Russiagate Continued - Topic

Member

Posts: 26,025

Joined: Jun 14 2006

Gold: 5,300.00

Warn: 10%

Oct 12 2022 04:48pm

here is the first thread if anyone is interested how a lot of this developed over time.
https://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=76154721&f=119

Quote (IceMage @ Dec 14 2020 06:50pm)

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1338614514493878273

Barr out. He left with a letter sucking up to Trump and replaying the "Russia hoax!" nonsense. One of the most corrupt AGs in modern history.

https://nypost.com/2022/05/20/hillary-clinton-okd-sharing-trump-russia-data-campaign-manager/

Quote

Hillary Clinton personally authorized her campaign to share since-debunked computer data linking Donald Trump with a Russian bank, according to bombshell testimony from her 2016 campaign manager Friday.

Robby Mook, testifying as a witness in defense of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, told jurors that he discussed the matter with the Democratic nominee shortly before Election Day.

Mook described his end of the conversation with Clinton as him telling her, “Hey, we have this and we want to share it with a reporter.”

“She agreed to that,” he said.

The stunning disclosure is the first evidence showing Clinton was aware of allegations of a purported secret back channel between a Trump Organization server and Russia’s Alfa Bank — before the theory emerged publicly eight days before the election.

Mook also acknowledged that the campaign hadn’t verified the accuracy of the data at the time.

“Part of the point of giving it to a reporter was they could run it down further,” he said.

“A reporter could vet the information and then decide to print it.”

Mook testified that he was first told about the Trump-Alfa Bank claims by campaign general counsel Marc Elias. Mook added that he didn’t recall where the data suggesting the connection came from.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/oct/21/fbi-file-disproves-trump-alfa-bank-link/

Quote

Special counsel John Durham has obtained the complete FBI investigative file on the bureau’s conclusion that there was no secret internet communication channel in 2016 between then-candidate Donald Trump and Alfa Bank, a large Russian lender controlled by Kremlin-tied billionaire oligarchs.

Mr. Durham said Wednesday in a U.S. District Court filing that the electronic case file will soon be turned over to defendant Michael A. Sussmann. The former federal prosecutor doggedly pushed the Alfa-Trump conspiracy when he was legal counsel for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and for months after the election.

Mr. Durham brought a federal indictment Sept. 16 that accuses Mr. Sussmann of lying when he pitched the Alfa claim to then-FBI General Counsel James Baker during the election. He told Mr. Baker he was not representing a client when in fact he was briefing for the campaign, the indictment charges.

He also failed to state that he represented a technology executive who fueled the entire Alfa Bank conspiracy claims by giving Mr. Sussmann digital logs of supposed computer server-to-server hookups, according to the indictment.

The Alfa-Trump link first surfaced in October 2016 news stories promoted by Fusion GPS, a private investigative firm hired by Democrats and the Clinton campaign via Mr. Sussmann’s law firm, Perkins Coie. Fusion GPS also pitched the discredited Christopher Steele dossier that alleged a number of unfounded felonies by Mr. Trump and his aides.

jesus, this one is even CNN
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/11/politics/steele-dossier-fbi-durham-danchenko/index.html

Quote

Shortly before the 2016 election, the FBI offered retired British spy Christopher Steele “up to $1 million” to prove the explosive allegations in his dossier about Donald Trump, a senior FBI analyst testified Tuesday.

The cash offer was made during an overseas October 2016 meeting between Steele and several top FBI officials who were trying to corroborate Steele’s claims that the Trump campaign was colluding with Russia to win the election.

FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten testified that Steele never got the money because he could not “prove the allegations.”

Auten also said Steele refused to provide the names of any of his sources during that meeting, and that Steele didn’t give the FBI anything during that meeting that corroborated the claims in his explosive dossier.

although i'd like to change "explosive dossier" to "fake and debunked blog of bs" though.

can you remind us why this wasn't propaganda pushed by the Clinton Campaign and DNC, and why the FBI had no role in perpetuating false information to spy on and debilitate the Trump Campaign?

YeeHaw

Member

Posts: 3,908

Joined: Jun 20 2022

Gold: 0.00

Warn: 30%

Oct 12 2022 05:40pm

Good luck buddy. Nobody here will acknowledge anything that doesn’t make a Republican look like a corrupt loony toon :drool:

HeLiCaL

Member

Posts: 38,137

Joined: May 28 2006

Gold: 0.00

Oct 12 2022 06:31pm

there goes BUST yet another left-wing Fascist "democrat" conspiracy theory concocted with the sole purpose to rig & steal the 2020 election

still waiting for the "CoLlUsIoN proving documents" that Adam Schiff claimed to have on CNN about 20 times, hopelessly dividing the country with lies & hopelessly branwashing his dumbfuck base to this day

YeeHaw

Member

Posts: 3,908

Joined: Jun 20 2022

Gold: 0.00

Warn: 30%

Oct 12 2022 06:49pm

Quote (HeLiCaL @ Oct 12 2022 07:31pm)

They will never bring themselves to admit they were wrong, because to these maniacs the truth actually hurts and is considered actual violence.

IceMage

Member

Posts: 49,289

Joined: Jun 18 2006

Gold: 11.77

Oct 12 2022 06:53pm

So the ultimate result of the Durham probe, which started with the proposition that the FBI and DOJ were trying to take down Trump somehow, is that there's basically nothing here. There were dozens of indictments related to Russiagate, and there's nothing untoward enough to land in an indictment for those who focused their aims on those who were investigating the national security threat.

Why would anyone cheer for an obvious victory? The premise was wrong. The stolen election nonsense is nonsense. Nobody with seriousness took it seriously. But I suppose it's good that the public knows it. That's the end of it.

HeLiCaL

Member

Posts: 38,137

Joined: May 28 2006

Gold: 0.00

Oct 12 2022 07:06pm

Quote (IceMage @ Oct 13 2022 03:53am)

So the ultimate result of the Durham probe, which started with the proposition that the FBI and DOJ were trying to take down Trump somehow, is that there's basically nothing here.

FBI strongarmed the US social media giants to BLACKLIST a FACTUAL story of Biden family corruption via selling access to the white house for personal gain, rigging the 2020 election as a result
(but its STILL funny how tinfoilhatters like you STILL lie through your teeth despite undeniable fact)

furthermore, a cabal of government agents is now caught in a scheme to rig the election & betray their country by running a disinformation campaign against a sitting United States president in order to steal his second presidential term:
(the left-wing fascist "Democrat" party is yet to persecute any for clear treason)

Mike Hayden, former CIA director, now analyst for CNN: Didn’t respond.

Jim Clapper, former director of national intelligence, now CNN pundit: “Yes, I stand by the statement made AT THE TIME, and would call attention to its 5th paragraph. I think sounding such a cautionary note AT THE TIME was appropriate.”

Leon Panetta, former CIA director and defense secretary, now runs a public policy institute at California State University: Declined comment.

John Brennan, former CIA director, now analyst for NBC and MSNBC: Didn’t respond.

Thomas Fingar, former National Intelligence Council chair, now teaches at Stanford University: Didn’t respond.

Rick Ledgett, former National Security Agency deputy director, now a director at M&T Bank: Didn’t respond.

John McLaughlin, former CIA acting director, now teaches at Johns Hopkins University: Didn’t respond.

Michael Morell, former CIA acting director, now at George Mason University: Didn’t respond.

Mike Vickers, former defense undersecretary for intelligence, now on board of BAE Systems: Didn’t respond.

Doug Wise, former Defense Intelligence Agency deputy director, teaches at University of New Mexico: Didn’t respond.

Nick Rasmussen, former National Counterterrorism Center director, now executive director, Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism: Didn’t respond.

Russ Travers, former National Counterterrorism Center acting director: “The letter explicitly stated that we didn’t know if the emails were genuine, but that we were concerned about Russian disinformation efforts. I spent 25 years as a Soviet/Russian analyst. Given the context of what the Russians were doing at the time (and continue to do — Ukraine being just the latest example), I considered the cautionary warning to be prudent.”

Andy Liepman, former National Counterterrorism Center deputy director: “As far as I know I do [stand by the statement] but I’m kind of busy right now.”

John Moseman, former CIA chief of staff: Didn’t respond.

Larry Pfeiffer, former CIA chief of staff, now senior advisor to The Chertoff Group:
Didn’t respond.

Jeremy Bash, former CIA chief of staff, now analyst for NBC and MSNBC: Didn’t respond.

Rodney Snyder, former CIA chief of staff: Didn’t respond.

Glenn Gerstell, former National Security Agency general counsel: Didn’t respond.

David Priess, former CIA analyst and manager: “Thank you for reaching out. I have no further comment at this time.”

Pam Purcilly, former CIA deputy director of analysis: Didn’t respond.

Marc Polymeropoulos, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.

Chris Savos, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.

John Tullius, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.

David A. Vanell, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.

Kristin Wood, former CIA senior intelligence officer, now non-resident fellow, Harvard: Didn’t respond.

David Buckley, former CIA inspector general: Didn’t respond.

Nada Bakos, former CIA analyst and targeting officer, now senior fellow, Foreign Policy Research Institute: Didn’t respond.

Patty Brandmaier, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.

James B. Bruce, former CIA senior intelligence office: Didn’t respond.

David Cariens, former CIA intelligence analyst: Didn’t respond.

Janice Cariens, former CIA operational support officer: Didn’t respond.

Paul Kolbe, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.

Peter Corsell, former CIA analyst: Didn’t respond.

Brett Davis, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.

Roger Zane George, former national intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.

Steven L. Hall, former CIA senior intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.

Kent Harrington, former national intelligence officer: Didn’t respond.

Don Hepburn, former national security executive, now president of Boanerges Solutions LLC: “My position has not changed any. I believe the Russians made a huge effort to alter the course of the election . . . The Russians are masters of blending truth and fiction and making something feel incredibly real when it’s not. Nothing I have seen really changes my opinion. I can’t tell you what part is real and what part is fake, but the thesis still stands for me, that it was a media influence hit job.”

Timothy D. Kilbourn, former dean of CIA’s Kent School of Intelligence Analysis: Didn’t respond.

Ron Marks, former CIA officer: Didn’t respond.

Jonna Hiestand Mendez, former CIA technical operations officer, now on board of the International Spy Museum: “I don’t have any comment. I would need a little more information.”

Emile Nakhleh, former director of CIA’s Political Islam Strategic Analysis Program, now at University of New Mexico: “I have not seen any information since then that would alter the decision behind signing the letter. That’s all I can go into. The whole issue was highly politicized and I don’t want to deal with that. I still stand by that letter.”

Gerald A. O’Shea, former CIA senior operations officer: Didn’t respond.

Nick Shapiro, former CIA deputy chief of staff and senior adviser to the director: Didn’t respond.

John Sipher, former CIA senior operations officer: Declined to comment.

Stephen Slick, former National Security Council senior director for intelligence programs:
Didn’t respond.

Cynthia Strand, former CIA deputy assistant director for global issues: Didn’t respond.

Greg Tarbell, former CIA deputy executive director: Didn’t respond.

David Terry, former National Intelligence Collection Board chairman: Couldn’t be reached.

Greg Treverton, former National Intelligence Council chair, now senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies: “I’ll pass. I haven’t followed the case recently.”

Winston Wiley, former CIA director of analysis: Couldn’t be reached.

tagged4nothing

Member

Posts: 26,025

Joined: Jun 14 2006

Gold: 5,300.00

Warn: 10%

Oct 12 2022 07:27pm

Quote (IceMage @ Oct 12 2022 08:53pm)

i have a whole list of names i can think of, but i'd expect you to think no differently when the focus isn't Trump.

Quote (IceMage @ Nov 15 2017 07:44pm)

Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence officer who compiled an explosive dossier of allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, believes it to 70% to 90% accurate, according to a new book on the covert Russian intervention in the 2016 US election.

The book, Collusion: How Russia Helped Donald Trump Win, by Guardian journalist Luke Harding, quotes Steele as telling friends that he believes his reports – based on sources cultivated over three decades of intelligence work – will be vindicated as the US special counsel investigation digs deeper into contacts between Trump, his associates and Moscow.

“I’ve been dealing with this country for thirty years. Why would I invent this stuff?” Steele is quoted as saying.

One of the reasons his dossier was taken seriously in Washington in 2016 was Steele’s reputation in the US for producing reliable reports on Russia, according to Harding’s book.

Between 2014 and 2016, he authored more than a hundred reports on Russia and Ukraine, which were commissioned by private clients but shared widely within the state department and passed across the desks of the secretary of state, John Kerry, and the assistant secretary Victoria Nuland, who led the US response to the annexation of Crimea and the covert invasion of eastern Ukraine.

The sources for those reports were the same as those quoted in the dossier on Trump, which included allegations that the Kremlin had personally compromising material on the US president including sex tapes recorded during a trip to Moscow in 2013, and that Trump and his associates actively colluded with Russian intelligence to influence the election in his favour.

Years earlier, Steele shared the results of his investigation of the global football organisation, Fifa, with a senior FBI official in Rome that let to an investigation by US federal prosecutors, and ultimately the arrest of seven Fifa officials.

“The episode burnished Steele’s reputation inside the US intelligence community and the FBI. Here was a pro, a well-connected Brit, who understood Russian espionage and its subterranean tricks. Steele was regarded as credible,” Harding writes.

The book traces Steele’s career as an MI6 officer, sent to Moscow in 1990 under cover of working as the second secretary in the UK chancery division at the embassy.

While there, the young spy was witness to the 1991 attempted coup and looked on when Boris Yeltsin climbed on a tank in central Moscow to denounce the plotters.

Steele left Moscow in 1993 and was later posted to Paris before taking a senior post on MI6’s Russia desk in London in 2006. Because his name had been on a list of MI6 officers leaked and published in 1999, he was unable to return to Moscow. But he was chosen to lead the MI6 investigation of the assassination of former FSB officer, Alexander Litvinenko, by radioactive poisoning in 2006.

Steele left MI6 in 2009, to start up a commercial intelligence firm, Orbis, with a former colleague, Christopher Burrows. Soon after its founding, Orbis began working with Fusion GPS, a Washington-based company doing political and business research, which commissioned the investigation of Trump in 2016.

Steele delivered a total of 16 reports to Fusion between June and early November 2016, but his sources started to go quiet from July, when Trump’s ties to Russia came under scrutiny. According to Harding’s account, he was shocked by the extent of collusion his sources were reporting.

“For anyone who reads it, this is a life-changing experience,” Steele told friends.

Steele flew to Rome in June to brief his FBI contact with whom he had shared his Fifa report, and returned in September to meet a full FBI team of investigators. He described their response as “shock and horror”, and they asked him to explain his methods and to pass on future reports.

However, as the weeks went by leading up to the 8 November election, the FBI told him it could not go public with material involving a presidential candidate, and then his FBI contacts went silent altogether. Steele told a friend it was clear he had passed on a “radioactive hot potato”.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/nov/15/christopher-steele-trump-russia-dossier-accurate

to which you stated along-side this...

This post was edited by tagged4nothing on Oct 12 2022 07:28pm

Cascadian

Member

Posts: 8,545

Joined: Oct 4 2021

Gold: 281.64

Oct 12 2022 07:33pm

Quote (YeeHaw @ 12 Oct 2022 16:40)

Good luck buddy. Nobody here will acknowledge anything that doesn’t align to their worldview

fixed that for you, you especially.

YeeHaw

Member

Posts: 3,908

Joined: Jun 20 2022

Gold: 0.00

Warn: 30%

Oct 12 2022 08:46pm

Quote (Cascadian @ Oct 12 2022 08:33pm)

fixed that for you, you especially.

Idk why I have to say this so often but you must have me mistaken for somebody else. Though I know you don’t because I am not going to insult your intelligence by inferring you can’t read. So again, you are just going out of your way to literally misquote me and misrepresent me.

The folks you align yourself with have explicitly said countless times that words are violence. This comes into play almost exclusively when the truth is being told plainly.

Would you care to refute what I said or are you satisfied with changing my words while quoting me and leaving it there. Sorry I don’t want to talk about Donald trump in your Donald trump thread.

This post was edited by YeeHaw on Oct 12 2022 08:47pm

IceMage

Member

Posts: 49,289

Joined: Jun 18 2006

Gold: 11.77

#10

Oct 14 2022 05:55pm

https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1581007883914792961

When Durham was chosen to investigate the investigators of Russiagate, most people I read thought it was a good choice, as he had a reputation for integrity.

But Bill Barr had a similar reputation pre-Trump, and look what he became. I think Durham's brain was probably poisoned with right-wing media(like Bill Barr) and he's now shown himself to be ineffective and kind of an embarrassment.

Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List