djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,019 
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 17, 2019 21:11:35 GMT -5
The alleged "Golden Showers,, Has that been proven,, like maybe a video?
has it been shown false?
has anyone been able to definitively say that it could not possibly have happened?
last I read, he was there, during that time, at that hotel.
what makes you think that didn't happen?
because he is such a virtuous man?
GMAFB
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,019
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 17, 2019 21:23:47 GMT -5
Of course the entire article is based on what has not been unproven!
you raised the bar. I never claimed there was proof.
what I SAID was that there is "verification". the word the article used was corroboration. same thing.
so, please stop waving this red herring around, unless you want to prove that something in the dossier is NOT true.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Feb 18, 2019 13:29:11 GMT -5
Without the Dossier, there was no reason for the Russian investigation. The Steele Dossier is not the reason for the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 US elections, nor is it the basis of investigation into collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. It was continued to be used for the fisa reissuing of the warrant when they knew it was full of holes and inuendos. |
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,305
|
Post by NastyWoman on Feb 18, 2019 16:00:56 GMT -5
large parts:
www.lawfareblog.com/steele-dossier-retrospective
edit: here is what lawfare says as a summary remark just before it provides details:
These materials buttress some of Steele’s reporting, both specifically and thematically. The dossier holds up well over time, and none of it, to our knowledge, has been disproven.
so, I ask you and others again: which specific allegations have been shown to be false?
if you say none, then please stop telling the rest of us that this document is a pack of lies, because you know you can't back that up.
A quick look, it appears this publication is not neutral in it's stories.. A quick search of Chuck Rosenburg and Sarah Grant tell which direction this story will take! Then farther down, "making it very hard to prove." Of course the entire article is based on what has not been unproven! OK, I will ask this, What part of Trump's actions have been proven,,, Let's ask this The alleged "Golden Showers,, Has that been proven,, like maybe a video?
You really shouldn't use double negatives → you have just stated that the entire article is based on what HAS been proven. And that is taking it a little too far even for me  |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,019
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 18, 2019 18:06:42 GMT -5
Without the Dossier, there was no reason for the Russian investigation. The Steele Dossier is not the reason for the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 US elections, nor is it the basis of investigation into collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. in fact, the investigation had already started.
of course we didn't know that until last year, but we have known it almost a year now.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,019
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 18, 2019 18:08:30 GMT -5
The Steele Dossier is not the reason for the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 US elections, nor is it the basis of investigation into collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. It was continued to be used for the fisa reissuing of the warrant when they knew it was full of holes and inuendos. again- what holes?
you keep saying the same stuff, but you have not actually shown anything in the Dossier to be false.
but don't take that as criticism.
nobody has.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Feb 18, 2019 19:06:11 GMT -5
It was continued to be used for the fisa reissuing of the warrant when they knew it was full of holes and inuendos. again- what holes?
you keep saying the same stuff, but you have not actually shown anything in the Dossier to be false.
but don't take that as criticism.
nobody has.
I thought the burden of proof was on the accuser! So now we have to prove the innocence??
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,019
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Feb 18, 2019 19:14:27 GMT -5
again- what holes?
you keep saying the same stuff, but you have not actually shown anything in the Dossier to be false.
but don't take that as criticism.
nobody has.
I thought the burden of proof was on the accuser! So now we have to prove the innocence??
in this case, I think that Steele is on trial. the charge is that he is lying.
so yes, it is up to you to prove that. I am assuming he is innocent.
if you are operating under the same assumption, my work here is done. 
|
|
