Watch: CNN Cuts Tulsi Gabbard Off as She Lays Out the Inconvenient Facts of the Russia Hoax

BPPLEE · Friday at 5:53 PM

The Barbarian said:
Steele first gathered information on Trump for a conservative republican group. Only later did he approach the Clinton campaign offering to do research on Trump.

Which of the actual allegations were proven false?
While the 35 pages that comprise Steele's dossier are brimming with explosive and explicit claims based on unidentified sources, some of the dossier's broad implications — particularly that Russian President Vladimir Putin launched an operation to boost Trump and sow discord within the U.S. and abroad — now ring true and were embedded in the memo Steele shared with the FBI before the agency decided to open an investigation.
The Trump-Russia dossier: why its findings grow more significant by the day

It's true that Trump himself was not charged with any crimes in the Russiagate scandal, but at least 8 of his underlings including his national security advisor (lying to the FBI about his contacts with Russian agents) were caught and convicted or pleaded guilty of serious crimes.

Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) funded the Steele dossier through the law firm Perkins Coie, which hired Fusion GPS, the research firm that commissioned former British spy Christopher Steele to compile the dossier. The dossier, containing unverified allegations about Donald Trump’s ties to Russia, was initially funded by Democrats, with payments funneled through Perkins Coie and reported as "legal services" on Federal Election Commission (FEC) forms, despite being for opposition research. in March 2022, the FEC settled with the Clinton campaign and the DNC, fining them a total of $113,000 ($8,000 for the Clinton campaign and $105,000 for the DNC) for misreporting the dossier payments as legal services rather than opposition research.
Source: Grok

The Barbarian · Friday at 6:22 PM

Barbarian, earlier:
Which of the actual allegations were proven false?

BPPLEE said:
Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) funded the Steele dossier through the law firm Perkins Coie, which hired Fusion GPS, the research firm that commissioned former British spy Christopher Steele to compile the dossier. The dossier, containing unverified allegations about Donald Trump’s ties to Russia, was initially funded by Democrats, with payments funneled through Perkins Coie and reported as "legal services" on Federal Election Commission (FEC) forms, despite being for opposition research. in March 2022, the FEC settled with the Clinton campaign and the DNC, fining them a total of $113,000 ($8,000 for the Clinton campaign and $105,000 for the DNC) for misreporting the dossier payments as legal services rather than opposition research.

So which of the actual allegations were proven false? One question. But no answer.

BPPLEE · Friday at 6:28 PM

The Barbarian said:
Barbarian, earlier:
Which of the actual allegations were proven false?

So which of the actual allegations were proven false? One question. But no answer.

Key Claims Proven False or Lacking Corroboration

Carter Page’s Alleged Meeting with Igor Sechin:
- Claim: The dossier alleged that Carter Page, a Trump campaign adviser, met with Igor Sechin, head of Rosneft, in July 2016 to discuss a deal involving a 19% stake in Rosneft in exchange for lifting U.S. sanctions on Russia.
- Status: This claim has been widely discredited. The 2019 Department of Justice Inspector General (IG) report found no evidence to support this meeting, and Page denied it under oath. The dossier’s primary sub-source, Igor Danchenko, told the FBI that the information was based on hearsay and lacked direct evidence. The Mueller report also found no corroboration for this specific allegation.
Michael Cohen’s Alleged Prague Meeting:
- Claim: The dossier claimed Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen met with Kremlin representatives in Prague in August 2016 to coordinate with Russian operatives.
- Status: Cohen has consistently denied traveling to Prague, and no definitive evidence has confirmed this trip. The Mueller report did not corroborate this claim, and Cohen’s passport records showed no travel to the Czech Republic during that period. While one outlet (McClatchy) reported possible evidence of Cohen’s presence, no other source confirmed it, and the claim remains unverified.
Allegations of Trump’s Sexual Misconduct in Moscow:
- Claim: The dossier alleged that Trump engaged in salacious activities, including a “golden shower” incident with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel in 2013, which Russia could use as kompromat.
- Status: This is one of the dossier’s most sensational claims and remains unverified. The IG report noted that the primary sub-source described this information as “rumor and speculation” and possibly said in “jest.” No corroborating evidence has emerged from the Mueller investigation or other probes. The source allegedly organizing the event also denied knowledge of it.
Source Reliability and Fabrication:
- Claim: The dossier relied on high-level Kremlin sources, including figures close to Putin, to support its allegations of a Trump-Russia conspiracy.
- Status: The 2019 IG report and 2023 Durham report revealed that the dossier’s primary sub-source, Igor Danchenko, relied on unverified hearsay, “word of mouth,” and conversations “over beers.” Danchenko himself told the FBI that corroboration for the dossier’s claims was “zero” and that some information was misrepresented as fact when it was Steele’s own analysis. The FBI’s 2018 briefing to Congress misrepresented the reliability of these sources, further undermining the dossier’s credibility.
Russian Hacking Attributed to U.S.-Based Operatives:
- Claim: The dossier suggested that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) hack was conducted by Russian operatives in the U.S. paid through Russian social security funds.
- Status: This claim is false. U.S. intelligence agencies, the Mueller report, and cybersecurity analyses confirmed that the DNC hack was executed by Russian military intelligence (GRU) operatives based in Russia, not U.S.-based actors. This error in the dossier further damaged its reliability.

Broader Context and Findings

Unverified Nature: The dossier was described by Steele himself as “raw intelligence” containing unverified and uncorroborated information. The 2019 IG report and 2023 Durham report concluded that the FBI was unable to corroborate any of the dossier’s substantive allegations.
FBI Misrepresentations: A declassified FBI document from 2018 showed that the FBI misled Congress about the dossier’s reliability, claiming the primary sub-source confirmed its contents when, in fact, the sub-source described the information as unverified hearsay.
Political Origins: The dossier was funded by the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign through Fusion GPS, which hired Steele. This has fueled criticism that it was a politically motivated document, though some argue its findings still warranted investigation.
Corroborated Elements: While some broader claims (e.g., Russia’s intent to interfere in the 2016 election, Putin’s dislike of Clinton) align with U.S. intelligence findings, these were independently verified and not reliant on the dossier. The dossier itself was not used in the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, and its specific allegations about Trump campaign collusion remain unproven.

Disputed Claims and Ongoing Debate

Some argue that not all dossier claims have been disproven, citing broader allegations about Trump campaign contacts with Russians (e.g., Paul Manafort’s ties to Ukraine or Carter Page’s meetings in Russia) that align with other findings. However, these are not unique to the dossier and were corroborated independently.
Others, including critics like Paul R. Gregory, argue the dossier’s reliance on improbable high-level Kremlin sources and logical inconsistencies (e.g., why Putin would withhold damaging Clinton material) suggests it may contain Russian disinformation or fabricated gossip.

ConclusionWhile the Steele dossier has not been entirely disproven due to the difficulty of verifying negative claims, specific allegations like the Carter Page-Sechin meeting, Michael Cohen’s Prague trip, and the salacious Trump hotel incident lack corroboration and are widely regarded as false or unreliable based on investigations like the Mueller report, IG report, and Durham report. The dossier’s reliance on hearsay, its political funding, and the FBI’s mishandling of its claims have further eroded its credibility. However, some broader themes align with independently verified intelligence, though these do not rely on the dossier itself. For a deeper dive into specific claims, the primary documents (IG report, Durham report) or court filings related to Igor Danchenko’s acquittal provide additional context
Source: Grok

Hans Blaster · Friday at 8:51 PM

A New Dawn said:
I didn't say that Comey said that the Russians hacked it, just that it was hacked, revealing state secrets. But, what, it doesn't matter unless it's Russia?

We were talking about the Russia issues. I don't know what this alleged "Hillary email hacking" is but his nothing to do with Russian election interference.

A New Dawn said:
Hillary Clinton, her campaign and the DNC paid for and hired (through her lawyer) the Fusion GPS opposition research group to create a dossier, written by Christopher Steele, with unverified and salatious gossip about Trump.

Again, this is still not correct. They did not "pay for" or even request a dossier or Steele. Clinton/DNC paid *Fusion GPS* fo oppo research. It was *Fusion GPS* that decided that they needed some information about Trump's repeated interactions (publicly recorded over years) with Russia, so Fusion GPS hired Orbis (Steele) to use his contacts in Russia. Unfortunately at least one of Steele's connections in Russia was loyal to Russian intel and they fed misinformation and garbage to Steele that ended up in his raw intel reports. Clinton/DNC did not request info on Russia.

A New Dawn said:
Over a million dollars went in from her campaign and she/the campaign and the DNC were both charged fines for it.

The fine was for recording the expense as "legal fees" instead of "oppo". It had nothing to do with the actual work done, which was legal.

A New Dawn said:
And don't suggest that the dossier would have been created without Hillary.

Nope. Put that on Fusion GPS.

A New Dawn said:
It was her baby from start to finish to take prying eyes off her illegal home server.

She was running for president and wanted things to use against her opponent. The oppo on Trump had nothing to do with any of her problems, it was just standard oppo work on the opponent.

A New Dawn said:
DNC, Clinton campaign agree to Steele dossier funding fine

Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee have agreed to pay $113,000 to settle a Federal Election Commission investigation.

apnews.com

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/clinton-dnc-steele-dossier-fusion-gps/

Clinton campaign, DNC fined by FEC for lying about Steele dossier payments

The Clinton campaign and the DNC will be forced to pay $8,000 and $105,000 respectively for mislabeling payments that ultimately went to Fusion GPS.

nypost.com

Did you actually read them, because it doesn't look like it.

A New Dawn said:
When you repeatedly claim that Trump or his pals or his family did something that YOU consider verboten and get all up in arms about it, yet overlook the same exact thing that was done by people on the other side of the aisle, I feel it is a valid question. Sorry if you don't agree, but everyone sees it.

This thread is exactly that -- a distraction drummed up by Russia's Girlfriend (Tulsi) to generate nonsense discussion about things that didn't happen to keep eyes away from Trump's pal Epstein.

Hans Blaster · Friday at 9:04 PM

The Barbarian said:
Steele first gathered information on Trump for a conservative republican group. Only later did he approach the Clinton campaign offering to do research on Trump.

Fusion GPS only hired Steele after getting the Clinton contract.

RocksInMyHead · Friday at 9:46 PM

A New Dawn said:
Comeys claim was that she was extremely careless and the server was likely hacked.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/14/doj-watchdog-james-comey-hillary-clinton-server-647020

Whether or not she was careless is irrelevant to this discussion. And Comey did not say that the server was "likely" hacked any more than he said it was "definitely" hacked. Did you even read the article you linked?

In his July 5, 2016, statement on the FBI’s investigation into the server that Clinton used while secretary of state, Comey said it was “possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.”

Many things are possible. It's possible that I'm actually an AI running a LLM trained on the writings of a geologist-cum-IT-guy. It's possible that your email has been hacked. But possibilities are proof of precisely zilch. Just as Clinton was careless in her use of a personal email server, James Comey was careless in the language that he used to discuss the investigation of a presidential candidate.

According to the report, an FBI forensics agent told the IG’s office that he was “fairly confident that there wasn’t an intrusion,” and a letterhead memorandum, or LHM, summarizing the FBI’s findings said there was no “evidence confirming that Clinton’s email server systems were compromised by cyber means.”

No public evidence has emerged to indicate that hackers compromised Clinton’s private server, although the FBI did determine that some of the messages she sent from the server were exposed when someone hacked her aides’ personal email accounts.

A New Dawn said:
Maybe destroy wasn’t the right word. A couple days after the home server was discovered, she was subpoenaed to turn over the server to search the emails for the Benghazi investigation. Before turning it over, she instructed her aide to delete all the emails, then turned it in. And somehow, through h the miracle of the deep state, she was found not guilty of intentional destruction of evidence.

Her aide instructed their IT service provider to impose a 60-day retention policy on personal emails in December of 2014 after identifying and sequestering all work-related emails they could find for the State Department. They forgot to flag the older emails for deletion, however, and didn't realize until the subpoena came down in March of 2015, at which point, one of their techs wiped the archive that they were supposed to have already wiped. Was that dumb? Yep. Potentially illegal? Perhaps. But there's no evidence of foul play on the part of Clinton or her aides there. Just an IT tech trying to cover his butt after realizing he screwed up.

F.B.I. Papers Offer Closer Look at Hillary Clinton Email Inquiry (Published 2016)

Mrs. Clinton was questioned about her use of a private email system to discuss drone strikes and allowing aides to destroy correspondence.

web.archive.org

The Barbarian · Friday at 10:15 PM

So which of the actual allegations were proven false? One question. But no answer.

BPPLEE said:
Key Claims Proven False or Lacking Corroboration

"Or lacking corroboration" But we still don't have a lost of those proven false. For reasons everyone understands.

BPPLEE · Friday at 10:23 PM

The Barbarian said:
So which of the actual allegations were proven false? One question. But no answer.

"Or lacking corroboration" But we still don't have a lost of those proven false. For reasons everyone understands.

I can only conclude that you didn't read the post

eclipsenow · 2025-08-09T04:33:52-0500

probinson said:
Perhaps the reason I'm being a bit hyperbolic in my description is to counter the incessant downplaying of what happened in 2016.

Yes - one has to be VERY hyperbolic to try and say 2016 was anything like the 2020 election, the Big Lie, the Insurrection, the death of 5 involved, the 16 sentenced for violent assault of police officers, the 300 who committed assault and offences against the Capitol - and the 1600 who march illegally on Capitol grounds. ALL pardoned by Trump!

So on the one hand you can be hyperbolic about 2016 - and on the other hand are not interested in 'gradation' of 2020?
Interesting.
I thought that was what was happening.

eclipsenow · 2025-08-09T04:37:41-0500

probinson said:
I believe Democrats were opportunistic in capitalizing on dubious information to push a narrative that simply was not true.

Then you are wishing away solid facts. Nothing Gabbard has said has overturned the facts. Steel Dossier? Irrelevant fluff.

BPPLEE · 2025-08-09T07:55:12-0500

eclipsenow said:
Then you are wishing away solid facts. Nothing Gabbard has said has overturned the facts. Steel Dossier? Irrelevant fluff.

Yes, the Steele dossier was used as a key component in obtaining FISA surveillance warrants on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign aide, in October 2016. The dossier, compiled by Christopher Steele and funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee, played a "central and essential role" in the FBI's decision to seek the FISA warrant, according to the Justice Department’s Inspector General report. However, the report also noted that the FBI made 17 "significant inaccuracies and omissions" in the FISA applications, including failing to verify much of the dossier’s information and not disclosing its political origins to the FISA court. The FBI relied heavily on the dossier despite its primary sub-source, Igor Danchenko, later stating that the information was unverified, based on hearsay, and included conversations "over beers" or in "jest." Some sources, like a Bloomberg report, claim the dossier was not the sole basis for the warrants, suggesting other intelligence may have been used, but the dossier’s role was significant

The Barbarian · 2025-08-09T08:43:57-0500

Bottom line? The Mueller investigation caught 8 Trump underlings involved in collusion with Russian agents and/or attempts to cover up the collusion and secured convictions or guilty pleas from them.

Yes, Trump pardoned some of the criminals, but they are still criminals. Like Trump.

A New Dawn · 2025-08-09T09:05:31-0500

The Barbarian said:
Bottom line? The Mueller investigation caught 8 Trump underlings involved in collusion with Russian agents and/or attempts to cover up the collusion and secured convictions or guilty pleas from them.

Yes, Trump pardoned some of the criminals, but they are still criminals. Like Trump.

Only because of a highly weaponized deep state. Many took plea deals rather than going to jail for crimes they did not commit, because to highly partisan politicians, the appearance of ‘collision’ is just as bad as collusion, itself.

BPPLEE · 2025-08-09T09:08:38-0500

A New Dawn said:
Only because of a highly weaponized deep state. Many took plea deals rather than going to jail for crimes they did not commit, because to highly partisan politicians, the appearance of ‘collision’ is just as bad as collusion, itself.

They couldn't afford to keep paying attorneys for their defense.

A New Dawn · 2025-08-09T09:10:29-0500

BPPLEE said:
They couldn't afford to keep paying attorneys for their defense.

Mindreading in action.

The Barbarian · 2025-08-09T09:21:38-0500

Bottom line? The Mueller investigation caught 8 Trump underlings involved in collusion with Russian agents and/or attempts to cover up the collusion and secured convictions or guilty pleas from them.

Yes, Trump pardoned some of the criminals, but they are still criminals. Like Trump.

A New Dawn said:
Only because of a highly weaponized deep state.

"All the judges and police are deep state! No fair!! Whaaaaa!"

The Founders deliberately made the Federal government too deep for one man to control on his own. These criminals committed felonies. They got caught. No point in whining about it.

A New Dawn · 2025-08-09T09:43:14-0500

The Barbarian said:
Bottom line? The Mueller investigation caught 8 Trump underlings involved in collusion with Russian agents and/or attempts to cover up the collusion and secured convictions or guilty pleas from them.

Yes, Trump pardoned some of the criminals, but they are still criminals. Like Trump.

"All the judges and police are deep state! No fair!! Whaaaaa!"

The Founders deliberately made the Federal government too deep for one man to control on his own. These criminals committed felonies. They got caught. No point in whining about it.

The founding fathers never dreamed of a time when the Congress would consist of life-time appointees who have no idea what the common man deals with. The founding fathers believed that persons serving their nation would be businessmen and landowners who served their country for short periods of time and then went back to the real world to live under the laws they created. The founding fathers believed in a small government of the people, by the people and for the people, not a gargantuan entity that ruled the country with a partisan iron fist, so far removed from their ideals that we might as well not have fought the revolutionary war.

The Barbarian · 2025-08-09T10:12:32-0500

A New Dawn said:
The founding day ever dreamed of a time when the Congress would consist of life-time appointees who have no idea what the common man deals with.

In fact, they set up lifetime appointees. And Congress depends on elections every few years. And the founders generally believed in a "natural aristocracy" that excluded the poor, women, and black people. There's a cost to sleeping in history class.

A New Dawn said:
The founding fathers believed that persons serving their nation would be businessmen and landowners who served their country for short periods of time and then went back to the real world to live under the laws they created.

Right. They excluded poor people from the system. They were great men, but they were hampered by the prejudices of their time.

A New Dawn said:
The founding fathers believed in a small government of the people, by the people and for the people, not a gargantuan entity that ruled the country with a partisan iron fist,

Like a president who would threaten private organizations for not doing what he wants? Here we are today.

A New Dawn said:
so far removed from their ideals that we might as well not have fought the revolutionary war.

That's our Donald. But now he's losing support. Hopefully and the Epstein affair proceeds, that will continue.

A New Dawn · 2025-08-09T12:52:47-0500

The Barbarian said:
In fact, they set up lifetime appointees. And Congress depends on elections every few years. And the founders generally believed in a "natural aristocracy" that excluded the poor, women, and black people. There's a cost to sleeping in history class.

Right. They excluded poor people from the system. They were great men, but they were hampered by the prejudices of their time.

Like a president who would threaten private organizations for not doing what he wants? Here we are today.

What “lifetime appointees” are you talking about? There have been term limits in place, even at the federal level under the Articles of Confederation (the first US constitution). But because it had deficiencies, they set up the Constitution we have now, with the terms conveniently set by the representatives at the time. Though there were no term limits in place, everyone had to be re-elected to continue serving. And Congress decided it needed to set term limits for the presidency after FDR was elected for his 4th term, but they themselves had no limits. But their idea (the founding fathers), whether you like it or agree with it or not, was for them to (voluntarily, I suppose) serve for a short while and go back to the real world and live under the laws they created.

The poor already lived under the laws set in place, congressmen don’t. The point was, if the congressmen had to live under the laws they set, they would create fairer laws.

No, like the prior administration who ruled by fiat from the shadows under the guise of a duly elected presidency. Weaponizing the governmental organizations against their political opponents and everyday citizens who dared to disagree with them, censoring the people so no discourse can be had.

The Barbarian · 2025-08-09T16:32:27-0500

A New Dawn said:
What “lifetime appointees” are you talking about?

Federal judges.

A New Dawn said:
But because it had deficiencies, they set up the Constitution we have now, with the terms conveniently set by the representatives at the time.

Four years or less seems like a reasonable term to me. That bothers you?

A New Dawn said:
The poor already lived under the laws set in place, congressmen don’t.

The point until the law was reformed, the poor had no say in many places in America. Neither did women or black people.

A New Dawn said:
No, like the prior administration who ruled by fiat from the shadows under the guise of a duly elected presidency.

You mean the present administration. As you know, even Trump's people admitted that he lost the 2020 election. So did court after court as Trump spun out dozens of lawsuits in a frantic effort to undo the election results. He crossed the line by instigating an attack on the Capitol and by trying to convince a state official to "find" him enough votes to win. Which is why he was impeached.

Watch: CNN Cuts Tulsi Gabbard Off as She Lays Out the Inconvenient Facts of the Russia Hoax

Well-Known Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Well-Known Member

On August Recess

On August Recess

God is innocent; Noah built on a floodplain!

Crabby Old White Guy

Well-Known Member

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Scripture is God's word, Science is God's works

Well-Known Member

Crabby Old White Guy

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

Well-Known Member

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

Crabby Old White Guy

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

Crabby Old White Guy

Bind my wandering heart to thee!

Crabby Old White Guy

Similar threads