"The dossier, which is a collection of memos written over a period of months, includes specific, unverified, and potentially unverifiable allegations of contact between Trump aides and Russian operatives,"




*

Unforgiven wrote on Jan 12^th, 2017 at 5:13pm:


That's not secrecy. it is innuendo.

   

Glenn Greenwald

2017-01-11

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/11/the-deep-state-goes-to-war-with-president-el...

Unforgiven wrote on Jan 12^th, 2017 at 3:51pm:



Buzzfeed, really! They have no credibility so since the source is tainted the story is too! More Information sources are going to be exposed as nothing more than fiction and wishful thinking by the Left.

Sex claim headlines seem unlikely. Much of Russia analysis holds up.

Mortdooley wrote on Jan 12^th, 2017 at 10:34pm:


No wonder your Canadian senator seems to love them.

Melanias purse wrote on Jan 13^th, 2017 at 9:08am:


Then why does Buzzfeed say the opposite?

Unforgiven wrote on Jan 13^th, 2017 at 12:55pm:


In its whole article.

AuntieM wrote on Jan 14^th, 2017 at 3:16am:


like the story Trump peddled for years about Obama's birth certificate? like that?

And from Forbes today...
"I have picked out just a few excerpts from the Orbis report. It was written, in my opinion, not by an ex British intelligence officer but by a Russian trained in the KGB tradition. It is full of names, dates, meetings, quarrels, and events that are hearsay (one an overheard conversation).  It is a collection of “this important person” said this to “another important person.” There is no record; no informant is identified by name or by more than a generic title. The report appears to fail the veracity test in the one instance of a purported meeting in which names, dates, and location are provided. Some of the stories are so bizarre (the Rosneft $12 billion bribe) that they fail the laugh test. Yet, there appears to be a desire on the part of some media and Trump opponents on both sides of the aisle to picture the Orbis report as genuine but unverifiable.

After reading the Orbis report I got the queasy feeling that it may have influenced intelligence community’s unclassified report.  Leaks of classified bits by NBCNews and the Washington Post suggest the findings were, in part, based on British intelligence and spies. I wonder if the reference is to Putin’s role, which the intelligence report characterized as direct. This is a matter the new administration must look into.

We have reached a sad state of affairs where an anonymous report, full of bizarre statements, captures the attention of the world media because it casts a shadow over the legitimacy of a President-elect, who has not even taken the oath of office. For example, the Trump dossier is tonight’s lead item on German state television and on BBC. False news has become America’s international export to the world media."

AiA wrote on Jan 14^th, 2017 at 3:18am:

First of all, I wasn't for Trump.
Secondly, it wasn't Trump who started the birther crap. The Clinton campaign started it during the primary phase of the 2008 election.  I remember, because I was an Obama supporter.

Don't try that deflection with me, please.

No, Trump yowled about a lot of other things that were his "meal ticket" to the Presidency.  And you were deflecting.
From the Washington Times:
Fact checking the media — yes, the Clinton machine did start the birther movement
On evaluating whether or not GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump can win over African-American voters after he demanded President Obama show his birth certificate, MSNBC’s Joy Reid didn’t like what one panelist had to say.
“The birther issue came out of Hillary Clinton’s campaign in the 2008 elections,” said Pastor Darrell Scott, who was on the panel over the weekend, only to be forcefully cut off.
“No, no it didn’t,” Ms. Reid interrupted. “That’s just factually wrong. Even a pastor can’t make this up on my show. This is part of the problem.”
As her show cut away to a commercial break, Ms. Reid added: “No, sir. I respect you as a pastor. You’re not going to come on my show and make things up.”
Sorry, Ms. Reid — but you’re the one that’s making things up, and to be honest, part of the problem.
The birther movement does indeed have Democratic roots, long before Mr. Trump ever brought it up and made it an issue.
“The idea of going after Obama’s otherness dates back to the last presidential election — and to Democrats,” Bloomberg News reported. “Long before Trump started in, Hillary Clinton’s chief strategist, Mark Penn, recognized this potential vulnerability in Obama and sought to exploit it.
“In a March 2007 memo to Clinton (that later found its way to me), Penn wrote: ‘All of these articles about his boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii are geared toward showing his background is diverse, multicultural and putting it in a new light,’ he wrote. ‘Save it for 2050. It also exposes a very strong weakness for him — his roots to basic American values and culture are at best limited. I cannot imagine America electing a president during a time of war who is not at his center fundamentally American in his thinking and his values,’ ” Bloomberg reported.
Although Mr. Penn never suggested bringing up Mr. Obama’s birth certificate as a strategy to exploit this weakness, he did suggest Mrs. Clinton include a line in every speech saying that she was “born in the middle of America to the middle class in the middle of the last century.”
But that doesn’t stand in the way of the mainstream news media trying to rewrite history.
Brian Stelter, the media columnist at CNN retweeted a “props” to Ms. Reid on confronting Mr. Scott, as well as to himself for confronting Sean Hannity on Mrs. Clinton’s health issues. He then attached a blog post. The post was titled: “Memo to News Media: Consumers Crave Truth, Not Balance.”
To whose truth are we talking? Apparently, only the one the Clinton team has signed off on.
So this election cycle — please don’t believe what you see or watch. The pundits and news media (especially CNN and MSNBC) are the force driving Mrs. Clinton’s campaign forward. (Have you even seen her do a press conference or rally within these last few weeks?)
The answer is no.
Why is that? Because she doesn’t need to. She can take a nice long vacation while the mainstream media does her bidding.

The Russian "dossier" is being proven to be utter bullshit.

What will be interesting, is if the fraud it perpetrates, is connected to the Clinton's proven earlier collusion with the Ukrainian government to discredit Trump.

At a time when the Ukraine and Russia are embattled, wouldn't it be ironic if the Clinton campaign unwittingly got this whole debacle rolling, to begin with?