POLITICS -  Draining The "Intelligence" Swamp (17392 views) Notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussion.Subscribe
 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconNov-22 4:41 AM 
To: All  (871 of 936) 
 7552.871 in reply to 7552.870 

July 29, 2020

         "The identification of Igor Danchenko as Steele’s subsource...means Steele’s dossier relied on someone who wasn't based in Russia despite claims to the contrary by the FBI...In at least two of the applications for its Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant targeting Trump adviser Carter Page, the FBI referred to the primary sub-source of the document as "truthful and cooperative" and "Russian-based..."

https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/revelation-steeles-primary-source-triggers-focus-think

Revelation of Steele’s primary source triggers focus on think tank tied to Clinton, Biden

The Obama team's ties to the Brookings Institution are deep, and so are those of impeachment witness Fiona Hill.

The revelation that Christopher Steele’s primary sub-source for his dossier was an American resident tied to a liberal think tank close to the Obama administration has triggered new investigative interest.

The identification of Igor Danchenko as Steele’s subsource — reported by Real Clear Investigations and then confirmed by Danchenko's lawyer to the New York Times — means Steele’s dossier relied on someone who wasn't based in Russia despite claims to the contrary by the FBI.

In at least two of the applications for its Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant targeting Trump adviser Carter Page, the FBI referred to the primary sub-source of the document as "truthful and cooperative" and "Russian-based," according to Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz's report last December.

Danchenko also worked for several years until 2010 at the Brookings Institute, a think tank familiar to many in the Obama administration and to one key witness in the impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

Fiona Hill, a Russia expert at the National Security Council and an impeachment witness against Trump, worked at the Brookings Institution in 2016 and co-authored a paper with Danchenko prior to the dossier being assembled, according to Real Clear Politics.

In addition, the president of the Brookings Institution — former Clinton administration figure Strobe Talbott — contacted Steele early in the Russia collusion probe and requested a copy of his dossier to share with Obama administration officials, according to Steele's recent testimony in a British lawsuit.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The sudden web of connections between Danchenko, Hill, Talbott and others inside Brookings has spurred Republicans to start investigating the think tank, a 501c 3 tax-exempt organization.

"It looks like there were a lot of connections to the Brookings Institute," said former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, one of the first members of Congress to help unravel the failings and abuses in the now-discredited Russia collusion investigation.

Nunes told Fox News' Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo that he is opening a "full-blown" probe into the role Brookings and its figures played with Steele and the entire Russia episode.

"People may remember the president of Brookings back in 2016, we know that he had given the dossier to a few people, we had that through testimony," Nunes explained. "You also may remember that the State Department was involved and there were additional dossiers that weren't the Steele dossiers, except that they mirrored the Steele dossiers."

"And we think there is a connection between the president of Brookings and those dossiers that were given to the State Department that mirrored the Steele dossiers," he continued.

The links between Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton and Brookings run deep.

 
 Reply   Options 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconDec-24 7:14 AM 
To: All  (872 of 936) 
 7552.872 in reply to 7552.871 

December 24, 2021

        "Prosecutors said they want to know what the Clinton campaign knew about the accuracy of the Steele dossier's now-discredited allegations of Trump-Russia collusion and whether any campaign "representatives directed, solicited, or controlled" Danchenko's activities assisting Steele.."

https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/durham-zeroes-clinton-campaign-could-call-some-aides

Durham zeroes in on Clinton campaign, could call some aides to testify, court memo reveals

New court filing in Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko's criminal case shows prosecutors want to know if Clinton campaign knew false intel was going to FBI. Expert calls it an "incredible twist."

Hillary Clinton's team long fought to keep its ties to Christopher Steele's dossier from public view, but Special Counsel John Durham is now making clear he has a strong interest in her campaign's behavior during the Russia collusion probe. He is even suggesting some of her aides could be summoned as trial witnesses. Durham's earth-shaking revelation came inside a routine court filing this month in the case of Igor Y. Danchenko, a Russian analyst who was a primary source in 2016 for Steele's now-infamous dossier. Danchenko has been charged with repeatedly lying to the FBI during the Russia collusion probe and has pleaded innocent.

Durham's motion asked the presiding judge to determine whether Danchenko's lawyers —Danny Onorato and Stuart Sears of the Schertler Onorato Mead & Sears law firm — pose a conflict of interest because the firm also represents the Hillary for America campaign as well as several former campaign officials in "matters before the special counsel."

"The Clinton Campaign financed the opposition research reports, colloquially known as the 'Dossier,' that are central to the Indictment against the defendant," the Durham team stated in the motion. "Accordingly, for the reasons set forth below, the government respectfully requests that the Court inquire into the potential conflict issues set forth herein."

Prosecutors said they want to know what the Clinton campaign knew about the accuracy of the Steele dossier's now-discredited allegations of Trump-Russia collusion and whether any campaign "representatives directed, solicited, or controlled" Danchenko's activities assisting Steele.

"The interests of the Clinton Campaign and the defendant could potentially diverge in connection with any plea discussions, pre-trial proceedings, hearings, trial, and sentencing proceedings," the prosecutors told the court, often referring to the Steele dossier as "Company Reports." ~~~~~~~~~~~

For the first time, Durham also raised the possibility aides to Hillary Clinton could testify at Danchenko's trial. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Patel, a former federal prosecutor and adviser to Trump, told the John Solomon Reports podcast that the memo is "an unbelievable twist" in the Russia case. He said the fact that the law firm representing the Clinton campaign is the same one representing Danchenko was certain to raise questions.

"You have to ask yourself why," he said. "Why would the Clinton campaign lawyers go and represent the Steele dossier's No. 1 source, who has been charged federally with five counts of lying to the FBI in a 39-page indictment that cites Clinton campaign former staffers? "There is no such thing as coincidences in these types of investigations."

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconDec-26 6:13 AM 
To: All  (873 of 936) 
 7552.873 in reply to 7552.872 

December 26, 2021

        "Why would the legal firm representing Hillary Clinton (to the Durham probe) step-in to represent Igor Danchenko in his criminal indictment?"

         Step by step, and it is probably too late to stop Durham now, assuming that without massive voter fraud they are soon to lose control of Congress.

Igor Danchenko Now Represented by Hillary Clinton Lawyers

In a court filing by Special Counsel John Durham it’s noted that previously indicted Igor Danchenko, the primary sub-source for Christopher Steele’s fraudulent dossier against Donald Trump, is now represented by the same lawyers representing Hillary Clinton’s legal interests.  John Durham is asking the court to evaluate the legal conflicts:

Why would the legal firm representing Hillary Clinton (to the Durham probe) step-in to represent Igor Danchenko in his criminal indictment?

The only logical reason would be for Danchenko to represent a legal risk to the interests of Hillary Clinton, likely through the direct association between Hillary Clinton and Charles Dolan, Danchenko’s collaborator and the liaison to Chris Steele from the Clinton campaign.

As a result of the Durham indictment, we know Igor Danchenko was working closely with Democrat Party public relations executive Charles Dolan to funnel the fabricated source material to Chris Steele.  The Clinton team’s communication and contact with Charles Dolan would represent a legal risk to Hillary Clinton.

If Charles Dolan and Hillary Clinton were in communication, it seems like that would be the motive for Clinton’s lawyers to want to control Danchenko’s legal status and any statements to John Durham or the court.  More than likely, the people in/around Hillary Clinton are the ones paying the law firm to represent Igor Danchenko.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconDec-28 9:17 AM 
To: All  (874 of 936) 
 7552.874 in reply to 7552.873 

December 28, 2021

       "This investigation is complicated and many people have forgotten it’s still ongoing. But with Clinton now potentially tied to it, things could become much tenser."

Authorities Admit Currently Investigating Hillary Clinton's 2016 Campaign: Durham

The Washington Examiner reported that “Durham told a federal court that he is scrutinizing members of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign as part of his criminal inquiry into the origins and conduct of the Trump-Russia investigation.”

Durham’s team asked the judge of the federal court to “inquire into a potential conflict of interest” concerning the lawyers for British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s main source for the anti-Trump dossier, according to the Examiner.

They noted that a separate lawyer at their firm “is currently representing the 2016 ‘Hillary for America’ presidential campaign, as well as multiple former employees of that campaign, in matters before the Special Counsel.”

Before the end of the Trump administration, then-Attorney General Bill Barr elevated Durham to special counsel status in October 2020, as Politico reported. This appointment as special counsel meant that he could continue investigations even under the new administration. ~~~~~~~~~~

So what does Hilary Clinton have to do with all this? Two lawyers, Stuart Sears and Danny Onorato, took over as Danchenko’s defense lawyers. At their firm is also Robert Trout, who represented Clinton campaign members in the past. Onorato and Sears argued that there is no conflict of interest.

But Durham’s team argued that the interests of Danchenko and the Clinton campaign “could potentially diverge in connection with any plea discussions, pretrial proceedings, hearings, trial, and sentencing proceedings.”

Durham listed several issues that could become relevant to Danchenko’s defense. He then explained how the Clinton campaign and Danchenko could have ties in all this and try to shift the blame on each other concerning the dossier. ~~~~~~~~~~~

“On each of these issues, the interests of the Clinton Campaign and the defendant might diverge … For example, the Clinton Campaign and the defendant each might have an incentive to shift blame and/or responsibility to the other party for any allegedly false information that was contained within the Company Reports and/or provided to the FBI,” Durham said, according to the Washington Examiner.

This investigation is complicated and many people have forgotten it’s still ongoing. But with Clinton now potentially tied to it, things could become much tenser.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconJan-14 5:00 AM 
To: All  (875 of 936) 
 7552.875 in reply to 7552.874 

January 14, 2022

Durham’s Investigation: Incriminating Inference in the FBI’s Empty Russiagate Predication

~~~~~~~~ According to the FBI, the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation was opened on July 31, 2016, because lowly Trump aide George Papadopoulos had been told by one Professor Joseph Mifsud that Russia had emails harmful to Hillary Clinton. ~~~~~~~~~ Quickly thereafter, the FBI opened highly secretive "SIM" (Sensitive Investigation Matter) investigations on Trump advisors Paul Manafort, Carter Page, Michael Flynn, and George Papadopoulos without any actual evidence, on the speculation that they were the most likely conspirators. ~~~~~~~~

Perhaps even more chilling, the FBI knew that Simpson, Steele, and sub-sources were a rogues’ gallery of Russian spies, agents, and oligarchic retainers. Simpson was working at the time for the Russian oligarchic Katsyv family and Prevezon Holdings in a huge Magnitsky Act case, along with Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya, she of the June 9, 2016, Trump Tower meeting imbroglio. 

Steele was the main intelligence advisor, since 2010, for one of Putin’s closest allies, oligarch Oleg Deripaska. Primary sub-source Igor Danchenko had been investigated as a Russian spy and had worked for Steele and Deripaska for years. Danchenko’s covert source, Clinton-connected politico Charles Dolan, was a registered foreign agent for Russia, “was very trusted by Putin’s people” and “well-connected in Vladimir Putin’s inner circle.” Steele has also claimed to have relied on former Russian spy head Vyacheslav Trubnikov and “Putin’s Rasputin” Vladislav Surkov. 

If Putin was truly plotting with Trump, would his close allies so openly betray him, or were they instead mollifying (and getting kompromat on) the presumed next U.S. president?

It is no wonder that Comey has testified that Brennan’s September 7, 2016 referral didn’t “sound familiar” and “doesn’t ring a bell.” ~~~~~~~~~~

But common sense tells us that Comey’s cohorts were not memory-challenged Inspector Clouseaus, but, rather, were more like diabolical Lex Luthors, ruthlessly plotting to take down a despised newcomer politician for partisan ends. 

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconJan-23 6:41 AM 
To: All  (876 of 936) 
 7552.876 in reply to 7552.875 

January 23, 2022

       "The FBI’s claim that Steele played no role in sparking the Trump-Russia probe is further called into question by top bureau officials’ previous false claims about the investigation, including Steele’s role. They not only lied to the public and Congress, but to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA)."

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/durham-vs-horowitz-tension-truth-consequences-grips-fbis-trump-russia-reckoning/

Durham vs. Horowitz: Tension Over Truth and Consequences Grips the FBI’s Trump-Russia Reckoning

~~~~~~~~~~~~ But Durham has made plain his dissent. In response to Horowitz’s report, the special counsel announced that his office had “advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.” Durham stressed that, unlike Horowitz, his “investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department” and has instead obtained “information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S.”

Durham’s office has not described the specific basis for its disagreement. But the Crossfire Hurricane advocates’ defense has a big problem: copious countervailing evidence in the public record – including in Horowitz’s own report. A considerable paper trail points to Steele’s political opposition research playing a greater role in the probe than the FBI has acknowledged:

  • Numerous officials received Steele’s allegations – some meeting with the ex-British intelligence officer himself – and discussed sending them up the FBI chain weeks before July 31, 2016, the Horowitz-endorsed date when the bureau claims it opened the Russia-Trump “collusion” investigation. These encounters call into question the FBI’s claim that Steele played no role in triggering Crossfire Hurricane and that its team only received the dossier weeks after their colleagues, on Sept. 19.
  • The FBI’s own records belie its claims that it decided to launch the Russia probe not because of the dossier, but instead on a vague tip recounting a London barroom conversation with a low-level Trump campaign volunteer, George Papadopoulos. Australian diplomat Alexander Downer’s tip, recorded in bureau records, was that Papadopoulos had merely “suggested” that Russia had made an unspecified “suggestion” of Russian help – a thin basis upon which to investigate an entire presidential campaign.
  • Upon officially opening Crossfire Hurricane on July 31, FBI officials immediately took investigative steps that mirrored the claims in the Steele dossier even though they were supposedly unaware of it. In August, the FBI team opened probes of Trump campaign figures Carter Page, Michael Flynn, and Paul Manafort – all of whom are mentioned in the dossier – based on predicates that are just as flimsy as the Downer-Papadopoulos pretext.
  • The FBI’s claim that Steele played no role in sparking the Trump-Russia probe is further called into question by top bureau officials’ previous false claims about the investigation, including Steele’s role. They not only lied to the public and Congress, but to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.
 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconJan-24 9:21 AM 
To: All  (877 of 936) 
 7552.877 in reply to 7552.876 

January 24, 2022

      "Elias is infamous for using deception, lies, and money to meddle with U.S. elections and push Democrats to the top. Not only did Elias fund the discredited Steele Dossier designed to hurt Donald Trump in 2016, but he helped coordinate and design the Democrat-financed effort to change hundreds of election laws in the months leading up to the 2020 election."

5th Circuit Won't Drop Its Sanctions On Russia Hoax Lawyer Marc Elias

A federal court refused to grant a request by Marc Elias, the Democrat operative who helped run the Russia collusion hoax, to rescind their sanctions against him for deceiving judges in his attempts to fight Republicans in Texas who pushed back on bad election practices by banning straight-ticket voting in the 2020 election.

Elias, who worked as Hillary Clinton’s top campaign lawyer in 2016 and served as legal counsel to now-Vice President Kamala Harris when she ran for president in 2020, was first sanctioned by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in March for deceptively refiling a motion to the court after it was previously denied. Two of the three judges on the panel agreed to sanction Elias and his team for the shady attempt to lie to the court. Elias was quickly scolded by the judges for lacking “candor” in a courtroom setting.

“This inexplicable failure to disclose the earlier denial of their motion violated their duty of candor to the court,” the judges ruled at the time. Filing the motion a second time, they said, “multiplied the proceedings unreasonably and vexatiously.”

As part of his punishment, the court demanded Elias pay attorneys’ fees and double costs as well as “complete one hour of Continuing Legal Education in the area of Ethics and Professionalism, specifically candor with the court.”

After legal counsel for Elias demanded that the judges rethink the “unprecedented” penalties and asked for an appeals court hearing to remove the sanctions, the judges unanimously refused.

Elias is infamous for using deception, lies, and money to meddle with U.S. elections and push Democrats to the top. Not only did Elias fund the discredited Steele Dossier designed to hurt Donald Trump in 2016, but he helped coordinate and design the Democrat-financed effort to change hundreds of election laws in the months leading up to the 2020 election.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconJan-27 9:32 AM 
To: All  (878 of 936) 
 7552.878 in reply to 7552.877 

January 27, 2022

      "Durham has been following the evidence and all signs point to the Hillary Clinton campaign."

https://slaynews.com/news/john-durham-puts-hillary-clinton-on-notice-in-new-filing-active-ongoing-criminal-investigation/

Special Counsel John Durham Puts Hillary Clinton, James Comey, and others on Notice in New Filing: ‘Active, Ongoing Criminal Investigation’

Special Counsel John Durham has put Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Jake Sullivan, and others on notice by calling his investigation into the Trump Russia story an “active, ongoing criminal investigation,” three times, in a new court filing.

Durham has been following the evidence and all signs point to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Clinton’s former lawyer, Michael Sussmann, will stand trial for lying to the FBI this spring.

Senior Legal Affairs Reporter at POLITICO, Josh Gerstein, said:

“Special Counsel John Durham court filing calls his probe ‘active, ongoing criminal investigation’ 3 times.

“Also says indicted lawyer Michael Sussmann is seeking info on NYT in-person meeting with the FBI

“Also says Sussmann met w/DOJ OIG Horowitz in March 2017 about the alleged Alfa bank/Trump tower cyber link.

“Durham’s office acknowledges they had no idea about this meeting before charging Sussmann.”

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconJan-28 4:13 AM 
To: All  (879 of 936) 
 7552.879 in reply to 7552.878 

January 28, 2022

       "What was not publicly known until recently was that he also pleaded guilty to an illegal foreign donation scheme...Nader was indicted in December 2019 for what prosecutors said was his role in a scheme to conceal large sums of illegal campaign contributions to help Clinton in 2016."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/mueller-witness-pleads-guilty-in-illegal-scheme-to-funnel-uae-money-to-hillary-clintons-2016-campaign

Mueller witness pleads guilty in illegal scheme to funnel UAE money to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign

George Nader, a key witness in former special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation and a convicted child sex predator, quietly pleaded guilty last year to involvement in an illegal campaign finance scheme funneling millions of dollars from the United Arab Emirates into Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Nader, a Lebanese American lobbyist, was sentenced to 10 years in prison in June 2020 after pleading guilty to bringing an underage teenage boy to the United States for sex and possessing child pornography. What was not publicly known until recently was that he also pleaded guilty to an illegal foreign donation scheme.

The Department of Justice revealed in a December sentencing memo that Nader had pleaded guilty to a single count on July 22, 2020. The court filing says Nader and Ahmad “Andy” Khawaja, a Los Angeles-based chief executive of Allied Wallet, “orchestrated a scheme to funnel over $3.5 million in foreign funds into the 2016 presidential election.” The DOJ added that they “did so to gain direct access to unsuspecting high-level political figures to further their professional endeavors: in the defendant’s case, out of a desire to lobby on behalf and advance the interests of his client, the government of the United Arab Emirates; in Khawaja’s case, in the hopes of securing political appointment in the future.”

Nader was indicted in December 2019 for what prosecutors said was his role in a scheme to conceal large sums of illegal campaign contributions to help Clinton in 2016. He was accused of conspiring with Khawaja to conceal the source of more than $3.5 million in campaign contributions to political committees associated with Clinton. ~~~~~~~~~~~

Search warrants unsealed in 2019 revealed that the FBI found child pornography in Nader’s possession during the Mueller investigation. The warrants alleged that at least a dozen videos containing child pornography were found on his phones — some involving animals and boys as young as 2 years old.

Nader was also accused of taking a 14-year-old boy from the Czech Republic to his Washington, D.C., home in 2000 and using him for sex. Two years later, Czech authorities arrested Nader amid allegations that he had sex with underage boys in the Czech Republic between 1999 and 2002. He was convicted in May 2003 of molesting children, according to the search warrants.

When law enforcement in the U.S. learned of the 14-year-old boy in 2002, Nader had left the country. The judge ruled in the summer of 2020 that Nader must pay $150,000 in restitution to the victim. Nader also pleaded guilty to a federal pornography charge in 1991 and was sentenced to six months in prison after he was found with two reels of videotape hidden in candy tins when he arrived at the Washington-Dulles International Airport.  ~~~~~~~~~~~~

Nader was mentioned more than 100 times in Mueller's 448-page report on the Russia investigation, and he was interviewed by the special counsel team multiple times, including about possible efforts from the United Arab Emirates to influence members of Trump's campaign. Mueller "did not establish" any criminal collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

 

 
From: WEBELIAHU DelphiPlus Member IconJan-31 4:16 AM 
To: All  (880 of 936) 
 7552.880 in reply to 7552.879 

January 31, 2022

       "At stake is the completeness of the official reckoning within the U.S. government over the Russiagate scandal – and whether there will be an accounting commensurate with the offense: the abuse of the nation's highest law enforcement and intelligence powers to damage an opposition presidential candidate turned president, at the behest of his opponent from the governing party he defeated."

https://www.wnd.com/2022/01/durham-going-reason-fbi-launched-debunked-russia-collusion/

Durham going after reason FBI launched debunked 'Russia collusion'

Scandal included 'abuse' of law enforcement to 'damage' Donald Trump

As he documents the role of Hillary Clinton’s campaign in generating false allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, Special Counsel John Durham has also previewed a challenge to the FBI’s claims about how and why its counterintelligence investigation of the Trump campaign began. At stake is the completeness of the official reckoning within the U.S. government over the Russiagate scandal – and whether there will be an accounting commensurate with the offense: the abuse of the nation's highest law enforcement and intelligence powers to damage an opposition presidential candidate turned president, at the behest of his opponent from the governing party he defeated.

The drama is playing out against the clashing approaches of the two Justice Department officials tasked with scrutinizing the Russia probe's origins and unearthing any misconduct: Durham, the Sphinx-like prosecutor with a reputation for toughness whose work continues, and Michael Horowitz, the Department of Justice inspector general, whose December 2019 report faulted the FBI's handling of the Russia probe but nonetheless concluded that it was launched in good faith.

The bureau's defenders point to Horowitz's report to argue that the FBI’s Trump-Russia conspiracy investigation, codenamed Crossfire Hurricane, is untainted despite its extensive use of the discredited Clinton-funded Steele dossier. Though highly critical of the bureau's use of Christopher Steele's reports, Horowitz concluded that they “played no role in the Crossfire Hurricane opening," which he said had met the department's "low threshold" for opening an investigation. But Durham has made plain his dissent. In response to Horowitz's report, the special counsel announced that his office had "advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened." Durham stressed that, unlike Horowitz, his "investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department" and has instead obtained "information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S."

Durham’s office has not described the specific basis for its disagreement. But the Crossfire Hurricane advocates’ defense has a big problem: copious countervailing evidence in the public record – including in Horowitz's own report. A considerable paper trail points to Steele’s political opposition research playing a greater role in the probe than the FBI has acknowledged:

  • Numerous officials received Steele's allegations – some meeting with the ex-British intelligence officer himself – and discussed sending them up the FBI chain weeks before July 31, 2016, the Horowitz-endorsed date when the bureau claims it opened the Russia-Trump “collusion” investigation. These encounters call into question the FBI’s claim that Steele played no role in triggering Crossfire Hurricane and that its team only received the dossier weeks after their colleagues, on Sept. 19. ~~~~~~~~~ Upon officially opening Crossfire Hurricane on July 31, FBI officials immediately took investigative steps that mirrored the claims in the Steele dossier even though they were supposedly unaware of it. In August, the FBI team opened probes of Trump campaign figures Carter Page, Michael Flynn, and Paul Manafort – all of whom are mentioned in the dossier – based on predicates that are just as flimsy as the Downer-Papadopoulos pretext.
 

Navigate this discussion: 1-10 11-20 21-30 ... 851-860 861-870 871-880 881-890 891-900 ... 911-920 921-930 931-936
Adjust text size:

Welcome, guest! Get more out of Delphi Forums by logging in.

New to Delphi Forums? You can log in with your Facebook, Twitter, or Google account or use the New Member Login option and log in with any email address.

Home | Help | Forums | Chat | Blogs | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
© Delphi Forums LLC All rights reserved.