The burden of proof falls on those who want to believe the claims. The fact that the dossier is notable (in the public interest to publish) does not mean that

The burden of proof falls on those who want to believe the claims. The fact that the dossier is notable (in the public interest to publish) does not mean that the dossier is correct. The court only ruled that the dossier was notable. The fact that presidents were briefed means that the dossier is notable, not that it is correct. The bit about people telling lies... well that is an ad hominem that also doesn't help to satisfy the burden of proof, plus if that were a valid argument then it could be applied to the source of the dossier.