FBI offered a 1,000,000 bribe to lie about dossier.

[hislegacy]

False
Deceptive/False

Eight bullet point you offer opinion on two with zero supporting links or evidence.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Eight bullet point you offer opinion on two with zero supporting links or evidence.

I don't see the relevance of Buzzfeed to the topics at issue in this thread.
You provided zero supporting links or evidence.

But at least on the first point I addressed, others have already described how your thread title is false.

 

[SimplyMe]

All that spin is making me dizzy!

I don't think it is his spin making you dizzy but, rather, your own.

• Hillary paid 12,000,000 to a spy to find dirt on Trump - truth
  [*]The 'dossier' was leaked by Buzz Feed - truth

True, if meant to be somewhat misleading.

• The only people who could have given the dossier to Buzz Feed were members of the Clinton Campaign - truth[/quote\

False. It could have been given by Steele. We know Steele gave the FBI a copy of his report -- part of why they offered him $1,000,000 to substantiate the claims. Beyond that, it could have been anyone at Fusion GPS, someone in the FBI, etc.

The FBI offered the former spy 1,000,000 to say it was verified information - truth

No, they offered him money to prove it was the truth. You talk about "grasping at words" but provide synonyms and not a definition of "substantiate." The definition is, "provide evidence to support or prove the truth of."

• The Dossier was extremely flawed and the FBI knew it - truth

I'm not sure they actually did, not at that point. They suspected it wasn't, since allegedly that is something Steele himself had told them. It is part of the reason they were willing to pay money to substantiate the claims, so they could verify if they were true.

• The FBI used knowingly flawed and unverified information to obtain a FISA warrant on a private Citizen - truth
  [*]To file the FISA application the applicant has to state all information is accurate and true to their knowledge - truth
  [*]The FBI signed the application knowing the information was not accurate, nor verified. - truth

To be clear, not "The FBI" but an FBI agent. Unfortunately, this isn't the first time such a thing has happened, and not just with the FBI but other branches of federal, state, and local law enforcement. Some law enforcement agents, unfortunately, bend the rules and those that do should be punished when they do.

The FOUR FISA warrants were the beginning of what culminated in the Mueller investigation.

False. Crossfire Hurricane was the beginning, which began before the FBI received the Steele document.

 

[hislegacy]

I offer the above search on the NSA website.

While blank forms for warrants are not published - the reader will not that an attestation is noted on virtually every piece shown here - including the link to the Judicial oversight of 702.

The FBI lied to the FISA court when they signed the attestation for the information in the Steele Dossier. They knew it was unverified when they attested it as true to their knowledge.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I offer the above search on the NSA website.

o... kay

The FBI lied to the FISA court when they signed the attestation for the information in the Steele Dossier.

When the FBI said "Source #1 said X", how was that a lie?

 

[hislegacy]

o... kay
When the FBI said "Source #1 said X", how was that a lie?

Vague and indefensible - and still not addressing my points - sorry, discussions are two way streets.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Vague and indefensible - and still not addressing my points - sorry, discussions are two way streets.

When the FBI agent wrote, in the FISA request, that "according to Source #1", a subsource reported that a meeting between Page and Russians occurred. Was it true or false that Source #1 said that?

 

[BPPLEE]

When the FBI agent wrote, in the FISA request, that "according to Source #1", a subsource reported that a meeting between Page and Russians occurred. Was it true or false that Source #1 said that?

View attachment 321927

What does this mean? That Page was trying to do what Hillary did?

 

[essentialsaltes]

What does this mean? That Page was trying to do what Hillary did?

What it means is beside the point.

The point is 'what did the FBI assert was accurate?' in the FISA request.

It is accurate that Source #1 said that his subsource said this meeting took place.

Source #1 had been found to be a "reliable" source for the FBI in the past, and the FBI deemed his information to be "credible" in this case. The claims about Page were accurately reported, and correctly sourced.

 

[hislegacy]

When the FBI agent wrote, in the FISA request, that "according to Source #1", a subsource reported that a meeting between Page and Russians occurred. Was it true or false that Source #1 said that?

View attachment 321927

Was it substantiated?

 

[BPPLEE]

What it means is beside the point.

The point is 'what did the FBI assert was accurate?' in the FISA request.

It is accurate that Source #1 said that his subsource said this meeting took place.

Source #1 had been found to be a "reliable" source for the FBI in the past, and the FBI deemed his information to be "credible" in this case. The claims about Page were accurately reported, and correctly sourced.

The bar for being a reliable source is very low.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Was it substantiated?

I asked a question first. sorry, discussions are two way streets. Let's take turns answering questions. You first.

 

[stevil]

• The Dossier was extremely flawed and the FBI knew it - truth

This isn't true. While some of the Dossier has been unverified, other parts of the Dossier have been verified.
Not much has been found untrue

• The FOUR FISA warrants were the beginning of what culminated in the Mueller investigation.

This isn't true. Crossfire Hurricane started by the FBI happened due to Popodaplous way prior to the Dossier. Trump fired Comey in an attempt to stop the investigation and Rod Rossenstien the Republican Acting Attorney General instigated Mueller as Special Council to continue this investigation and also to investigate if anyone helped Trump obstruct justice. The Dossier had nothing to do with any of this.

It was actually quite a smart thing of the Republicans to do this. It gave them full control and oversight of the investigation and they could then make sure that D Trump was never under investigation himself. Mueller (under Rossenstien's oversight) refused to investigate D Trump directly and refused to make any determination as to Trump's culpability in obstruction. Unlike other members of the Trump 2016 presidential campaign, D Trump's finances were never looked at.
A judge determined that when Bill Barr claimed that D Trump had not obstructed justice that Bill Barr and the DoJ had not seriously considered it at all.

Those that did get found guilty of crimes were then pardoned by Trump,
Flynn
Papadopoulis
Manafort
Van der Zwaan

 

[hislegacy]

I asked a question first. sorry, discussions are two way streets. Let's take turns answering questions. You first.

Fair enough: Here is my answer.

I have no earthly clue without knowing if the information had been verified or not. If you would be kind enough to now answer my question we can continue.

Was the information verified.

 

[hislegacy]

This isn't true. While some of the Dossier has been unverified, other parts of the Dossier have been verified.
Not much has been found untrue

That my friend is inaccurate. It is part of the reason why the Mueller investigation was almost a total flop in proving a Trump Russia connection.

Do we really have so short a memory that we do not remember it?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Fair enough: Here is my answer.

I have no earthly clue without knowing if the information had been verified or not.

That's not the issue.

You said "The only people who could have given the dossier to Buzz Feed were members of the Clinton Campaign"

The FBI writes a report that says:
"hislegacy stated the only people who could have given the dossier to Buzz Feed were members of the Clinton Campaign."

That statement is accurate.

It's like testimony. For the FISA judge to evaluate.

Was the information verified.

They attempted to do so through investigation. Part of which was to offer Steele $1 million if he could do so for them. That is, the topic of this thread was part of the FBI's efforts to verify or disconfirm the information.

As for that specific claim, I don't know whether it was verified or not. Earlier things I've mentioned have been verified, or at least Carter Page has admitted them (maybe he's lying).

 

[stevil]

That my friend is inaccurate. It is part of the reason why the Mueller investigation was almost a total flop in proving a Trump Russia connection.

Do we really have so short a memory that we do not remember it?

The Dossier has no impact at all on the outcome of the Special Council investigation

The investigation found lots of connections, and information exchange and secret meetings between Trump campaign members and Russians seeking to interfere in the 2016 election.
They just didn't determine that this would win a criminal case.
In some circumstances they determined it didn't reach the threshold of criminality, and in at least one case they say that a defence could be made that a key participant didn't know they would be breaking the law.

The Special Council investigation was very successful. The vast majority of indictments made were successful in the courts. Many people and organisations were criminally convicted. A lot of connections between Trump campaign members and Russians were documented and disclosed. And lots of incidents of potential Obstruction of Justice was also documented and disclosed.
The investigation and report was highly successful.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

FBI offered $1M to Christopher Steele to prove his Trump-Russia dossier, agent testifies

The FBI offered up to $1 million to former British spy Christopher Steele to substantiate his claims that Donald Trump was colluding with Moscow during his first run for president, an agent testified as the trial of a leading source for Steele’s mostly disproven dossier got underway.

Steele never collected the money because he could not “prove the allegations” made in his 35-page file on Trump’s ties to Russia, Auten said. The controversial work was commissioned by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.​

Put this in the "Trump was right" jar.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Source #1 had been found to be a "reliable" source for the FBI in the past, and the FBI deemed his information to be "credible" in this case.

But, as revealed in the Durham investigation, the FBI knew that the information provided by their "reliable source" was unreliable. So why would they use it for a FISA warrant?