting for yours, any time now.
FBI's spreadsheet puts a stake through the heart of Steele's dossier
The Trump Dossier Is Fake -- And Here Are The Reasons Why

I didn’t see a link to said spreadsheet but unless it shows nothing in the dossier to be verified, it doesn’t dispute my claim. Like I said, this was hashed out years ago and you can easily go to Wikipedia or the dossier itself, I’m not spending my time compiling the info only for you.

Evan Jellicoe · May 28, 2020

disciple Clint said:
Here is my evidence, I am still waiting for yours, any time now.
FBI's spreadsheet puts a stake through the heart of Steele's dossier
The Trump Dossier Is Fake -- And Here Are The Reasons Why

"One source estimated the spreadsheet found upward of 90 percent of the dossier’s claims to be either wrong, nonverifiable or open-source intelligence found with a Google search."

First, that means that about 10% of it was correct. Maybe that's a poor percentage, but it's not zero.
Second, the 90% includes "could not be verified," which means maybe it's true, maybe it isn't.
Third, the 90% includes true things which are discounted because they can easily be found with Google. In other words, they're true, but Steele doesn't get any points because they were easy to find.

Does this put a stake through the heart of Steele's claim? Maybe, but if so, I am actually not even sure what the heart of the claim even is. All I can say is that it is not technically true to say the the dossier was completely fake. It was never considered absolutely reliable. It was only considered credible. Beyond that, I don't have a stake in the outcome of the argument.

whatbogsends · May 28, 2020

Evan Jellicoe said:
"One source estimated the spreadsheet found upward of 90 percent of the dossier’s claims to be either wrong, nonverifiable or open-source intelligence found with a Google search."

First, that means that about 10% of it was correct. Maybe that's a poor percentage, but it's not zero.
Second, the 90% includes "could not be verified," which means maybe it's true, maybe it isn't.
Third, the 90% includes true things which are discounted because they can easily be found with Google. In other words, they're true, but Steele doesn't get any points because they were easy to find.

Does this put a stake through the heart of Steele's claim. Maybe, but if so, I am actually not even sure what the heart of the claim even is. All I can say is that it is not technically true to say the the dossier was completely fake. It was never considered absolutely reliable. It was only considered credible. Beyond that, I don't have a stake in the outcome of the argument.

Spot on. What would be meaningful is the percent of things that was actually shown to be wrong.

iluvatar5150 · May 28, 2020

Six pages in, it'd be nice if the OP acknowledged the dishonesty in the sources he cited.

K Watt · May 28, 2020

DaisyDay said:
See how well businesses do in failed states, states which have non-functioning governments.

No one is advocating for the abolishing of government.

The point which no one can deny is that governments must tax the production of citizens in order to do anything. It is inefficient, but necessary. Because it is inefficient, government functions should be limited to those that are necessary.

K Watt · May 28, 2020

iluvatar5150 said:
Six pages in, it'd be nice if the OP acknowledged the dishonesty in the sources he cited.

What is dishonest about it?

Did she make a false claim?

iluvatar5150 · May 28, 2020

K Watt said:
What is dishonest about it?

Already explained earlier in the thread.

Did she make a false claim?

No, nor did she admit to doing so.

VirOptimus · May 28, 2020

K Watt said:
No one is advocating for the abolishing of government.

The point which no one can deny is that governments must tax the production of citizens in order to do anything. It is inefficient, but necessary. Because it is inefficient, government functions should be limited to those that are necessary.

Goverment isnt necesseraliy inefficent just as private companies isnt necissarily efficent.

DaisyDay · May 28, 2020

K Watt said:
No one is advocating for the abolishing of government.

The point which no one can deny is that governments must tax the production of citizens in order to do anything. It is inefficient, but necessary. Because it is inefficient, government functions should be limited to those that are necessary.

Taxes are one form of revenue - there are also tariffs and fees. But you are simply wrong that government provides no value and that the value government workers provide is tainted because "taxes!!!"

K Watt · May 28, 2020

DaisyDay said:
Taxes are one form of revenue - there are also tariffs and fees. But you are simply wrong that government provides no value and that the value government workers provide is tainted because "taxes!!!"

Government creates no value. There's a difference.

Government performs a service by taking the value created by citizens and using it.

VirOptimus · May 28, 2020

K Watt said:
Government creates no value. There's a difference.

Government performs a service by taking the value created by citizens and using it.

Isnt the legal system f.ex. of value?

Or fire departements?

K Watt · May 28, 2020

VirOptimus said:
Isnt the legal system f.ex. of value?

Or fire departements?

I didn't say they have no value, I said they create no value.

Former Obama Official Admits She Lied About Having Evidence of Russian Collusion

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Regular Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

A nihilist who cares.

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Well-Known Member

A nihilist who cares.

Well-Known Member

Similar threads