How the right embraced the false claim that Hillary Clinton 'spied' on President Donald Trump - The Washington Post
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
On Feb. 7, former Trump administration aide Kash Patel aired an interview with his former boss on Epoch Times TV. Former president Donald Trump predicted there would be "a lot coming" from special counsel John Durham and that Durham would "fully expose" Democratic efforts to tie his campaign to Russia.
"All of the things they said about me and Russia — it was them and Russia," Trump said. "It was them and Russia, they worked with Russia."
Four days later, in a filing that appeared in electronic federal court records shortly before midnight, Durham made new claims about the case that exploded across right-leaning media during the weekend.
Coincidentally or not, the filing highlighted something that Patel knew in great detail — a February 2017 meeting between the CIA and former prosecutor Michael Sussmann, who is in Durham's crosshairs. Patel in 2017 was a Republican Hill aide charged with investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. During a 2017 interview with Sussman, Patel indicated he knew about Sussmann's meeting with the CIA and questioned him closely about it.
Patel did not respond to a request for comment. The deep-in-the-weeds connection between his 2017 inquiries and the Durham probe reflects the unusual web of Durham-focused influencers that helped drive the narrative that the latest Durham filing was a monumental bombshell.
The group includes anonymous Twitter accounts, such as one called "Techno Fog," conservative journalists, such reporters for the Epoch Times and Red State, and former administration officials such as Patel. Fox News and Newsmax then led the charge on conservative television, often in misleading ways.
Because the Durham filing was made late on Friday, the narrative pushed by this group was largely unchallenged over the weekend. Not until Monday did mainstream journalists begin to look into the filing, adding context and reporting, including responses from Sussmann and other players supposedly implicated. The Sussmann legal team accused Durham of making "prejudicial — and false — allegations that are irrelevant to his Motion and to the charged offense, and are plainly intended to politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool."
But by then the horse was out of the barn.
A court filing near midnight
Durham's 13-page document was ostensibly about a conflict-of-interest issue regarding Sussmann's counsel Latham & Watkins. Durham in September charged Sussmann with lying to the FBI during a meeting in 2016. The indictment alleged that he told the FBI he was not acting on behalf of clients when in fact, the indictment said, he was secretly acting on behalf of Hillary Clinton's political team and others. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty, and his lawyers have denied he ever said he had no clients.
But as part of the document, Durham listed "factual background" that included a series of new, but uncharged allegations. (We created a guide to the allegations earlier this week.)
Marcy Wheeler, a national security reporter who has written skeptically about the Durham probe, said she received a copy of the filing through PACER at 11:33 p.m. Eastern time on Friday. Within an hour, an anonymous Twitter account called "Whispers of Dementia" had tweeted about the filing but only focused on the conflict-of-interest issue.
Early Saturday morning, the gaggle of Durham followers on the right sprang into action and shaped the news coverage that followed.
Hans Mahncke, an Epoch Times reporter and host on Epoch TV, at 9:25 a.m. tweeted: "Holy moly! New Durham filing. Rodney Joffe and his buddies at Georgia Tech monitored Trump's Internet traffic *while* he was President of the United States."
His tweet included a screenshot from paragraph five of the filing that highlighted in red the phrase "Executive Office of the President of the United States."
In many ways, this framing formed the core of the conservative news coverage that followed — a claim that Democrats had spied on Trump, even when he was president. But Durham's filing, which is written in turgid and confusing prose, did not actually say that Trump's Internet traffic had been monitored during his presidency.
Joffe, who has not been charged, is an Internet entrepreneur who founded the world's first commercial Internet hosting company. Statements by a Joffe spokesperson and Sussmann's legal team insisted that the data, which Sussmann provided to the CIA at the 2017 meeting, pertained to the time before Trump became president — when Barack Obama was still president.
Indeed, 20 minutes later, Wheeler sarcastically tweeted over Mahncke's tweet: "BREAKING: Cybersecurity of US networks covers cybersecurity of the White House and (as Durham admits) had while Obama was there." But Wheeler's corrective tweet made little difference to the emerging slant on the right.
'Techno Fog' fans the flames
Mahncke's tweet did not use a key word — spied. But soon an influential Twitter account tipped the soup.
At 10:25 a.m., the anonymous Techno Fog Twitter account, with nearly 350,000 followers, tweeted: "Special Counsel John Durman [sic]: DNC/Perkins Coie allies — Rodney Joffe, et al. — 'exploited a sensitive US govt arrangement' to gather intel on the 'Executive Office of the President of the U.S.' They spied on Trump." This tweet also had a screenshot of paragraph five. Before noon, this person had tweeted a substack analysis that emphasized, in bold type, "they essentially spied on President Trump."
The 10:25 a.m. tweet also raised the possibility that the Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee was actually a plot engineered by the Clinton campaign via Sussmann and Joffe. Never mind that the Russian hack has been extensively documented by a Senate bipartisan report and 12 Russians were indicted by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III for their roles. For some of the Durham obsessives, this theory is the Holy Grail.
At 11:11 a.m., the House Judiciary GOP account tweeted over the Techno Fog tweet: "We knew they spied. But it was worse than we thought." That tweet a few hours later received this response from former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe: "And now you're finding out why … " He linked to an interview he gave in October saying he had provided 1,000 intelligence community documents to Durham that should support additional charges.
Ratcliffe did not specifically say this spin was true, but he seemed to validate it, giving an important boost to the narrative. By 2:45 p.m. Red State, an influential conservative website, had posted an article, highlighting Techno Fog's tweets, titled"John Durham Drops a 'Shock and Awe' Filing About Spying on Donald Trump.
Then former White House chief of staff Mark Meadows weighed in, also tweeting over Techno Fog's 10:25 a.m. tweet: "They didn't just spy on Donald Trump's campaign. They spied on Donald Trump as sitting President of the United States. It was all even worse than we thought."
Finally, Patel issued a lengthy statement via Twitter that claimed "the Hillary Clinton campaign and her lawyers masterminded the most intricate and coordinated conspiracy against Trump when he was both a candidate and later President of the United States." (Durham's filing actually did not claim the Clinton campaign directed this.) Patel separately told Fox News "the lawyers worked to 'infiltrate' Trump Tower and White House servers."
Fox News then used Patel's phrase and, in a headline, made it appear that it came from Durham's filing: "Clinton campaign paid to 'infiltrate' Trump Tower, White House servers to link Trump to Russia, Durham finds."
Interestingly, Patel's statement made an odd distinction. Rather than refer to the Executive Office of the President, as was mentioned in the filing, he referred to the hacking of "Trump Tower and the Eisenhower Executive Office Building." That suggested he knew something more than what was in the filing.
Patel's 2017 inquiry
Indeed, as Wheeler highlighted in one of the articles she wrote on the Durham filing, during a congressional interview with Sussmann on Dec. 18, 2017, Patel raised whether Sussmann had had any meetings besides one with the FBI — "with any other government agencies in relation to the DNC hack, Russian involvement in the 2016 elections, or anything like that, or any members of any government agencies." After some back and forth, Patel specifically asked about a possible meeting with the CIA.
Sussmann said he had a CIA meeting in February 2017.
"My contact [with CIA] did not relate to my specific representation of the DNC, or the Clinton campaign, or the Democratic Party," Sussmann said, adding "the contact [with CIA] was about reporting to them information that was reported to me about possible contacts, covert or at least nonpublic, between Russian entities and various entities in the United States associated with the — or potentially associated with the Trump Organization." He noted that the meeting "was in large part, in response to President Obama's post-election IC [intelligence community] review of potential Russian involvement in the election" but it ended up being scheduled after Trump took office.
In other words, the "evidence" in the Durham filing should not have been especially newsworthy to Patel. He's known about the meeting and Sussmann's explanation for more than four years. Moreover, the five-year statute of limitations for charging a crime in connection with the CIA meeting had expired two days before Durham filed the document.
Trump calls for executions
The drumbeat of spin continued. Ric Grenell, the former acting director of national intelligence, then appeared on Newsmax at 5:25 p.m. and managed to echo both the "infiltrate" and "spy" narratives.
"Durham's filing makes it clear," Grenell said, that people paid by the Clinton campaign were "infiltrating the White House, the executive office of the president. They were spying not only on the campaign of Donald Trump but Donald Trump as president."
Less than two hours later, Trump issued a hyperbolic statement on the filing, saying it "provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign." He said the "scandal" was far bigger than Watergate and "in a stronger period of time in our country, this crime would have been punishable by death."
Trump's statement provided the perfect runway for days of outraged reactions by prominent Republicans, not to mention commentators, following the script originally provided by the mysterious Techno Fog Twitter account.
- House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), just hours after Trump: "Democrats got caught spying, first on candidate Trump and then when he was President IN THE WHITE HOUSE."
- Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), to Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, Feb. 14: "They spied on a presidential campaign. That's as wrong as it gets. But then we found out from this filing that they actually spied on a sitting president, which is even worse."
- Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), Feb. 15: "The latest with the Durham report is that the Clinton campaign, the same group that fear-mongered this Russian collusion, actually spied on the president of the United States."
It no longer mattered whether it was true or even whether Durham's allegations were disputed. Within the echo chamber, it was believed.
(Note: In a filing late Thursday, Durham distanced himself from the right-wing media furor in response to Sussmann's demand that the court strike the "factual background" of the original Durham filing that made these allegations: "If third parties or members of the media have overstated, understated, or otherwise misinterpreted facts contained in the Government's Motion, that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the Government's inclusion of this information." Durham confirmed the data collection in question took place in 2016, not under Trump, and he indicated he might make further filings under seal if, for instance, "the safety of individuals" could be threatened — an apparent reference to Trump's statement about punishment by death.)
Tags
Who is online
64 visitors
Beginning in 2014 and continuing until election day in 2016 Trump was in secret negotiations with the Russians to build Trump Tower Moscow, even going so far as to offer Vlad Putin a half billion dollar luxury penthouse as a bribe. Every Intelligence agency in the world (Including Ours) noticed when Trump sought out clandestine agents of Russian State Intelligence Services DURING THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION!
so far as to offer Vlad Putin a half billion dollar luxury penthouse
lol… the penthouse price dropped in half overnight. It still, of course, bears no relationship with reality but that’s your theme.
Every Intelligence agency in the world (Including Ours) noticed when Trump sought out clandesti
Where do you get these fairy tales? The left wing conspiracy nonsense on this site gets worse by the day, as posters glom onto some piece of misinformation from the left wing fever swamps, repeat it obsessively and just build Lie on top of lie upon it.
This whole building nonsense is a prime example. Anyone whose read the IGs report or the mueller report knows it had nothing to do with the fbi looking into the trump campaign. What started the investigation was a drunken low level staffer claiming the Russians had Clinton’s emails.
that’s it. Drunk talk by a guy who gets coffee. The fbi didnt start it’s investigation because trumps company tried to build a building or sought. out “clandestine agents” This is all made up nonsense that gets repeated over and over by people who have no idea what they are talking about.
the irony, of course, is that if what these fantasies were true, that would mean the fbi has lied and covered up the roots of the investigation. Which would mean the fbi was even more biased and criminal than Trump has claimed.
What it proves is that Trump was already under investigation by our FBI and CIA for his secretive contacts with clandestine agents of Russian State Intelligence Services before there even was a Clinton campaign. She had nothing to do with it and the investigation were warranted for cause based on Trump seeking out known Russian secret agents. What don't you understand?
Prove any of that.
The proof is provided in the article. Read It...
The proof is provided in the article. Read It..
Did you actually read it? It says nothing of the sort.
Why do so many on the left think it's okay to just make things up and say "it's in the article" when anyone who can read knows otherwise.
Both Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump Junior have admitted that Trump was secretly in negotiations with Putin to build Trump Tower Moscow beginning at least by 2014 and continuing right up to election day 2016. That is what got Trump spied on originally. Mrs Clinton had zero zip nada to do with it. If you don't believe me look it up. Prove me wrong!
Prove this. Just once.
Why do you think it's okay to make this up?
[removed]
If he has loans with Russian banks and can't repay them, watch how fast Putin marks him persona non gratis when they come due.
trumpski is using the russian sanctions as a reason not to make his russian loan payments...
He'd better start waving a Geiger counter over anything he eats or drinks. His kids, too. Putin's not above seasoning his enemies' dishes with a little polonium.
Is that what your Russian friends sold you?
huh? I don't know any of the FOX news people and I'm not friends with any trumpsters here...
I see you bothered to respond, but not to answer the question.
Typical.
I did answer your question. please keep reading my reply until you can understand it.
False, of course.
Babbling on about Fox and Trump doesn't answer if your Russian friends sold you a bill of goods or not.
FOX and trump aren't my friends. I really can't be any plainer than that.
Never said they were.
And that wasn't my question to begin with.
You aren't embarrassed to answer me, are you?
Had I asked about your Fox or Trump friends, that would have been a clear answer.
Since I didn't, it is just deflection.
FOX, trump, and his supporters are as close as I get to knowing any russians or their friends.
right, right, sure thing.
How everyone in the gop looks after this all blew up!
Aaaaaand Now It's.... GONE!
Truth doesn't matter to these people
They certainly are avoiding thie topic after carrying on like it was the biggest story in the world for days.
That is because Durham has been unable to show that he has the goods on anyone
Also because Hillary mentioned a possible defamation suit.
funny how rwnj scumbags are so hyper-sensitive about those lawsuits now.
Yeah, once Dominion started filing lawsuits against the pillow psycho and Fox "News", they don't wanna play hardball anymore.
It is, of course, still being reported on. Fox posted a story just fours ago.
The fantasies the left tells itself.
you can bet there's some FOX lawyers shitting cinder blocks daily until that court date. I'm really going to enjoy watching mike lindell's public evisceration and seeing him move back under a bridge and get back on the pipe, although I think the odds are pretty high that mike will spin his main bearing before he does any hard time.
The rabid, hair on fire "reports" have disappeared.
It's really not a matter of IF they are reporting on it, it is a matter of HOW they are reporting on it. The FoxNews narrative about it, has done a complete 180 turn, as it is slowly moved back into Rupert Murdoch's large closet, to never see the light of day again.
He probably never got off of the pipe considering how he rambles, does not know the alphabet, does not know how to count, does not know shapes, and does not know how to pronounce words properly..
his pillow business is beginning crater. bummer.
He can finally unload the pillows that no longer sell to the truckers who are now planning to take their dog and pony show to Washington DC.
Yeah, why aren't they working? What exactly are they protesting? Lots of alt right sources funding these domestic terrorists.
They are protesting the covid mandates/inoculations according to the news story I heard this am. If they think DC will put up with the bs they tried in Canada, they have a massive reality check coming their way.
Tow storage yards are already clearing room in preparation I am betting.
Now he thinks that an email addy is the same as a web site.
Supposedly LE and the NG will be there to stop them in their tracks.
Wrong, what matters is that this investigation is not over yet.
Thinking minds will wait until the investigation is done before judging. Meanwhile the wailing and gnashing of teeth coming from the left on this topic will continue unabated.
Lord have mercy it will continue .....
this investigation is not over yet.
Much?
Ya, much ado.
Triggered ? More like ROTFLMAO
Meh .... opinions do vary ....
... from fact based to not so much, huh?
You must have missed this part of the seed:
So WHY 'continue' an investigation that CANNOT result in a prosecution?
So they can continue whining.
At this point it is very clear Clinton will not go to prison, especially since she sports the "D" behind her name, expired statutes or not.
However, even if the statutes of limitations have expired, it will probably fully expose the criminal element of Hillary and many of her minions. Prosecution may not be a path, but blacklisting her as a criminal that got away with it may be more damaging in the world of politics.
Of course, again, since she is a D, the left will probably embrace her even more.
The world of the left is simply lunacy.
the radical right wing scam artists haven't shaken all the potential cash out of all the gullible moron's pockets yet...
eek, commies! - please send us $20... (we promise not to make it a weekly charge, maybe...)
Sure, that must be it. She was investigated for 4+ years, starting with the Obama administration and throughout the Republican Trump administration, with a Trump DOJ and Republican-controlled Congress (both houses) for the first two years, and a Republican-controlled Senate for the latter two years. Those Republicans were working really hard to protect her because of the D behind her name, weren't they?
That's fucking hilarious. Y'all have been blacklisting Hillary Clinton as a criminal since the 90's.
BTW, there isn't a shred of evidence that y'all give a fuck about criminals in the world of politics, especially if they're R's.
The best of criminals know how to effectively hide their crimes.
Hillary is the best.
My post stands. She will never go to prison because she has the almighty D after her name.
No intelligent person can argue against that.
See my reply to Sandy. It applies to you too.
[deleted]
Your post was ridiculous in light of who's held office and squealed "lock her up" from 2017 to 2021, your ad hom notwithstanding.
What part of "The best of criminals know how to effectively hide their crimes" do you not understand?
Hillary is proven to the best
First, it was because she's a Democrat.
Then it was because she's smart.
You moved the goalposts, but you know what? That's ok. If you want to say she's avoided prosecution because she's a Democrat, and therefore smarter than Republicans, you go right ahead. Nobody's going to argue with you.
Really? You said:
Are you saying that I am the best criminal or that I will never go to prison?
Yet here you are whining about it.
No intelligent person would make that argument.
trump's a regular boy scout.
Bingo!
Before long we'll be getting "the rest of the story"...stay tuned. Too much evidence has already been disclosed to vindicate the DNC and Hillary
Exactly what "evidence" is that? Please elaborate.
That is not true and you know it is not true...
You're not keeping up and/or denying recent news. How did the whole Mueller hoax get started?
Who paid for and used the fake Steele dossier?
it's the same brain dead right wing faction waiting on obama's real birth certificate...
The facts show that Hillary and the DNC were the victims of a Russian plot to help Donald Trump win the 2016 election. That's a fucking irrefutable fact and anyone trying to deny it has more than just their heads shoved up their own asses, they're shoulders and elbows deep.
The Republican Senate investigation was clear on that, though apparently some conservatives are too fucking stupid to accept reality.
"The nearly 1,000-page report, the fifth and final one from the Republican-led Senate intelligence committee on the Russia investigation, details how Russia launched an aggressive effort to interfere in the election on Trump’s behalf . It says the Trump campaign chairman had regular contact with a Russian intelligence officer and says other Trump associates were eager to exploit the Kremlin’s aid , particularly by maximizing the impact of the disclosure of Democratic emails hacked by Russian intelligence officers.
The report is the culmination of a bipartisan probe that produced what the committee called “the most comprehensive description to date of Russia’s activities and the threat they posed.” The investigation spanned more than three years as the panel’s leaders said they wanted to thoroughly document the unprecedented attack on U.S. elections.
The findings , including unflinching characterizations of furtive interactions between Trump associates and Russian operatives, echo to a large degree those of special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and appear to repudiate the Republican president’s claims that the FBI had no basis to investigate whether his campaign was conspiring with Russia ."
Manafort’s high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik, represented a grave counterintelligence threat, ” the report says.
The report notes how Manafort shared internal Trump campaign polling data with Kilimnik and says there is “some evidence” Kilimnik may have been connected to Russia’s effort to hack and leak Democratic emails".
Repudiate: verb - deny the truth or validity of.
So first, a Republican senate investigation found that the investigation into the Trump campaign was warranted. Second, the investigation found that the Trump campaign contacts with Russia " represented a grave counterintelligence threat". Third, just because they didn't find a tape of Trump telling Putin what he'd give him in return for help in the election, aka "criminal conspiracy", that doesn't mean the Trump campaign connections and coordination with Russian operatives was "a hoax". It happened, Russia did help the Trump campaign and the Trump campaign welcomed the help, that's a fucking fact no matter how much some conservative losers want to keep calling it "a hoax" as their pitiful piece of shit Republican talking point handlers have told them to do.
Any Trump sycophants desperately trying to deflect and distract from those actual facts are just tiny fucking loser ass barnacles on Trump voluminous backside that spend their entire day sucking the pus out of his pimply posterior.
A few days ago, I was told over and over on this site there was no new information in the motion that hadn’t been publicly disclosed.
That was a lie.
Nothing in the motion has been disproven, nor has Durham “backed away” from anything in the motion. All this article is more hand waving and distraction from from the actual allegations, which Clinton’s cult doesn’t like to discuss.
Inconvenient facts for the worker drones of the chosen one.
the only inconvenience i see, is this BS all took place while Obama was in office, as verified by Vic/Durham. Hyping up BULLSHIP, that sinks in rather fast currently, asz how rapidly the 'Right" tends to prove that they R again WRONG! There is NOTHING NEW presented by Durham , who basically stated if due to Trumps calling for the Death of people attempting to spread the damn TRUTH, Durham responded with "
(Note: In a filing late Thursday, Durham distanced himself from the right-wing media furor in response to Sussmann's demand that the court strike the "factual background" of the original Durham filing that made these allegations: "If third parties or members of the media have overstated, understated, or otherwise misinterpreted facts contained in the Government's Motion, that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the Government's inclusion of this information." Durham confirmed the data collection in question took place in 2016, not under Trump, and he indicated he might make further filings under seal if, for instance, "the safety of individuals" could be threatened — an apparent reference to Trump's statement about punishment by death.)
Tick tock, tick tock .........
That's what you said about Hillary for 30 years!
Prove it
Prove what? That the right has been saying Hillary Clinton was going down any minute for thirty years? Actually it started much earlier...
That proves nothing about what I did or didn’t say the last 30 years. Please direct your hyperbolics more accurately.
You chose Hillary to hate way back in the day. Lies upon lies by far-right wingers.
Hillary was a great FLOTUS and a great Sec. State.
Screw all far right-wing Putin fans who generate propaganda.
Lol.. Are you related to her or do you have a financial interest in promoting her?
Who says those things seriously?
[Deleted]
Opinions do vary and in this case they vary greatly.
The only one who went down was Monica.
The Titanic of blow jobs. The epiphany of going down. Jammed on it with Freddie King one night in a small club in Boulder Colorado.
And, yet, the Clinton campaign used political donations to contract the services of a former intelligence agent to conduct espionage and obtain secrets from a foreign government. The effort of a private citizen to spy on a foreign government has been euphemistically labeled 'opposition research'. The Clinton campaign did not pursue espionage for the purpose of national security or diplomacy. The espionage was strictly intended to obtain salacious information that could be used against a political opponent.
So, yes, the Clinton campaign employed spies. Yes, the Clinton campaign conducted espionage. And the Clinton campaign did use information obtained from that spying effort to manipulate the Federal bureaucracy and to spread misinformation.
Legal techno babble over Durham's filings won't change the reality of what the Clinton campaign did.
and again, why did Tru,mp Jr, Trumps son in law Jared Cushner, and Manafort meet the head Russian spy/diplomat at Trump tower again...? you know, to discuss that adoption issue no one ever nheard about again, yet Trumps three TOP guys are there meeting inn Trump Tower with the Russians expecting DIRT ON HILLARY ! Does anybody recall this ? WTF as usual!!
So Fusion GPS represents the head Russian spy/diplomat?
Natalia Veselnitskaya sought the meeting by offering information. The Trump campaign did not hire Natalia Veselnitskaya to perform espionage for the purpose of preparing a dossier on Hillary Clinton. It was the Clinton campaign who hired spies to perform espionage.
Russian interest in the Trump campaign was not a secret. Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak attended Trump political events, the Russian presence was quite public.
What lead you to that unfounded conclusion Nerm? It sure as fuck didn't come from Durham's filing.
Trump and Co got themselves spied on by every professional spying agency in the whole world when they were actively seeking out multiple clandestine agents of Russian State Intelligence Services way back in 2014 and 2015. By 2016 all that was left to do was to collaborate what all of their investigations had found, which is what Steele documented. The actual spying that predicated the Trump Russia Probe predated Clinton's 2016 run for the Presidency The worst she did was to help make it all public knowledge. And that is not, even by abnermally convoluted definitions, "Spying"...
This is a lie. deleted
. By 2016 all that was left to do was to collaborate what all of their investigations had found, which is what Steele documented.
My God. Who tells you these things? Do you even know what the Steele dossier is?
The Steel Dossier has never been vetted. Damn good thing too. Much of it is true. Maybe all of it. The details were concerning Trump. Trump, not Clinton.
Just take a peek outside the rightwing bubble.
Hard to vet a piece of shit like the Steele Dossier.
I am a little surprised that so many folks STILL are falling for it as a legitimate anything.
I am just as surprised that people post seeds insinuating the Hillary had Vince Foster killed by suicide
because Justin Bieber contracted COVID. /s
Still waiting for you to prove any of your claims.
The Steel Dossier has never been vetted. Damn good thing too. Much of it is true. Maybe all of it.
That you believe this explains a lot.
It doesn’t Insinuate anything. the proof is in the article. I quoted it verbatim. Read it.
That's great!
better recheck you seed...lol
Take a peek outside your left wing bubble. The proof is in the article. Verbatim.
Christopher Steele was a former MI6 field agent - a spy. The Clinton campaign used political donations to contract the services of Christopher Steele. Steele utilized contacts inside Russia (including Russian government employees), from his time as an intelligence field agent, to obtain information about Trump. Steele produced the dossier as raw intelligence; unvetted, uncorroborated, and not actionable.
SOP for a Clinton. I see they tied up one more loose end in a French prison the other day.
Except Steele did not spy on Trump. He merely cataloged the information garnered from multiple different country's investigations into Trump's and Trump's organization's Russian connections. So far what he reported has not been disproved. Regardless, those investigations started way before there even was a Clinton campaign. They were triggered by Trump and Co's numerous secretive communications and meetings with clandestine agents of Russian State Intelligence Services. Remember that Trump was in constant negotiations with Putin to build Trump Tower in Moscow beginning in 2013 or 2014 and continuing right up to election day 2016. He lied about it but it is all out in the open now. Both Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump Junior have publicly admitted to it multipletimes. So have multiple other sources close to both Trump and Putin. Clinton did not spy on Trump. She merely exposed the fact that Trump was lying about his long term and ongoing flirtations with Putin and Russia. Things Americans needed to know.
Fusion GPS hired Steele, to investigate Trump's Russia-related activities, and this investigation produced what became known as the Steele dossier.
Who tells you these lies? This is all easily available public information. Why do you persist in posting blatantly false misinformation?
So far what he reported has not been disproved
Lol. Imagine claiming that in 2022.
rdless, those investigations started way before there even was a Clinton campaig
[deleted]
Exactly how is that materially different than what I have said and how does any of that change the verified fact that the information contained within the Steele Report predates Hillary Clinton campaign for the Presidency?
Trump and Co got themselves spied on by searching out and establishing contacts with and communicating with and meeting with multiple clandestine agents of Russian State Intelligence Services. Hillary had nothing at all to do with the origins of the Trump Russia investigation. This is why even Durham has refuted what you are still falsely flogging!
I stand by the truth of what I have said above!
stand by the truth of what I have said above!
If your claims had any basis in reality, you could provide sources to prove your argument. Your empty declaration that you stand by misinformation is meaningless.
Fact - What is reported in the Steel Report predates Hillary Clinton's campaign for President in 2016. The CIA and FBI and multiple other foreign governments were aware of and had documented Trump's multiple secretive contacts with known agents of Russian State Intelligence Services prior to 2016. Trump caused himself to be investigated by creeping with known spies going way back. That is an indisputable fact.
Lol.. A four year old report from Mother Jones, the very vehicle used by the Clintons to publicize the investigation originally. Way to avoid the IG report, the Mueller Report, the indictment of Steele's source for lying and all the exposes on how the Steele report was abused by Democrats in Congress and in the FISA Court.
Your choice of source is admission of dishonesty.
Fact - What is reported in the Steel Report predates Hillary Clinton's campaign for President in 2016.
Are you familiar, at all, with the Steele Report? It pretends to document the Trump s campaign's supposedly ongoing attempts to collude with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election. Of course Clinton was running for President in 2016.
he CIA and FBI and multiple other foreign governments were aware of and had documented Trump's multiple secretive contacts with known agents of Russian State Intelligence Services prior to 2016
That's not what your article says. Did you even read it?
It contains bombshells like Trump went on David Letterman and said he did business with Russians! Such a secret.
Read the lies you posted in 7.1.21. None of them are supported by this article.
Of course Steele spied on Trump. Steele was attempting to obtain the content of conversions, trace movements, and establish associations. What do you think spying entails?
Steele was not spying under any sort of government authority. Steele was not conducting a criminal investigation. Steele was not collecting intelligence for national security purposes. Steele was hired as a private contractor to collect information for the private enterprise of the Clinton campaign. What Steele was doing is similar to industrial spying.
Steele was hired to collect raw intelligence for private use. And that raw intelligence was unvetted, uncorroborated, and was not actionable. The Clinton campaign used Steele's raw intelligence to manipulate Federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies and to spread misinformation.
The Russian interest in the Trump campaign was not clandestine or secret. And if Trump has such a close relationship with Vladimir Putin then perhaps Trump would be the appropriate person to be involved as special envoy to address the Ukrainian 'crisis'.
Yes, the Clinton campaign was relying on using public disclosure as a weapon. That's one purpose of spying. The Clinton campaign took the next step of spreading misinformation when public disclosure proved to be ineffective.
And, after all the years and years and years of investigating prior to 2016 - he was STILL vetted by the FBI/CIA to allow him to run for President.
That's the fact you should be paying attention to.
And Barr appointed Durham----------who has been investigating whatever he is investigating for a longer period than the Mueller investigation. Your point would be...just exactly what?
I don't believe that Trump was vetted by FBI or CIA.
My thoughts exactly - just like Kavanaugh - not vetted AT ALL - former and current thug, grifter, mobster, gangster, thief, and complete steaming pile of shit.
Well, he still believes a bunch of nonsense regarding Helsinki, too.
That statement is a blatant lie.
He WAS vetted and recommended by the ABA, but I suppose we can all pretend that that never happened to further some wild tale.
I hate to break it to you 1st, but Presidential Candidates are NOT vetted by anyone but the voters.
In fact, a late last year, Frank Figliuzzi suggested that a bi-partisan commission be appointed to do just that and the RW gnashed their teeth, grabbed their pearls and swooned.
That is not accurate. Presidents are vetted by the press not by law enforcement though Trump's record is not great with the law. In fact, there was lots of evidence against him we never saw because it was an ongoing investigation as I've explained over and over.
Didn't read the link? Here is just a small part.............
To mention a couple..............and I see very little in the article about the press doing the vetting. Perhaps you have one of those illusive links you can provide to help me out?
I didn't provide that crap hole link. Information gathered in ongoing investigations is never made public unless or until charges are filed.
Where did I type that you provided that "crap hole link"? It was provided TO another and you, evidently, passed it by and chose not to read it.
Trump had been under investigation for his multiple secretive contacts with known agents of Russian State Intelligence Services since at least 2014 but he hadn't been charged with crimes so the information gathered in those investigations was not publicly available. Steele did a summary of the scuttlebutt but he did not do the source investigations. The Clinton campaign had not even begun at the time when the CIA and FBI Trump Russia Investigations first began. She was a private citizen by then having retired in Jan 2013. What do you not understand?
So 6 or more years of investigations, and Trump was charged with what crime?
So are you insinuating that, supposedly, the CIA and FBI were investigating Trump starting in 2014...............again? Ya gonna provide the same bullshit link you did before that didn't say what you thought (and hoped evidently) yesterday that got holes shot in it by someone other than me? Please do, I haven't laughed that much today and could use a laugh.
Kinda supports my comment,eh?
Hate to break it to you Dulay, but 7.1.37 sez otherwise.
You have read the link, right?
Seriously JBB - what don't you understand about the process?
"For presidential candidates, the security clearance process involves checking criminal and court records to see if a person was not charged with anything in the past. Court records are considered to check if there are no pending cases, and usually, the police take fingerprints for clearance.
Law enforcements play a pivotal role in ascertaining if presidential candidates are in-line with the security clearance demands. Participation in a state’s general elections needs a person with a clean record because individuals with criminal records are usually not allowed to join the government let alone lead a country.
The public record view and vetting interviews also examine government records in administration offices to see one’s job conduct and track work record. It also stretches to records contained in archives of security agent organizations and secret services. The ethics clearance process touches on whether the candidates had considered risks involved in the position he or she wishes for, exhibits qualities necessary for the job, and has the required skills for that post.
Vetting is the gateway into a presidential candidate’s life and informs relevant authorities about that individual’s life, including all important aspects that are necessary when one wishes to be a president."
You're saying, I believe, that the FBI/CIA are not government law enforcement agencies and that they could not have gotten info from the "security agent organizations and secret services" prior to 2016?? Hell, without a doubt, with his record of "dubious" businesses, you can bet your bottom dollar that those two government agencies combed his records.
Clinton was and has been and will be investigated/held to the burner for her past activities - Whitewater ring a bell?
What 7.1.37 'sez' is that some members are more than willing to rely on a blog by 'Desmond K' [whoever the fuck THAT is] to form their opinions.
Now maybe you and yours can post some empirical evidence, maybe like an FBI regulation on Presidential vetting or Federal legislation that addressed the topic that will alter my perspective on the FACTS, but I doubt it.
Note that there isn't ONE link to references to support the assertions made by 'Desmond K'. If y'all want to believe 'Desmond K', so be it.
I for one prefer FACTS and the FACT is that other than the qualifications in the Constitution, the voters are the ONLY ones that vet Presidential Candidates.
Ya 1st. Sadly, I can't get that wasted time back. Proclamations are NOT facts 1st.
1st, repeating bullshit doesn't make it fact.
WHY do you believe 'Desmond K' over reality?
I have been 'vetted' through a background check by the US government, THREE times. Once in the 80's when I did work for Defense contractors, once when my wife was hired by DHS and most recently when I was hired by the Trump Commerce Dept. for the 2020 Census. Depending on the Agency, they called our mothers, our neighbors were interviewed, our finances scrutinized, and our 'criminal' histories were reviewed. It isn't 'pleasant'.
I'd LOVE to see Trump's SF86, especially Secions 16 [People who know you well], 19 [foreign contacts] and 20 [foreign activities]. Maybe you can find me a copy. My wife still has a copy of hers.
One can only imagine what Trump's reaction would be if the FBI actually DID do a background check on him.
Thank you so much for posting that proclamation by 'Desmond K', who I presume you think is reliable source of information.
FYI, there is no evidence that 'Desmond K' has a clue what he's talking about.
So, I hope that you understand that I prefer to rely on facts and don't consider 'Desmond K' a purveyor of them.
I find it hypocritical to ask for links while citing a blog that contains NONE to support the posit.
Where did you see a "Desmond K"?
Colon wall......................
[Deleted] What you are doing is no different than someone just repeatedly claiming Trump was never impeached. Your constant repetition of a lie doesn't make it any more true.
I READ the link 1st. The 'author' of the blog is 'Desmond K'. I presume he is what passed as a 'journalist' at Politic Sphere. He's the guy y'all claim has written the defining proof that US law enforcement thoroughly vets Presidential candidates.
I'd love to read his 'Linkedin' page. /s
So, when you said that you 'see very little in the article', you meant the name of the author too.
Lol ... you attempting to compare and contrast low level bureaucrats vetting process with the POTUS vetting process is funny.
Really funny .
Now I found out what you were talking about.
See, unlike many folks on NT, I don't do a research paper on all the authors or organizations who publish their opinions.
Ya wanna go after "Desmond K" - go for it. But, I'd PREFER you discuss the thread/seed and quit chasing fireflies.
What's REALLY funny is that you seem to think that posting a strawmen fallacy is 'WINNING!'
Good for you.
Nor do you seem to 'vet' those whose OPINION you and yours insist is golden.
That's fucking hilarious 1st.
YOU and yours are the ones that are all about your friend's link. Instead of 'considering the source' [which I encourage you to do in the future], you doubled down and insisted that JBB and I 'don't understand the process'.
So NOW, instead of admitting that your friend's link is from a highly questionable source and lacks any evidence, you want to deflect and pretend that YOU weren't the one 'chasing fireflies'.
I hope that you know now that there is NO fucking process because Presidential candidates are NOT vetted by the FBI/CIA blah, blah, blah.
Nope, wrong again but thanks for playing.
Deflect/ignore/don't discuss - keep up the MO. I NEVER said I was a school marm looking to correct everyone and show them how wrong they are. And, no - you don't understand the process as it is utilized. Yes, the FEDS do utilize their agencies to vet candidates - the Feds include the FBI/CIA/NSA and other initials.
Discuss the topic/subject Dulay - quit running circles about the meaning of a commenter's responses. You don't like the response - don't bring a tank when a simple comment, based on SOMEONE'S OPINION, is posted. Ya remember? Opinions are what EVERYONE HAS - their own personal views - and they DON'T have to match yours.
Then it's simple isn't it 1st, PROVE it.
I am discussing the subject of this thread 1st. You were all about it until your source fell apart.
I'm just letting your own words speak for themselves.
Again, PROVE it.
The issue with your comment is that it's FALSE 1st. You've doubled and tripled down on it now.
No.
YOU stated:
That is an assertion of FACT, not an expression of an OPINION.
So again, PROVE it.
Nope, it is REALLY funny Sparty.
No discussion? Why is that typical?
No proof. WHY not?
Only to the triggered .... all y’all be batshit crazy
Nope, YOU made the assertion that they DID and YOU have the burden of proof.
Please proceed.
So, you can ask for evidence but other members shouldn't expect you to provide any. Got ya.
You asserted it by making this comment:
And then posting 'Desmond K's' blog to support it.
You didn't equivocate, you stated it as fact.
What 'Desmond K's' blog proves is that he spewed an unfounded OPINION, utterly devoid of evidence. Any member READING that opinion can see for themselves that there are NO links to regulations, legislation, documentation of anything 'Desmond K' claims. In short, 'Desmond K' blog is an unfounded proclamation, NOT substantiated FACT.
Now, unless and until you can point out wherein 'Desmond K's' blog actually DOES provide one iota of evidence to support his proclamations about vetting, my assessment stands true.
Could you post that more intelligibly?
See above.
Just did.
Steele was contracted to dig dirt by the GOP first.
Steele was contracted to dig dirt by the GOP first.
That's a lie that's been debunked hundreds of times on this site alone
Marco Rubio is part of the gop last I checked.
This has been told to you countless times. [deleted]
Marco Rubio and/or any Republican organization you can imagine was not not involved when Fusion GPS hired Richard Steele on behalf of Hillary Clinton and the DNC. [deleted]
Get over it Dulay...
It was an opinion...
And just one you don't like.
That is incorrect. HERE is the timeline .
And HERE is the proof that the "Conservative Publication" shown in the timeline is "The Washington Free Beacon" who it was found had ended it's relationship with Fusion GPS before Steele was hired on to conduct further research after Fusion GPS was hired by the DNC and Hillary's campaign.
More from NBC News here :
Delusions of grandeur.
Nope, it's one that is just WRONG.
That is incorrect. HERE is the timeline .
I salute your optimism that facts matter.
But tomorrow, next week, next month the same people will post the same lie you debunked.
And next week or next month I will debunk it again. That is the nature of forums like this. Truth requires diligence and daylight, and presenting the truth (even if one needs to do it multiple times) is much more effective than calling people liars. There is a difference between lying and repeating dis-information, or being ignorant of the facts. Only a concerted effort to correct the latter can expose the former.
Only to the narcissists that claim it
"Nope, it's one that is just WRONG."
Because YOU don't like an opinion doesn't make it wrong.
Again...
Get over it.
Your comment's illustration of delusions of grandeur doesn't necessarily connote narcissism. But hey, if that's the way you self-identify, so be it.
It has nothing to do with what I like bugsy, it has everything to do with FACTS.
Oh and BTFW, until I called the 'article' out as a blog by 'Desmond K', it was cited as FACT by a couple of your buddies. It's ironic that they doubled down on using blog as PROOF of the vetting by the US government without vetting their source.
You and yours have had 5 days to post evidence to support the OPINION stated in the blog.
Not one iota of evidence has been forthcoming. NONE, NADA. Neither you nor any of your buddies can come up with even ONE reference to give credibility to your source posit.
What makes your source WRONG is that there is NO evidence that he is RIGHT. His proclamations are fiction. Period, full stop.
Perhaps since you and yours cannot support the OPINION you hang your hats on, YOU should be the ones to get over it bugsy.
You know if you stop and think about it, the right-wing has been spewing conspiracy bs for decades upon decades. Back in the 1950s, when I was still in my single digits of years I can remember 'conservative talk' about how fluoride in the drinking water was a communist conspiracy. These guys never quit. Never.
As far as the Clintons, they've been under attack by the right for thirty plus years. The right wing fears them. And also--------------so does Putin. He hates Hillary almost as much as he fears her.
Keep it up Tucker. You're forging your chain link by link.
Nobody is afraid of the Clintons--except perhaps for some of their former business and political "friends".
Putin could care less about Hillary. She is a never-was and is completely irrelevant.
Hell, Putin knows the Clintons Price. Donations to their “charity” exorbitant speakers fees for bill, and the Clintons work for him.
Hill does love her useful idiots.
Left the White House in the poor house. Her words. Now she rolls fat and dirty on her/Bubba sycophants donated money.
Never made anything, always sucking off someone else’s teet
You forgot RT.