Christopher Steele: I Was Hired to Help Hillary Clinton Challenge the 2016 Election Results

[hanger4]

Doesn't mean I'm wrong that both parties sought the firms expertise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You weren't referring to the firm Fusion GPS, you were directly referring to Steele, via "his services".

 

[Airyaman]

No. You are wrong. You're supposed to use only verified information in FISA warrant requests regardless of what you want to investigate.

Please point towards the statute that supports your contention.

The only "evidence" warrants require -- FISA warrants included -- is probable cause. The Steele dossier was just one piece of information lending to the probable cause necessary to obtain a FISA warrant on Carter Page.

Isikoff knew about the Steele dossier in September and the first FISA warrant was in October.

Not sure what this has to do with anything?

 

[Conaeolos]

Unless the OP is intimating that Steele made up information, not sure why any of this would be a problem. Perhaps the OP can elaborate?

The information is paid for intel from Russian sources so without verification what does it matter the reputation of Steele as weighted in the FISA application? More concern the verification indicated seems to have been circular citing an artical about said dossier. And since I think a lot of this is coming from Dan Bongino, he points out the similarities of this article written by the Founder of Fusion GPS in 2007: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB117674837248471543 (no paywall: https://web.archive.org/web/20180630103910/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB117674837248471543) [you can judge that one for yoruself]

You then seem to imply that something illegal happened with the FISA warrant(s) that used the Steele dossier as a source. What specifically was illegal?

The target may have been people within orbit of Carter Page so misleading a FISA judge in that way is of great concern. The illegal activity would be in the 'why' they were misleading a FISA judge as it would have to be intentional unless there is some damning classifed evidence which from what we know is unlikely.

 

[eohrnberger]

If it has to do with Hillary, Mueller doesn't care.

I'd modify it to "If it has to do with Hillary or Obama, it's Mueller's job to redirect attention to Trump".

Seems that there are a number of news outlets are reporting on this, so not just BreitBart.

Christopher Steele: Hillary Clinton was preparing to challenge 2016 ...
https://www.washingtontimes.com/.../christopher-steele-hillary-clinton-was-preparing-...
Dec 12, 2018 - British ex-spy Christopher Steele, who wrote the Democrat-financed ... dossier author was hired to help Hillary challenge 2016 election results.

In Court, Steele Claimed His Dossier Was Meant to Help Hillary ...
https://pjmedia.com/.../in-court-steele-claimed-his-dossier-was-meant-to-help-hillary-c...
4 days ago - The DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign funneled cash to ex-British spy Christopher Steeleto help them "challenge the ... In Court, Steele Claimed His Dossier Was Meant to Help Hillary Challenge 2016 Election Results.

Christopher Steele Admits He Was Hired To Help Hillary Challenge ...
https://www.zerohedge.com/.../christopher-steele-admits-he-was-hired-help-hillary-ch...
5 days ago - Former UK spy Christopher Steele admitted in a London court that he was hired to help Hillary Clinton contest the results of the 2016 election in ...

Mission Accomplished: Christopher Steele Admits He Was Hired to ...
https://townhall.com/.../mission-accomplished-christopher-steele-admits-he-was-hired-...
5 days ago - Christopher Steele, a former spy from Britain and the author of the ... His goal was to help Hillary Clinton challenge the results of the presidential election. ... of the 2016 US Presidential election," Steele said in a sealed Aug.
​

Appears that Steele made these statements in court.

Observing the following:


If you look back how the Hillary, the Dems, the media, and even the further far left extremists have behaved since the 2016 election results, they've done nothing but not accepting the outcome of the election.

By Hillary's own measure, wouldn't that make them all a 'threat to our democracy' ? Why, yes. Yes, I think so.

 

[Airyaman]

The information is paid for intel from Russian sources so without verification what does it matter the reputation of Steele as weighted in the FISA application?

The application for the FISA warrant indicated that information from the Steele dossier was from a paid informant. Not sure what your point is then in mentioning this.

More concern the verification indicated seems to have been circular citing an artical about said dossier. And since I think a lot of this is coming from Dan Bongino, he points out the similarities of this article written by the Founder of Fusion GPS in 2007: https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB117674837248471543 (no paywall: https://web.archive.org/web/20180630103910/https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB117674837248471543) [you can judge that one for yoruself]

Not sure what this article has to do with anything?

The target may have been people within orbit of Carter Page so misleading a FISA judge in that way is of great concern. The illegal activity would be in the 'why' they were misleading a FISA judge as it would have to be intentional unless there is some damning classifed evidence which from what we know is unlikely.

Can you be specific as to what you find misleading?

 

[bubbabgone]

Please point towards the statute that supports your contention.

The only "evidence" warrants require -- FISA warrants included -- is probable cause. The Steele dossier was just one piece of information lending to the probable cause necessary to obtain a FISA warrant on Carter Page.

"FISA warrants go through purportedly stringent parallel vetting processes by FBI headquarters and the DOJ’s National Security Division. The effort is said to ensure the application is truthful and to eliminate unsupported or unsubstantiated assertions."
https://knowledgeisgood.net/2018/02/27/need-fisa-warrants/
You shouldn't need to be told that, given the implications of the alternative.

Not sure what this has to do with anything?

I said
"Steele allegedly told the FBI he never told the media."
you said
"At the time of their negotiations, he hadn't."
so I had to remind you
"Isikoff knew about the Steele dossier in September and the first FISA warrant was in October."

Clear now?

 

[eohrnberger]

Hillary---DNC---Fusion GPS---Steele---Russians


Mr Mueller?

Mr Mueller: "We have another indictment on someone from the Trump orbit".

Mueller isn't going to do a single thing which would implicate Hillary, Obama, the Obama administration, nor the DNC in anything. :2mad:
Raises question as to what the Trump DOJ is busy doing, playing tiddlywinks in their back room? :2mad:

 

[veritas1]

Mr Mueller: "We have another indictment on someone from the Trump orbit".

Mueller isn't going to do a single thing which would implicate Hillary, Obama, the Obama administration, nor the DNC in anything. :2mad:
Raises question as to what the Trump DOJ is busy doing, playing tiddlywinks in their back room? :2mad:

Exactly.

 

[Airyaman]

"FISA warrants go through purportedly stringent parallel vetting processes by FBI headquarters and the DOJ’s National Security Division. The effort is said to ensure the application is truthful and to eliminate unsupported or unsubstantiated assertions."
https://knowledgeisgood.net/2018/02/27/need-fisa-warrants/
You shouldn't need to be told that, given the implications of the alternative.

Interesting. So did you breeze past this in your link?

The FISA probable cause standard is similar in many respects to that in domestic criminal cases. It is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather it is comprised of evidence that would cause a reasonable person to conclude that the subject could be a spy for a foreign government or organization. From this standpoint, the FISA probable cause standard is slightly lower lower than that required in a domestic criminal case.


Now, that said, what all of this information should tell you is that the Steele dossier was not the sole piece of information, but that it was a corroborating piece of information. I see no evidence that the Steele dossier was the only information used. Thus, the applicants and the judge must have felt the information used in the Steele dossier for the Carter Page FISA warrant was sufficiently supported with other pieces of information.

I said
"Steele allegedly told the FBI he never told the media."
you said
"At the time of their negotiations, he hadn't."
so I had to remind you
"Isikoff knew about the Steele dossier in September and the first FISA warrant was in October."

Clear now?

Clear, but not sure what this has to do with the subject at hand.

 

[Conaeolos]

The application for the FISA warrant indicated that information from the Steele dossier was from a paid informant. Not sure what your point is then in mentioning this.

FISA is guided by Attorney General Guidelines which establish a threshold for the grounds, by this logic the Dossier would not meet the threshold outlined. The evidence is weighted on the reputation of Steele; even though he is not the source but rather a pass-through. By what means could the applicants assess Steele's paid Russian sources credible? The intel is from paid likely unknown Russian sources that remained unverified from all we can tell and more may have been framed as more verifed than they were using circular reasoning. The only claims of verifcation to that point we know is a claim by CNN from unknown sources that there was some Russian to Russian activity that correlates. A meaningless statement in this context. Granted there is a chance the redacted portions contain the missing link; however, there is plenty of negative evidence to suggest otherwise.

Not sure what this article has to do with anything?

Scan it. You will see the parallels quite quickly. Why does it matter that a major involved party wrote a similar conspiracy or reported a similar story but with different actors in 2007?

You do realize you are making the affirmative claim here that there is grounds of Russian collusion is so strong as to justifying a FISA warrant against a political opponent. And the largest evidence to date is all based around credibility.

Can you be specific as to what you find misleading?

We have a very strong chance unverified paid Russian sources found via oppo research by a political competitor for the stated purposes of challanging election results was used to target an opposing political actor using FISA and your question to me is what could be misleading? What about the judge not being aware of that context.

 

[iguanaman]

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...-clinton-challenge-the-2016-election-results/

I don't recall seeing this posted here so I'm not quite sure what to make about this:

From a Washington Times report:


So I can't imagine that Mueller has not talked to these people. It is so intertwined with Muellers central mission to "investigate Russian meddling in the US election", there is no way in hell this can be avoided. This "confession" of Steeles goes to the heart of the FISA warrant and spying on the Trump campaign. FISA is to to be used for domestic spying on the opposition party.

The Steele dossier has been 80% verified as fact with more items checking out every week so there is that...

The most obvious occurrence that could not have been known to Orbis in June 2016, but shines bright in retrospect is the fact that Russia undertook a coordinated and massive effort to disrupt the 2016 election to help Donald Trump, as the U.S. intelligence community itself later concluded. Well before any public knowledge of these events, the Orbis report identified multiple elements of the Russian operation including a cyber campaign, leaked documents related to Hillary Clinton, and meetings with Paul Manafort and other Trump affiliates to reportedly discuss the receipt of stolen documents. Steele could not have known that the Russians stole information on Hillary Clinton, or that they were considering means to weaponize them in the U.S. election, all of which turned out to be stunningly accurate.

The U.S. government only published its conclusions in January 2017, with an assessment of some elements in October 2016. It was also apparently news to investigators when the New York Times in July published Donald Trump Jr.’s emails arranging for the receipt of information held by the Russians about Hillary Clinton in a meeting that included Manafort. How could Steele and Orbis know in June 2016 that the Russians were working actively to elect Donald Trump and damage Hillary Clinton unless at least some of its information was correct? How could Steele and Orbis have known about the Russian overtures to the Trump Team involving derogatory information on Clinton?

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/09/a-lot-of-the-steele-dossier-has-since-been-corroborated.html

 

[humbolt]

The beauty is that his prior work with MI6 would then enable the FBI to use him as a reliable source for FISA warrants.
Sure does present many opportunities to advance an agenda among folks who were so inclined.

It does, and the primary sources are nearly untouchable. It's not like Steele invited them over to his place for dinner, after which they'd retire to his home office. These were all remote, back channel communications, and probably done with Moscow's blessing.

 

[bubbabgone]

Interesting. So did you breeze past this in your link?

The FISA probable cause standard is similar in many respects to that in domestic criminal cases. It is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather it is comprised of evidence that would cause a reasonable person to conclude that the subject could be a spy for a foreign government or organization. From this standpoint, the FISA probable cause standard is slightly lower lower than that required in a domestic criminal case.


Now, that said, what all of this information should tell you is that the Steele dossier was not the sole piece of information, but that it was a corroborating piece of information. I see no evidence that the Steele dossier was the only information used. Thus, the applicants and the judge must have felt the information used in the Steele dossier for the Carter Page FISA warrant was sufficiently supported with other pieces of information.



Clear, but not sure what this has to do with the subject at hand.

No I didn't breeze past anything.
Did you breeze past
"Nevertheless, to obtain a FISA warrant to conduct electronic surveillance on a United States’ citizen, the FBI must show probable cause that the target is an “agent of a foreign power” who is knowingly engaging “in clandestine intelligence activities.” In addition, these clandestine activities must likely constitute one or more felonies under federal law, such as engaging in sabotage, terrorism or using a false or stolen identity."
and
"While I think that the failure to advise the court of Steele’s bias and ties to the Clinton campaign is a glaring material omission, it is difficult on the record presently available to tell whether that was or should have been a fatal defect. For example, in addition to Steele’s reliability, does the application set forth any corroboration of his information? Former FBI Director James Comey has publicly described the Steele dossier as “salacious” and “unverified.” But does that mean the application is devoid of corroboration of any kind? If Steele’s information is corroborated, how and to what extent? We need to see the actual document to make those critical determinations."
In case you didn't get the gist, it all means there needs to be corroboration of claims made in FISA applications.
Using Steele as corroboration for a FISA request and then using a media outlet he spoke to as additional corroboration for the same FISA request should be recognized as an obvious problem as well as an explanation of what it has to do with the subject at hand.

 

[chuckiechan]

Mr Mueller: "We have another indictment on someone from the Trump orbit".

Mueller isn't going to do a single thing which would implicate Hillary, Obama, the Obama administration, nor the DNC in anything. :2mad:
Raises question as to what the Trump DOJ is busy doing, playing tiddlywinks in their back room? :2mad:

Being that Trump has the authority to declassify a lot of things concering the whole constellation of Russiagate, Clinton, Inc, The Clinton Foundation, The FISA warrants, all connected in one way or amother. In typical Trump fashion, he is waiting until the right time. Probably after the crazed democrats vote for imoeachment, then BAM, the rebuttal with newly unclassified information plus a special fisherman to go after the real criminals for the very things he was accused of.

 

[bubbabgone]

The Steele dossier has been 80% verified as fact with more items checking out every week so there is that...

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/09/a-lot-of-the-steele-dossier-has-since-been-corroborated.html

Where did that come from?

 

[bubbabgone]

It does, and the primary sources are nearly untouchable. It's not like Steele invited them over to his place for dinner, after which they'd retire to his home office. These were all remote, back channel communications, and probably done with Moscow's blessing.

Read some more of the thread and you'll discover that some people believe you can put all manner of smelly uncorroborated garbage in a FISA warrant request because, after all, you want to see if there's any truth to it.

 

[iguanaman]

Where did that come from?

It's called a link.

 

[Airyaman]

No I didn't breeze past anything.
Did you breeze past
"Nevertheless, to obtain a FISA warrant to conduct electronic surveillance on a United States’ citizen, the FBI must show probable cause that the target is an “agent of a foreign power” who is knowingly engaging “in clandestine intelligence activities.” In addition, these clandestine activities must likely constitute one or more felonies under federal law, such as engaging in sabotage, terrorism or using a false or stolen identity."
and

You are suddenly shifting the goal posts of the discussion. We have been discussing whether or not information used to apply for a FISA warrant has to be verified. This has nothing to do with that particular discussion.

Not chasing any rabbits here.

"While I think that the failure to advise the court of Steele’s bias and ties to the Clinton campaign is a glaring material omission,

That information was included in the FISA warrant. As footnotes, but still included.

it is difficult on the record presently available to tell whether that was or should have been a fatal defect. For example, in addition to Steele’s reliability, does the application set forth any corroboration of his information? Former FBI Director James Comey has publicly described the Steele dossier as “salacious” and “unverified.” But does that mean the application is devoid of corroboration of any kind? If Steele’s information is corroborated, how and to what extent? We need to see the actual document to make those critical determinations."
In case you didn't get the gist, it all means there needs to be corroboration of claims made in FISA applications.
Using Steele as corroboration for a FISA request and then using a media outlet he spoke to as additional corroboration for the same FISA request should be recognized as an obvious problem as well as an explanation of what it has to do with the subject at hand.

You've been reading the GOP memo again, eh? Shame.

Digging into the release of the Carter Page FISA application | Jamie Dupree - AJC

6. The FBI document undermines Nunes on one point. In the GOP memo released back in February about this FISA request, Republicans state clearly that the “Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016 Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff,” making it seem like the FBI was relying on information in that article to support the FBI request for surveillance of Page. Except when you read the actual FISA document, that article is noted under a section headlined, “Page’s Denial of Cooperation with the Russian Government,” as the FBI even includes information from a letter that Page wrote to the FBI Director denying any wrongdoing. The GOP memo is first in the below graphic, followed by the FISA warrant request.

So your point that the FBI used the Yahoo article as corroborating evidence is simply false.

 

[Athanasius68]

Interesting. So did you breeze past this in your link?

The FISA probable cause standard is similar in many respects to that in domestic criminal cases. It is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather it is comprised of evidence that would cause a reasonable person to conclude that the subject could be a spy for a foreign government or organization. From this standpoint, the FISA probable cause standard is slightly lower lower than that required in a domestic criminal case.


Now, that said, what all of this information should tell you is that the Steele dossier was not the sole piece of information, but that it was a corroborating piece of information. I see no evidence that the Steele dossier was the only information used. Thus, the applicants and the judge must have felt the information used in the Steele dossier for the Carter Page FISA warrant was sufficiently supported with other pieces of information.



Clear, but not sure what this has to do with the subject at hand.

FBI policy requires that 'facts' used for a FISA warrant request be verified before being submitted to the FISA court. Comey has twice stated under oath the dossier is unverified.
And the standards are tighter when the warrant is sought against a USA citizen.

So, for example, if the claim is that Page met with some Russian on some date that fact has to be verified. That fact alone may not prove anything, but it could reasonably be part of a probable cause belief that Page was acting as a foreign agent.
But if the fact of the meeting cannot be established, then obviously there is less claim of probable cause of the claim for which the FISA warrant is all about.

And we know it was the dossier which drove the warrant.

 

[Conaeolos]

The Steele dossier has been 80% verified as fact with more items checking out every week so there is that..

80%? Eh. Are we counting appeals to authority? But great so the next request should be easy….

Please name one specific aspect [one that can be show to be true or false] that has been verified with evidence not an appeal to classified information or unknown "credible" sources. Feel free to use a link with a short description. I have read a few articles claiming and am generally farmilar but am requesting just one point laid out to discuss. So if your going use a link to a general article, I just request you highlight the best section to discuss. I am sure this 80% claim will be easy to review.

as to

How could Steele and Orbis know in June 2016 that the Russians were working actively to elect Donald Trump and damage Hillary Clinton unless at least some of its information was correct?

Easy, they were not.

How could Steele and Orbis have known about the Russian overtures to the Trump Team involving derogatory information on Clinton?

Clintons are especially famous for being rumoured for having secret dirt. I am not even sure what the point would be even if that wasn't true.

 

[Airyaman]

FBI policy requires that 'facts' used for a FISA warrant request be verified before being submitted to the FISA court.

Link?

Comey has twice stated under oath the dossier is unverified.
And the standards are tighter when the warrant is sought against a USA citizen.

So, for example, if the claim is that Page met with some Russian on some date that fact has to be verified. That fact alone may not prove anything, but it could reasonably be part of a probable cause belief that Page was acting as a foreign agent.
But if the fact of the meeting cannot be established, then obviously there is less claim of probable cause of the claim for which the FISA warrant is all about.

And we know it was the dossier which drove the warrant.

No, you don't know that. You need to believe that, but you don't know that.

 

[bubbabgone]

It's called a link.

Not your link.

 

[Airyaman]

One thing that always interests me about the whole Steele dossier thing and the Carter Page FISA warrant is this: what is the true concern of those who bring it up? Are they simply railing against the FISA process or are they Carter Page fans?

 

[eohrnberger]

Being that Trump has the authority to declassify a lot of things concering the whole constellation of Russiagate, Clinton, Inc, The Clinton Foundation, The FISA warrants, all connected in one way or amother. In typical Trump fashion, he is waiting until the right time. Probably after the crazed democrats vote for imoeachment, then BAM, the rebuttal with newly unclassified information plus a special fisherman to go after the real criminals for the very things he was accused of.

Fair. May very well turn out that way.

In your mind's eye you can see a White House private meeting with Pelosi and Trump, where Trump plays 'no impeachment or I'll declassify all this', and Pelosi getting pressure from Hillary and Obama to shutdown any house talk of impeachment. After all:

"If that ****ing bastard wins, we all hang from nooses!" - Hillary Clinton (alleged)

Make of that alleged quote what you will, but might very well be needed to purge at least some of the political corruption that abounds on the Democrat side of the aisle.

 

[bubbabgone]

You are suddenly shifting the goal posts of the discussion. We have been discussing whether or not information used to apply for a FISA warrant has to be verified. This has nothing to do with that particular discussion.

Not chasing any rabbits here.



That information was included in the FISA warrant. As footnotes, but still included.



You've been reading the GOP memo again, eh? Shame.

Digging into the release of the Carter Page FISA application | Jamie Dupree - AJC

6. The FBI document undermines Nunes on one point. In the GOP memo released back in February about this FISA request, Republicans state clearly that the “Carter Page FISA application also cited extensively a September 23, 2016 Yahoo News article by Michael Isikoff,” making it seem like the FBI was relying on information in that article to support the FBI request for surveillance of Page. Except when you read the actual FISA document, that article is noted under a section headlined, “Page’s Denial of Cooperation with the Russian Government,” as the FBI even includes information from a letter that Page wrote to the FBI Director denying any wrongdoing. The GOP memo is first in the below graphic, followed by the FISA warrant request.

So your point that the FBI used the Yahoo article as corroborating evidence is simply false.

You're mistaken yet again.
Information used to get a FISA warrant should be verified.

The footnote was not enough to explain Steele's involvement, his bias, how he came to be involved, and who paid for it.
If it wouldn't have mattered it would have been included in the interest of being thorough.
The FBI relied on the Yahoo article as corroboration for Steele but Yahoo got it from Steele.
Yahoo couldn't be used as corroboration.
Even if the FBI felt all comfy with Steele they had no contact with his sources yet relied on them.