25 ms·

The dossier has been almost entirely corroborated across the board. No parts of it have been proven incorrect so far. Do you have any evidence that any parts of

The dossier has been almost entirely corroborated across the board. No parts of it have been proven incorrect so far. Do you have any evidence that any parts of it have been shot down as not factual? Calling it the 'uncorroborated Steele dossier' is a talking point that has been proven to be a lie over and over. It seems that Buzzfeed New's publishing about the dossier is literally the type of 'real journalism' and 'legitimate news' that you're talking about because it has led to multiple investigations of some of the most influential people in the United States and has led to multiple indictments and guilty pleas, including the former National Security Advisor to the President of the United States. I haven't seen many '10 surprise diet secrets' articles doing the same. Have you?

WillPostForFood 8y ago
Even Mother Jones would call it mostly uncorroborated. https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/12/an-updated-look-at-the-steele-dossier/ https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/12/an-updated-lo... What source are you using to get "almost entirely corroborated"?
remarkEon 8y ago
Reading comments like this makes me honestly entertain simulation theory. We have to be living in completely different realities, where what you’ve read and what I’ve read literally have different words on the page.
arduanika 8y ago
> almost entirely corroborated Have any of the guilty pleas corresponded to a specific claim from Steele? My understanding is, few if any. For what remains of "almost entirely" the whole dossier, "corroborated" in your book seems to mean "not worth bringing before a court of law, even after 2+ years of highly empowered investigation". > No parts of it have been proven incorrect so far. Do you have any evidence that any parts of it have been shot down as not factual? Russell has got an orbiting teacup to sell you.
a_tractor 8y ago
As you probably know, the Steele dossier is actually a piece of opposition research created by the PR firm CrowdStrike and paid for by the HRC campaign and the DNC. Containing information sourced from foreign intelligence agents, it is itself, at least in part, a product of Russian Intelligence. By the time Buzzfeed published the contents of the , it was already in the hands of the FBI. In fact, the FBI had already used the Steele Dossier as evidence to get a FISA warrant to spy on members of the Trump campaign and transition team. Buzzfeed wasn't responsible for any of that. They simply jumped on the scoop ahead of every other media outlet that had it. Buzzfeed simply didn't bother to verify its authenticity or even its source, nor did they corroborate any of the claims. Btw, if you want to give a journalist credit for "breaking" the (planted) story, Michael Isikoff is the journalist who wrote the Sept. 23, 2016 article at Yahoo! News laying out Steele’s allegations that Trump campaign adviser Carter Page met secretly in Moscow with two Kremlin insiders. That is the actual article that was used by the FBI to "corroborate" the Steele Dossier and get their FISA warrant on Carter Page. Isikoff’s co-author, David Corn, is the only other reporter to have written about Steele’s claims prior to the 2016 election. FYI, when Mediaite's columnist John Ziegler [asked Isikoff in an interview this past December](https://www.mediaite.com/columnists/extensive-interview-with-russian-roulette-coauthor-isikoff-reveals-big-problems-with-collusion-theory/ https://www.mediaite.com/columnists/extensive-interview-with...), “Would you agree that a lot of what’s in the Steele dossier has been somewhat vindicated?” Isikoff responded: “No.” “You would not?” asked Ziegler. “No,” Isikoff repeated.

WillPostForFood 8y ago

Even Mother Jones would call it mostly uncorroborated. https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/12/an-updated-look-at-the-steele-dossier/ https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2018/12/an-updated-lo... What source are you using to get "almost entirely corroborated"?

remarkEon 8y ago

Reading comments like this makes me honestly entertain simulation theory. We have to be living in completely different realities, where what you’ve read and what I’ve read literally have different words on the page.

arduanika 8y ago

> almost entirely corroborated Have any of the guilty pleas corresponded to a specific claim from Steele? My understanding is, few if any. For what remains of "almost entirely" the whole dossier, "corroborated" in your book seems to mean "not worth bringing before a court of law, even after 2+ years of highly empowered investigation". > No parts of it have been proven incorrect so far. Do you have any evidence that any parts of it have been shot down as not factual? Russell has got an orbiting teacup to sell you.

a_tractor 8y ago

As you probably know, the Steele dossier is actually a piece of opposition research created by the PR firm CrowdStrike and paid for by the HRC campaign and the DNC. Containing information sourced from foreign intelligence agents, it is itself, at least in part, a product of Russian Intelligence. By the time Buzzfeed published the contents of the , it was already in the hands of the FBI. In fact, the FBI had already used the Steele Dossier as evidence to get a FISA warrant to spy on members of the Trump campaign and transition team. Buzzfeed wasn't responsible for any of that. They simply jumped on the scoop ahead of every other media outlet that had it. Buzzfeed simply didn't bother to verify its authenticity or even its source, nor did they corroborate any of the claims. Btw, if you want to give a journalist credit for "breaking" the (planted) story, Michael Isikoff is the journalist who wrote the Sept. 23, 2016 article at Yahoo! News laying out Steele’s allegations that Trump campaign adviser Carter Page met secretly in Moscow with two Kremlin insiders. That is the actual article that was used by the FBI to "corroborate" the Steele Dossier and get their FISA warrant on Carter Page. Isikoff’s co-author, David Corn, is the only other reporter to have written about Steele’s claims prior to the 2016 election. FYI, when Mediaite's columnist John Ziegler [asked Isikoff in an interview this past December](https://www.mediaite.com/columnists/extensive-interview-with-russian-roulette-coauthor-isikoff-reveals-big-problems-with-collusion-theory/ https://www.mediaite.com/columnists/extensive-interview-with...), “Would you agree that a lot of what’s in the Steele dossier has been somewhat vindicated?” Isikoff responded: “No.” “You would not?” asked Ziegler. “No,” Isikoff repeated.