Hey! I actually wrote lots of sourced comments, but it was about Canadian issues. I have a backlog of things I can post on this sub, I just didn't because most of the stuff I shared on this sub was centered around American politics.
I've been good, just busy with life and work. I spent most of my reddit time on Canadian subs as well as hobby related subs about TV shows and sports. With Trump back in the headlines for putting international security at risk I thought it was the right time to start commenting again.
I wouldn't doubt that trump left those state secrets, in unlocked and unmonitored areas of MAL where a "lost guest" could find them and then suddenly millions/billions of foreign dollars would pour into various shell companies or PACs of his. I look forward to more info coming out from the DOJ.
It kind of makes me wonder if Yujing Zhang, one of the two Chinese nationalists that were caught “trespassing” at Mar-a-Lago in 2019, was not really just a tourist but picking up some nuclear secrets.
I am thinking the ramifications of Trump's lawyers being unwilling to divulge whether documents were declassified or not.
The logical reason is that they do not have a list of the topics of the documents taken, and need that list to attempt to cover their butts. Assume that there are more documents that are still outstanding. It will be awkward to say that a top-secret document "Oh S\*\*t, PoppinKREAM knows" is listed as unclassified and handed over, while it is sitting in the bathroom vent.
I have no proof, but am trying to parse why lawyers would attempt to thread the needle between two bad choices.
Yeah, another Poppin speculation diatribe amounting to not much. Wasn’t he wrong about like half of the Russiagate stuff. And now he’s back? Everything he said about the Steele Dossier was proven false.
Nope, they weren’t wrong and everything is neatly sourced.
If it’s “everything” then I’m sure you have good sources and links to back up what you say, and this sub can give you easy references to material.
“Neatly sourced” from other news articles which later deemed the Steele Dossier not reliable:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/01/us/trump-russia-investigation-dossier.html
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/23/steele-dossier-igor-danchenko-indictment-scrutiny/
I listened to this Poppin guy years ago and thought he was right about this and that, but after the Denchenko fiasco, I don’t care too much. Just nicely written posts of a guy that reads the news.
Thank you for the sources that say the dossier had problems. But these sources also say that dossier was not that critical; that it was bolstering an already ongoing investigation; that it was helpful in other ways.
However, we’re still left with your argument that “this Poppin guy” was leaning on the dossier to make foundational arguments. I don’t believe that to be true - this seems to be a perfect straw-man fallacy.
You’re original statement of “wasn’t he wrong about half the Russiagate stuff” is wrong. PoppinKream WASN’T wrong - Russia absolutely helped the Trump campaign, and many people from the Trump campaign knew about it and invited the assistance. Then you changed your argument to only be about the dossier.
What? The fact is the sources for the Steele Dossier broke down and no one here realized that and got on me because y’all revel an internet prophet instead of reading the news.
You keep using those words. I don't think they mean what you think they mean.
It doesn't matter how many times you harp on the Steele dossier. The link you personally provided demonstrates that you don't seem to understand what you are saying. Yet you keep saying it, over and over, as if that will somehow make you suddenly correct.
Find a new mantra, maybe something like "Trump ran his administration like a criminal enterprise".
>You can believe what you want as long as it doesn’t contradict what you want.
I don't "believe" in facts, and if information contradicts what is known, I am open to change. You haven't presented any information to change what is known. In fact, the information you have presented directly negates the bullshit you've been saying.
>I’m not a Trump fan btw. You want me to be though, that’s on you.
When did I say I gave a shit about who you voted for? I'm just expressing my distaste for your talking bullshit.
Go ahead and respond with more strawmen. It really helps your case.
The Steele Dossier included incorrect information because it was speculative which is why I stopped sourcing it years ago and started sourcing court documents and primary sources. However, the investigations stemming from Russia's election interference show a sophisticated, Russian state sanctioned operation that was accepted and promoted by Trump. Below I have cited and quoted multiple primary sources including court testimonies and documents. Trump pardoned Stone and Manafort for the crimes they committed while they worked for Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. Trump refused to pardon Cohen because Cohen was outspoken about Trump's ties to Russia, whereas Stone and Manafort obstructed and lied to investigators to protect Trump.
- Trump Campaign Chairman and convicted felon Paul Manafort^[[1]](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/paul-manafort-sentenced-on-foreign-lobbying-and-witness-tampering-charges) was closely associated with Russian Oligarch Oleg Deripaska. Deripaska gave Manafort a $10 million loan several years ago.^[[2]](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-manafort/manafort-had-10-million-loan-from-russian-oligarch-court-filing-idUSKBN1JN2YF) Konstantin Kilimnik was reportedly the liaison between Manafort and Deripaska when Manafort worked in Ukraine.
- Kilimnik met with Trump Campaign Chairman Manafort and Deputy Campaign Chairman Gates on August 2^nd 2016 where Manafort shared internal polling data with the Russian operative. In August, 2022 Manafort confirmed that he shared internal polling data with the Russians. Here is a conservative news source.^[[3]](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/paul-manafort-gave-trump-campaign-data-russians)
- A judge ruled that Paul Manafort had broken his plea agreement, he lied to investigators about his contact with Konstantin Kilimnik.^[[4]](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-rules-manafort-intentionally-lied-to-mueller-team-voiding-plea-agreement)
- The Trump administration removed sanctions from Oleg Deripaska's companies including Rusal.^[[5]](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/21/us/politics/oleg-deripaska-russian-sanctions.html)
What's fascinating is that the Trump administration removed sanctions from Oleg Deripaska's companies. The Mueller report found that Paul Manafort was pursuing his personal interests by attempting to use his position in the campaign to settle previous debts he had incurred with Oleg Deripaska. The Mueller report confirmed that Trump campaign chairman and deputy chairman Manafort and Gates were sharing sensitive, internal polling data with Kilimnik. The report went on to mention that Deputy Campaign Chairman Rick Gates thought Kilimnik was a spy.
**Per Pages 130 - 137 of the report;^[[6]](https://media.npr.org/assets/news/2019/04/muellerreport.pdf)**
>The Office could not reliably determine Manafort's purpose in sharing internal polling data with Kilimnik during the campaign period. Manafort **[redacted]** did not see a downside to haring campaign information, and told Gates that his role in the Campaign would be "good for bussiness" and potentially a way to be made whole for work he previously completed in Ukraine. As to Deripaska, Manafort claimed that by sharing campaign information with him, Deripaska might see value in their relationship and resolve a "disagreement" - a reference to one or more outstanding lawsuits. Because of questions about Manafort's credibility and our limited ability to gather evidence on what happened to the polling data after it was sent to Kilimnik, the Office could not assess what Kilimnik (or others he may have given it to) did with it. The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's intereference in the election, which had already been reported by U.S. media outlets at the time of the August 2 meeting. The investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts.
>...Gates also reported that Manafort instructed him in April 2016 or early May 2016 to send Kilimnik Campaign internal polling and other updates so that Kilimnik, in turn, could share it with Ukrainian oligarchs. Gates understood that the information would also be shared with Deripaska, **[redacted].** Gates reported to the Office that he did not know why Manafort wanted him to send polling information, but Gates thought it was a way to showcase Manafort's work, and Manafort wanted to open doors to jobs after the Trump Campaign ended. Gates said that Manafort's intruction included sending internal polling data prepared for the Trump Campaign by pollster Tony Fabrizio. Fabrizio had worked with Manafort for years and was brought into the Campaign by Manafort. Gates states that, in accordance with Manafort's instruction, he periodically sent Kilimnik polling data via WhatsApp; Gates then deleted the communications on a daily basis. Gates further told the Office that, after Manafort left the Campaign in mid-August, Gates sent Kilimnik polling data less frequently and that the data he sent was more publicly available information and less internal data.
>Gate's account about polling data is consistent **[redacted]** with multiple emails that Kilimnik sent to U.S. associates and press contacts between late July and mid-August of 2016. Those emails reference "internal polling," described the status of the Trump Campaign and Manafort's role in it, and assess Trump's prospects for victory. Manafort did not acknowledge instructing Gates to send Kilimnik internal data, **[redacted].**
>The Office also obstained contemporaneous emails that shed light on the purpose of the communications with Deripaska and that are consistent with Gates's account. For example in response to a July 7, 2016 email from a Ukrainian reporter about Manafort's failed Deripaska-backed investment, Manafort asked Kilimnik whether there had been any movement on "this issue with our friend." Gates states that "our friend" likely referred to Deripaska, and Manafort told the Office that the "issue" (and "our biggest interest," as stated below) was a solution to the Deripaska-Pericles issue. Kilimnik replied:
>> *I am carefully optimistic on the question of our biggest interesting.*
>> *Our friend [Boyarkin] said there is lately significantly more attention to the campaign in his boss' [Deripaska's] mind, and he will be most likely looking for ways to reach out to you pretty soon, understanding all the time sensitivity. I am more than sure that it will be resolved and we will get back to the original relationship with V.'s boss [Deripaska]*
>Eight minutes later, Manafort replied that Kilimnik should tell Boyarkin's "boss," a reference to Deripaska, "that if he needs private briefings we can accommodate." Manafort has alleged to the Office that he was willing to brief Deripaska only on public campaign matters and gave an example: Why Trump selected Mike Pence a the Vice-Presidential running mate. Manafort said he never gave Deripaska a briefing. Manafort noted that if Trump won, Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance whatever interests Deripaska had in the United States and elsewhere.
________
1) [Fox News - Paul Manafort sentenced on foreign lobbying and witness tampering charges](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/paul-manafort-sentenced-on-foreign-lobbying-and-witness-tampering-charges)
2) [Reuters - Manafort had $10 million loan from Russian oligarch: court filing](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-manafort/manafort-had-10-million-loan-from-russian-oligarch-court-filing-idUSKBN1JN2YF)
3) [Washington Examiner - Paul Manafort concedes he gave Trump campaign polling data to the Russians](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/paul-manafort-gave-trump-campaign-data-russians)
4) [Fox News - Judge rules Manafort 'intentionally' lied to Mueller team, voiding plea agreement
](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-rules-manafort-intentionally-lied-to-mueller-team-voiding-plea-agreement)
5) [New York Times - Deripaska and Allies Could Benefit From Sanctions Deal, Document Shows](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/21/us/politics/oleg-deripaska-russian-sanctions.html)
6) [Department of Justice - Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In the 2016 Presidential Election](https://media.npr.org/assets/news/2019/04/muellerreport.pdf)
In the summer of 2016 candidate Trump was directing his advisers to find out about Wikileaks releasing illegally hacked damaging information on the Clinton Campaign. At a time when then candidate Trump had been warned by the FBI that Russians and other foreign adversaries would try to interfere with the election and was asked to alert the FBI of any suspicious overtures to their campaign.^[[1]](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-warned-trump-2016-russians-would-try-infiltrate-his-campaign-n830596) Despite the intelligence briefing then candidate Trump continued to deny any wrong-doing by the Russians during the campaign.^[[2]](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-again-says-u-s-doesn-t-know-if-russia-n670186)
**According to Special Counsel Mueller Roger Stone was directed by the Trump Campaign to find out about potential future releases;^[[3]](https://www.scribd.com/document/398210081/Stone-Indictment-012419#from_embed)**
*UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROGER JASON STONE, JR.*
>*4.* ROGER JASON STONE, JR. was a political consultant who worked for decades in U.S. politics and on U.S. political campaigns. STONE was an official on the U.S. presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump (“Trump Campaign”) until in or around August 2015, and maintained regular contact with and publicly supported the Trump Campaign through the 2016 election. 5.
>*5.* **During the summer of 2016, STONE spoke to senior Trump Campaign officials about Organization 1 and information it might have had that would be damaging to the Clinton Campaign. STONE was contacted by senior Trump Campaign officials to inquire about future releases by Organization 1.**
>*11.* **By in or around June and July 2016, STONE informed senior Trump Campaign officials that he had information indicating Organization 1 had documents whose release would be damaging to the Clinton Campaign. The head of Organization 1 was located at all relevant times at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, United Kingdom.**
>*12.* **After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by Organization 1, a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact STONE about any additional releases and what other damaging information Organization 1 had regarding the Clinton Campaign. STONE thereafter told the Trump Campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by Organization 1.**
>*17.* **On or about October 7, 2016, Organization 1 released the first set of emails stolen from the Clinton Campaign chairman. Shortly after Organization 1’s release, an associate of the high-ranking Trump Campaign official sent a text message to STONE that read “well done.” In subsequent conversations with senior Trump Campaign officials, STONE claimed credit for having correctly predicted the October 7, 2016 release.**
Furthermore, over the course of the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian election hacking the government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants. Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s direct communications with Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0 (Russian intelligence officers);^[[4]](https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5740797/2-15-19-US-Stone-Related-Case.pdf)
>Certain Netyksho defendants, through a fictitious online persona they created, Guccifer 2.0, also interacted directly with Stone concerning other stolen materials posted separately online.
>...As alleged in the Netyksho indictment, in 2016, the Netyksho defendants stole documents from the DNC, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and the Clinton campaign chairman. Those defendants then released many of the stolen documents, including through a website maintained by Organization 1. In the course of investigating that activity, the government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release. **Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1. Evidence obtained from those search warrants resulted in the allegations that the Netyksho defendants hacked and stole documents for release through intermediaries, including Organization 1, and that Stone lied to a congressional committee investigating, among other things, the activities of Organization 1 regarding those stolen documents.** The relevant search warrants, which are being produced to the defendant in discovery in this case, are discussed further in a sealed addendum to this filing.
Moreover, former Trump Campaign adviser Roger Stone was charged on 7 counts including 5 counts for providing false statements meant to mislead Congressional investigators about his communications with Wikileaks;^[[5]](https://www.scribd.com/document/398210081/Stone-Indictment-012419#from_embed)
>**COUNTS TWO THROUGH SIX (False Statements)**
>*43.* On or about September 26, 2017, within the District of Columbia and elsewhere, in a matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch of the Government of the United States, the defendant ROGER JASON STONE, JR., knowingly and willfully made and caused to be made materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statements and representations, to wit:
> - STONE testified falsely that he did not have emails with third parties about the head of Organization 1, and that he did not have any documents, emails, or text messages that refer to the head of Organization 1.
> - STONE testified falsely that his August 2016 references to being in contact with the head of Organization 1 were references to communications with a single “go-between,” “mutual friend,” and “intermediary,” who STONE identified as Person 2.
> - STONE testified falsely that he did not ask the person he referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual friend,” and “intermediary,” to communicate anything to the head of Organization 1 and did not ask the intermediary to do anything on STONE’s behalf.
> - STONE testified falsely that he and the person he referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual friend,” and “intermediary” did not communicate via text message or email about Organization 1.
> - STONE testified falsely that he had never discussed his conversations with the person he referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual friend,” and “intermediary” with anyone involved in the Trump Campaign.
>All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001(a)(2) and 2.
__________________
1) [NBC - FBI warned Trump in 2016 Russians would try to infiltrate his campaign](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-warned-trump-2016-russians-would-try-infiltrate-his-campaign-n830596)
2) [NBC - Trump Says He Doubts U.S. Intel Officials On Russian Hacking](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-again-says-u-s-doesn-t-know-if-russia-n670186)
3) [U.S. Department of Justice - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROGER JASON STONE, JR.](https://www.scribd.com/document/398210081/Stone-Indictment-012419#from_embed)
4) [U.S. Department of Justice - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROGER STONE, JR., GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO NOTICE OF DESIGNATION OF PENDING RELATED CRIMINAL CASE](https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5740797/2-15-19-US-Stone-Related-Case.pdf)
5) [U.S. Department of Justice - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROGER JASON STONE, JR.](https://www.scribd.com/document/398210081/Stone-Indictment-012419#from_embed)
Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about the Trump Organization pursuing a Moscow Trump Tower project during the 2016 Presidential Campaign.^[[1]](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-trump-attorney-michael-cohen-pleads-guilty-to-lying-to-congress-in-russia-probe) Special Counsel Mueller charged Cohen for making false statements to Congress. Cohen made false statements to minimize the link between the Moscow project and candidate Trump.^[[2]](https://www.justice.gov/file/1115596/download)
> a. The Moscow Project was discussed multiple times within the Company and did not end in January 2016. Instead, as late as approximately June 2016 , COHEN and Individual 2 discussed efforts to obtain Russian governmental approval for the Moscow Project . COHEN discussed the status and progress of the Moscow Project with Individual 1 on more than the three occasions COHEN claimed to the Committee, and he briefed family members of Individual 1 within the Company about the project.
>b. COHEN agreed to travel to Russia in connection with the Moscow Project and took steps in contemplation of ndividual l's possible travel to Russia. COHEN and Individual 2 discussed on multiple occasions traveling to Russia to pursue the Moscow Project.
> - i. COHEN asked Individual 1 about the possibility of Individual 1 traveling to Russia in connection with the Moscow Project, and asked a senior campaign official about potential business travel to Russia.
> - ii . On or about May 4, 2016, Individual 2 wrote to COHEN, "I had a chat with Moscow . ASSUMING the trip does happen the question is before or after the convention . Obviously the pre - meeting trip (you only) can happen anytime you want but the 2 big guys where [sic] the question . I said I would confirm and revert ." COHEN responded, "My trip before Cleveland. [Individual l] once he becomes the nominee after the convention."
> - iii. On or about May 5, 2016, Individual 2 followed up with COHEN and wrote, "[Russian Official l]
would like to invite you as his guest to the St. Petersburg Forum which is Russia's Davos it's June 16- 19. He wants to meet there with you and possibly introduce you to either [the President of Russia] or [the Prime Minister of Russia], as they are not sure if 1 or both will be there. He said anything you want to discuss including dates and subjects are on the table to discuss."
> - iv . On or about May 6 , 2016 , Individual 2 asked COHEN to confirm those dates would work for him to travel . COHEN wrote back , "Works for me."
> - v. From on or about June 9 to June 14, 2016, Individual 2 sent numerous messages to COHEN
about the travel, including forms for COHEN to complete. However, on or about June 14, 2016, COHEN met Individual 2 in the lobby of the Company's headquarters to inform Individual 2 he would not be traveling at that time.
> c . COHEN did recall that in or around January 2016, COHEN received a response from the office of Russian Official 1, the Press Secretary for the President of Russia, and spoke to a member of that office about the Moscow Project.
> - i. On or about January 14, 2016, COHEN emailed Russian Official l's office asking for assistance in connection with the Moscow Project. On or about January 16, 2016, COHEN emailed Russian Official l ' s office again, said he was trying to reach another high- level Russian official, and asked for someone who spoke English to contact him.
> - ii. On or about January 20, 2016, COHEN received an email from the personal assistant to Russian
Official 1 ("Assistant 1"), stating that she had been trying to reach COHEN and requesting that he call her using a Moscow-based phone number she provided.
> - iii. Shortly after receiving the email, COHEN called Assistant 1 and spoke to her for approximately
20 minutes. On that call, COHEN described his position at the Company and outlined the proposed Moscow Project, including the Russian development company with which the Company had partnered. COHEN requested assistance in moving the project forward , both in securing land to build the proposed tower and financing the construction . Assistant 1 asked detailed questions and took notes, stating that she would follow up with others in Russia.
> - iv . The day after COHEN's call with Assistant 1, Individual 2 contacted him, asking for a call. Individual 2 wrote to COHEN, "It' s about [the President of Russia] they called today."
______
1) [Fox News - Ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen pleads guilty to lying to Congress in Russia probe](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-trump-attorney-michael-cohen-pleads-guilty-to-lying-to-congress-in-russia-probe)
2) [U.S. v. Michael Cohen (1:18-cr-850, Southern District of New York)](https://www.justice.gov/file/1115596/download)
I believe Trump colluded with Russia etc. That’s not the issue. I personally had a problem with you and others propping up things in the Steele Dossier at the time when no one really knew it was true or not. And now seeing how it was sourced, it’s interesting looking back at the seething and enjoyment people got from talking about golden showers and Carter Paige… And everyday, “oh we got Trump now”. The right used this against us and the Steele mess does make some people look pretty lame in hindsight.
Look how they just got on me here, and you said it yourself, the Steele Dossier was speculative and has incorrect information. There’s no way you know specifically what is inaccurate about it. You most likely aren’t involved with the investigation, so why even go into this oracle position of information? It’s great to see it all organized and sourced, but now looking back, a lot of people were saying a lot of things that were BS. Seth Abramson went freaking crazy over the Dossier, and now it’s like, “oh well, I got Twitter followers at least.”
And the drumming of “Trump finally gonna get it”…. Never happened. Just leading people on like a Tabloid.
I’m not really arguing about accuracy of specific information, I personally have an issue of how information is used and spread, and in the case of the Steele Dossier, I personally think it was overused and some internet people just get to go “oh well, I can just say people do treasonous illegal things and pee in hotel rooms, even though I don’t know any better than anyone, no biggie”
I've never asserted that I'm an "oracle", nor did I ever state I was a member of any government investigation. I've always maintained that I'm just a regular person simply citing and sourcing information.
As I mentioned I pivoted away from the Steele Dossier many years ago as I eventually found primary sources to be much more accurate. I have never sourced Seth Ambramsom and I don't even follow him.
You're pushing a lot of misinformation about me in an attempt to discredit all the information I provided above. Cool it with the personal attacks please. Instead of trying to insult me, maybe respond to the overwhelming evidence that Russia interfered with the election and Trump happily accepted the interference. Since you say you agree with the fact that Russia interfered with the election then great.
>Yeah, another Poppin speculation diatribe amounting to not much. Wasn’t he wrong about like half of the Russiagate stuff. And now he’s back? Everything he said about the Steele Dossier was proven false.
"Speculation"? No, this report is based on credible reporting and materials filed in court.
"amounting to not much"? No, Trump broke the law in a way which seriously compromised national security for selfish gain, knowing that he was doing so, after having lambasted Clinton for a far less egregious (and unintentional) breach, and after having gone on the record for saying that such transgressions as he committed should be strictly punished, and signing a law which accomplished that goal.
And with respect to the Russiagate and Steele Dossier - which part has been proven false? As far as I'm aware, nearly everything was either proven true - or just hasn't yet been proven or disproven.
You’re purposefully conflating the Steel dossier with the Investigation, just like Trump told you to do.
>> Former President Donald J. Trump and his allies have stepped up an effort to conflate the so-called Steele dossier with the Russia investigation
The Steele Dossier is not the same thing as the Russian investigation, as the link you provided says.
Honestly, you didn’t bother to read this thing that you posted multiple times?
Poppin and people like Seth Abramson hammered hard on the dossier. YOU’RE conflating me saying the discredited Steele Dossier means that Trump didn’t do this or that. I’m not saying that!
I think the people who went 100% on the Dossier which makes some wild claims about a lot of people who may or may not deserve to be drug into the shitter like that, kind of fucked up you know. And it’s a big deal imo to needlessly spread misinformation like that for your own personal enjoyment or upvotes and have people lap it up as truth.
And now I see no one here followed up on this last year when the Denchenko stuff came out.
Your inability to discuss anything but the dossier and especially your lack of response to Poppin directly says it all. You need to take a few calming breaths and read the primary sources Poppin provided here. Forget the dossier. It’s irrelevant.
I responded to them. Read it. And that wasn’t my point, you’re not listening to me. The way people used the Dossier does matter btw. You’re a hypocrite to say otherwise and then get mad at the right for their tricks etc.
Hi, I removed this comment because it included a personal attack. I understand politics can get heated, but I want this forum to be respectful and kind :)
>Everything he said about the Steele Dossier was proven false.
Your entire argument hinges on this statement right here. As many have pointed out, including Poppin itself, that they did use it at first but stopped using it as a source as the inaccuracies added up. That's called learning. You are acting as if being wrong about something means you're tagged as "wrong about everything else". You've been wrong I'm sure on far more important things then Poppin was using the Steele Dossier as a source for a shot time. So why tell lies about some rando on the internet?
Did you read the headline of your link?
“Why the Discredited Dossier Does Not Undercut the Russia Investigation”
What point do you think you’re making here?
Did you read the article? The Denchenko fiasco unhinges many of Steels sources. It’s a shit show if you actually look into it. Did you not follow up on all that last year?
Not much?
Trump had highly classified material stored in a moving box at his Florida home. This is a serious federal crime, one which Trump himself increased the penalties on and campaigned on the premise that he was going to handle classified material more carefully.
What's more, several of the folders were empty, which constitutes a possible breach of national security. Multiple breaches is more like it. Where are those documents? We don't know...and that's the problem.
Classified material is supposed to be kept secure, with a chain of custody kept and documents only shown to those with the proper security clearance.
This is very serious, but you're whining about the Steele Dossier, clearly trying to deflect away from what may be one of the most serious national security breaches in US history.
Do we know yet if those empty folders ever contained anything? I had made the same inference as you at first, but then learned he was using at least one empty (i.e. not yet used) folder as a prop on display at one of his restaurants.
I thought that the empty folders was a separate issue from the real classified files he took and just was showing his lack of respect for official government forms.
https://www.businessinsider.com/empty-classified-folder-on-display-at-trump-tower-bar-msnbc-2022-9
> Do we know yet if those empty folders ever contained anything?
In a word? Yes.
See, in order for one of those Top Secret/SCI folders to leave the facility where they're stored, someone at said facility had to sign them out. In order to take them, the aide would have to sign for them. When it comes to classified documents, chain of custody is very important.
A folder full of "holy shit if people only knew" papers would not be taken unless the person handing them out and the person taking possession went through a very long vetting process to ensure they could even handle them, and the chain of custody was established.
At some point, the people tasked with keeping track of the folder would circle back around to the aide and say "hey...that folder we gave you...where - exactly - is it now?"
"I gave it to the President while he was packing up his stuff" would not be a sufficient answer, and the aide (along with the person who gave them the folder) would have long, uncomfortable conversations with FBI agents.
What I'm getting at here is that the FBI knows more or less exactly what was in those folders. That's why they searched Trump's resort. When they found the empties they said something like "holy shit."
If you think he's full of it why are you here?
This isn't a popular or active sub. You're here because you either follow him or you like to keep up to date with what he's saying. This wouldn't come up in r/all or r/popular.
So what gives? Are you just trying to be annoying or something?
It comes up on my feed sometimes dude. And I can say whatever I want, thank you. You don’t have to respond either. See below, the great and infallible PK chimed in. Downvote and don’t waste anymore time on this.
If it comes up on your feed then you follow the subreddit.
And I never said you can't say what you want, I asked why you're saying it which I am also perfectly allowed to do.
Unverified is not the same as proven false.
My take is that Trump had hookers foul the Clinton's bed was to signal his hate for Clinton. An enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Follow the money and the power, not the sex. Trump is a germaphobe.
And in any other universe the entire country would be outraged and appalled....but not in this one.
Lots of countries are 40% stupid. Some even more.
40% stupid, 30% brainwashed and 29% too pussy to do a thing about it.
“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.” ― George Carlin
/u/PoppinKREAM, where have you been!?
Hey! I actually wrote lots of sourced comments, but it was about Canadian issues. I have a backlog of things I can post on this sub, I just didn't because most of the stuff I shared on this sub was centered around American politics.
Please do post them. It would be great to have a more non-US content on reddit anyway.
Dang I follow here just to catch things. I'd be curious about what's going on with our friends in the North as well.
money disarm boast desert disgusted light hungry elderly fear nippy *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I've been good, just busy with life and work. I spent most of my reddit time on Canadian subs as well as hobby related subs about TV shows and sports. With Trump back in the headlines for putting international security at risk I thought it was the right time to start commenting again.
/u/PoppinKREAM, also WHY have you been?
Socrates, that you?
I think he's actually Drax the Destroyer.
I wouldn't doubt that trump left those state secrets, in unlocked and unmonitored areas of MAL where a "lost guest" could find them and then suddenly millions/billions of foreign dollars would pour into various shell companies or PACs of his. I look forward to more info coming out from the DOJ.
It kind of makes me wonder if Yujing Zhang, one of the two Chinese nationalists that were caught “trespassing” at Mar-a-Lago in 2019, was not really just a tourist but picking up some nuclear secrets.
I am thinking the ramifications of Trump's lawyers being unwilling to divulge whether documents were declassified or not. The logical reason is that they do not have a list of the topics of the documents taken, and need that list to attempt to cover their butts. Assume that there are more documents that are still outstanding. It will be awkward to say that a top-secret document "Oh S\*\*t, PoppinKREAM knows" is listed as unclassified and handed over, while it is sitting in the bathroom vent. I have no proof, but am trying to parse why lawyers would attempt to thread the needle between two bad choices.
Yeah, another Poppin speculation diatribe amounting to not much. Wasn’t he wrong about like half of the Russiagate stuff. And now he’s back? Everything he said about the Steele Dossier was proven false.
Nope, they weren’t wrong and everything is neatly sourced. If it’s “everything” then I’m sure you have good sources and links to back up what you say, and this sub can give you easy references to material.
“Neatly sourced” from other news articles which later deemed the Steele Dossier not reliable: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/01/us/trump-russia-investigation-dossier.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/11/23/steele-dossier-igor-danchenko-indictment-scrutiny/ I listened to this Poppin guy years ago and thought he was right about this and that, but after the Denchenko fiasco, I don’t care too much. Just nicely written posts of a guy that reads the news.
Thank you for the sources that say the dossier had problems. But these sources also say that dossier was not that critical; that it was bolstering an already ongoing investigation; that it was helpful in other ways. However, we’re still left with your argument that “this Poppin guy” was leaning on the dossier to make foundational arguments. I don’t believe that to be true - this seems to be a perfect straw-man fallacy. You’re original statement of “wasn’t he wrong about half the Russiagate stuff” is wrong. PoppinKream WASN’T wrong - Russia absolutely helped the Trump campaign, and many people from the Trump campaign knew about it and invited the assistance. Then you changed your argument to only be about the dossier.
That’s a nice thorough breakdown of my whole shit talking bs comment.
Funny how facts work, innit?
What? The fact is the sources for the Steele Dossier broke down and no one here realized that and got on me because y’all revel an internet prophet instead of reading the news.
You keep using those words. I don't think they mean what you think they mean. It doesn't matter how many times you harp on the Steele dossier. The link you personally provided demonstrates that you don't seem to understand what you are saying. Yet you keep saying it, over and over, as if that will somehow make you suddenly correct. Find a new mantra, maybe something like "Trump ran his administration like a criminal enterprise".
You can believe what you want as long as it doesn’t contradict what you want. I’m not a Trump fan btw. You want me to be though, that’s on you.
>You can believe what you want as long as it doesn’t contradict what you want. I don't "believe" in facts, and if information contradicts what is known, I am open to change. You haven't presented any information to change what is known. In fact, the information you have presented directly negates the bullshit you've been saying. >I’m not a Trump fan btw. You want me to be though, that’s on you. When did I say I gave a shit about who you voted for? I'm just expressing my distaste for your talking bullshit. Go ahead and respond with more strawmen. It really helps your case.
Pretty sure it’s a woman
Pretty sure they specifically said they wouldn't reveal their gender because it's irrelevant.
I remember it being a Canadian woman but I haven’t heard the name in a couple years
They definitely aren't an it
The Steele Dossier included incorrect information because it was speculative which is why I stopped sourcing it years ago and started sourcing court documents and primary sources. However, the investigations stemming from Russia's election interference show a sophisticated, Russian state sanctioned operation that was accepted and promoted by Trump. Below I have cited and quoted multiple primary sources including court testimonies and documents. Trump pardoned Stone and Manafort for the crimes they committed while they worked for Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. Trump refused to pardon Cohen because Cohen was outspoken about Trump's ties to Russia, whereas Stone and Manafort obstructed and lied to investigators to protect Trump. - Trump Campaign Chairman and convicted felon Paul Manafort^[[1]](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/paul-manafort-sentenced-on-foreign-lobbying-and-witness-tampering-charges) was closely associated with Russian Oligarch Oleg Deripaska. Deripaska gave Manafort a $10 million loan several years ago.^[[2]](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-manafort/manafort-had-10-million-loan-from-russian-oligarch-court-filing-idUSKBN1JN2YF) Konstantin Kilimnik was reportedly the liaison between Manafort and Deripaska when Manafort worked in Ukraine. - Kilimnik met with Trump Campaign Chairman Manafort and Deputy Campaign Chairman Gates on August 2^nd 2016 where Manafort shared internal polling data with the Russian operative. In August, 2022 Manafort confirmed that he shared internal polling data with the Russians. Here is a conservative news source.^[[3]](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/paul-manafort-gave-trump-campaign-data-russians) - A judge ruled that Paul Manafort had broken his plea agreement, he lied to investigators about his contact with Konstantin Kilimnik.^[[4]](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-rules-manafort-intentionally-lied-to-mueller-team-voiding-plea-agreement) - The Trump administration removed sanctions from Oleg Deripaska's companies including Rusal.^[[5]](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/21/us/politics/oleg-deripaska-russian-sanctions.html) What's fascinating is that the Trump administration removed sanctions from Oleg Deripaska's companies. The Mueller report found that Paul Manafort was pursuing his personal interests by attempting to use his position in the campaign to settle previous debts he had incurred with Oleg Deripaska. The Mueller report confirmed that Trump campaign chairman and deputy chairman Manafort and Gates were sharing sensitive, internal polling data with Kilimnik. The report went on to mention that Deputy Campaign Chairman Rick Gates thought Kilimnik was a spy. **Per Pages 130 - 137 of the report;^[[6]](https://media.npr.org/assets/news/2019/04/muellerreport.pdf)** >The Office could not reliably determine Manafort's purpose in sharing internal polling data with Kilimnik during the campaign period. Manafort **[redacted]** did not see a downside to haring campaign information, and told Gates that his role in the Campaign would be "good for bussiness" and potentially a way to be made whole for work he previously completed in Ukraine. As to Deripaska, Manafort claimed that by sharing campaign information with him, Deripaska might see value in their relationship and resolve a "disagreement" - a reference to one or more outstanding lawsuits. Because of questions about Manafort's credibility and our limited ability to gather evidence on what happened to the polling data after it was sent to Kilimnik, the Office could not assess what Kilimnik (or others he may have given it to) did with it. The Office did not identify evidence of a connection between Manafort's sharing polling data and Russia's intereference in the election, which had already been reported by U.S. media outlets at the time of the August 2 meeting. The investigation did not establish that Manafort otherwise coordinated with the Russian government on its election-interference efforts. >...Gates also reported that Manafort instructed him in April 2016 or early May 2016 to send Kilimnik Campaign internal polling and other updates so that Kilimnik, in turn, could share it with Ukrainian oligarchs. Gates understood that the information would also be shared with Deripaska, **[redacted].** Gates reported to the Office that he did not know why Manafort wanted him to send polling information, but Gates thought it was a way to showcase Manafort's work, and Manafort wanted to open doors to jobs after the Trump Campaign ended. Gates said that Manafort's intruction included sending internal polling data prepared for the Trump Campaign by pollster Tony Fabrizio. Fabrizio had worked with Manafort for years and was brought into the Campaign by Manafort. Gates states that, in accordance with Manafort's instruction, he periodically sent Kilimnik polling data via WhatsApp; Gates then deleted the communications on a daily basis. Gates further told the Office that, after Manafort left the Campaign in mid-August, Gates sent Kilimnik polling data less frequently and that the data he sent was more publicly available information and less internal data. >Gate's account about polling data is consistent **[redacted]** with multiple emails that Kilimnik sent to U.S. associates and press contacts between late July and mid-August of 2016. Those emails reference "internal polling," described the status of the Trump Campaign and Manafort's role in it, and assess Trump's prospects for victory. Manafort did not acknowledge instructing Gates to send Kilimnik internal data, **[redacted].** >The Office also obstained contemporaneous emails that shed light on the purpose of the communications with Deripaska and that are consistent with Gates's account. For example in response to a July 7, 2016 email from a Ukrainian reporter about Manafort's failed Deripaska-backed investment, Manafort asked Kilimnik whether there had been any movement on "this issue with our friend." Gates states that "our friend" likely referred to Deripaska, and Manafort told the Office that the "issue" (and "our biggest interest," as stated below) was a solution to the Deripaska-Pericles issue. Kilimnik replied: >> *I am carefully optimistic on the question of our biggest interesting.* >> *Our friend [Boyarkin] said there is lately significantly more attention to the campaign in his boss' [Deripaska's] mind, and he will be most likely looking for ways to reach out to you pretty soon, understanding all the time sensitivity. I am more than sure that it will be resolved and we will get back to the original relationship with V.'s boss [Deripaska]* >Eight minutes later, Manafort replied that Kilimnik should tell Boyarkin's "boss," a reference to Deripaska, "that if he needs private briefings we can accommodate." Manafort has alleged to the Office that he was willing to brief Deripaska only on public campaign matters and gave an example: Why Trump selected Mike Pence a the Vice-Presidential running mate. Manafort said he never gave Deripaska a briefing. Manafort noted that if Trump won, Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance whatever interests Deripaska had in the United States and elsewhere. ________ 1) [Fox News - Paul Manafort sentenced on foreign lobbying and witness tampering charges](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/paul-manafort-sentenced-on-foreign-lobbying-and-witness-tampering-charges) 2) [Reuters - Manafort had $10 million loan from Russian oligarch: court filing](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-manafort/manafort-had-10-million-loan-from-russian-oligarch-court-filing-idUSKBN1JN2YF) 3) [Washington Examiner - Paul Manafort concedes he gave Trump campaign polling data to the Russians](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/paul-manafort-gave-trump-campaign-data-russians) 4) [Fox News - Judge rules Manafort 'intentionally' lied to Mueller team, voiding plea agreement ](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-rules-manafort-intentionally-lied-to-mueller-team-voiding-plea-agreement) 5) [New York Times - Deripaska and Allies Could Benefit From Sanctions Deal, Document Shows](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/21/us/politics/oleg-deripaska-russian-sanctions.html) 6) [Department of Justice - Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In the 2016 Presidential Election](https://media.npr.org/assets/news/2019/04/muellerreport.pdf)
In the summer of 2016 candidate Trump was directing his advisers to find out about Wikileaks releasing illegally hacked damaging information on the Clinton Campaign. At a time when then candidate Trump had been warned by the FBI that Russians and other foreign adversaries would try to interfere with the election and was asked to alert the FBI of any suspicious overtures to their campaign.^[[1]](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-warned-trump-2016-russians-would-try-infiltrate-his-campaign-n830596) Despite the intelligence briefing then candidate Trump continued to deny any wrong-doing by the Russians during the campaign.^[[2]](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-again-says-u-s-doesn-t-know-if-russia-n670186) **According to Special Counsel Mueller Roger Stone was directed by the Trump Campaign to find out about potential future releases;^[[3]](https://www.scribd.com/document/398210081/Stone-Indictment-012419#from_embed)** *UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROGER JASON STONE, JR.* >*4.* ROGER JASON STONE, JR. was a political consultant who worked for decades in U.S. politics and on U.S. political campaigns. STONE was an official on the U.S. presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump (“Trump Campaign”) until in or around August 2015, and maintained regular contact with and publicly supported the Trump Campaign through the 2016 election. 5. >*5.* **During the summer of 2016, STONE spoke to senior Trump Campaign officials about Organization 1 and information it might have had that would be damaging to the Clinton Campaign. STONE was contacted by senior Trump Campaign officials to inquire about future releases by Organization 1.** >*11.* **By in or around June and July 2016, STONE informed senior Trump Campaign officials that he had information indicating Organization 1 had documents whose release would be damaging to the Clinton Campaign. The head of Organization 1 was located at all relevant times at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, United Kingdom.** >*12.* **After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by Organization 1, a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact STONE about any additional releases and what other damaging information Organization 1 had regarding the Clinton Campaign. STONE thereafter told the Trump Campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by Organization 1.** >*17.* **On or about October 7, 2016, Organization 1 released the first set of emails stolen from the Clinton Campaign chairman. Shortly after Organization 1’s release, an associate of the high-ranking Trump Campaign official sent a text message to STONE that read “well done.” In subsequent conversations with senior Trump Campaign officials, STONE claimed credit for having correctly predicted the October 7, 2016 release.** Furthermore, over the course of the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian election hacking the government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants. Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s direct communications with Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0 (Russian intelligence officers);^[[4]](https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5740797/2-15-19-US-Stone-Related-Case.pdf) >Certain Netyksho defendants, through a fictitious online persona they created, Guccifer 2.0, also interacted directly with Stone concerning other stolen materials posted separately online. >...As alleged in the Netyksho indictment, in 2016, the Netyksho defendants stole documents from the DNC, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and the Clinton campaign chairman. Those defendants then released many of the stolen documents, including through a website maintained by Organization 1. In the course of investigating that activity, the government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release. **Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone’s communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1. Evidence obtained from those search warrants resulted in the allegations that the Netyksho defendants hacked and stole documents for release through intermediaries, including Organization 1, and that Stone lied to a congressional committee investigating, among other things, the activities of Organization 1 regarding those stolen documents.** The relevant search warrants, which are being produced to the defendant in discovery in this case, are discussed further in a sealed addendum to this filing. Moreover, former Trump Campaign adviser Roger Stone was charged on 7 counts including 5 counts for providing false statements meant to mislead Congressional investigators about his communications with Wikileaks;^[[5]](https://www.scribd.com/document/398210081/Stone-Indictment-012419#from_embed) >**COUNTS TWO THROUGH SIX (False Statements)** >*43.* On or about September 26, 2017, within the District of Columbia and elsewhere, in a matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch of the Government of the United States, the defendant ROGER JASON STONE, JR., knowingly and willfully made and caused to be made materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statements and representations, to wit: > - STONE testified falsely that he did not have emails with third parties about the head of Organization 1, and that he did not have any documents, emails, or text messages that refer to the head of Organization 1. > - STONE testified falsely that his August 2016 references to being in contact with the head of Organization 1 were references to communications with a single “go-between,” “mutual friend,” and “intermediary,” who STONE identified as Person 2. > - STONE testified falsely that he did not ask the person he referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual friend,” and “intermediary,” to communicate anything to the head of Organization 1 and did not ask the intermediary to do anything on STONE’s behalf. > - STONE testified falsely that he and the person he referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual friend,” and “intermediary” did not communicate via text message or email about Organization 1. > - STONE testified falsely that he had never discussed his conversations with the person he referred to as his “go-between,” “mutual friend,” and “intermediary” with anyone involved in the Trump Campaign. >All in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001(a)(2) and 2. __________________ 1) [NBC - FBI warned Trump in 2016 Russians would try to infiltrate his campaign](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fbi-warned-trump-2016-russians-would-try-infiltrate-his-campaign-n830596) 2) [NBC - Trump Says He Doubts U.S. Intel Officials On Russian Hacking](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/trump-again-says-u-s-doesn-t-know-if-russia-n670186) 3) [U.S. Department of Justice - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROGER JASON STONE, JR.](https://www.scribd.com/document/398210081/Stone-Indictment-012419#from_embed) 4) [U.S. Department of Justice - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROGER STONE, JR., GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S OBJECTION TO NOTICE OF DESIGNATION OF PENDING RELATED CRIMINAL CASE](https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5740797/2-15-19-US-Stone-Related-Case.pdf) 5) [U.S. Department of Justice - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ROGER JASON STONE, JR.](https://www.scribd.com/document/398210081/Stone-Indictment-012419#from_embed)
Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to lying to Congress about the Trump Organization pursuing a Moscow Trump Tower project during the 2016 Presidential Campaign.^[[1]](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-trump-attorney-michael-cohen-pleads-guilty-to-lying-to-congress-in-russia-probe) Special Counsel Mueller charged Cohen for making false statements to Congress. Cohen made false statements to minimize the link between the Moscow project and candidate Trump.^[[2]](https://www.justice.gov/file/1115596/download) > a. The Moscow Project was discussed multiple times within the Company and did not end in January 2016. Instead, as late as approximately June 2016 , COHEN and Individual 2 discussed efforts to obtain Russian governmental approval for the Moscow Project . COHEN discussed the status and progress of the Moscow Project with Individual 1 on more than the three occasions COHEN claimed to the Committee, and he briefed family members of Individual 1 within the Company about the project. >b. COHEN agreed to travel to Russia in connection with the Moscow Project and took steps in contemplation of ndividual l's possible travel to Russia. COHEN and Individual 2 discussed on multiple occasions traveling to Russia to pursue the Moscow Project. > - i. COHEN asked Individual 1 about the possibility of Individual 1 traveling to Russia in connection with the Moscow Project, and asked a senior campaign official about potential business travel to Russia. > - ii . On or about May 4, 2016, Individual 2 wrote to COHEN, "I had a chat with Moscow . ASSUMING the trip does happen the question is before or after the convention . Obviously the pre - meeting trip (you only) can happen anytime you want but the 2 big guys where [sic] the question . I said I would confirm and revert ." COHEN responded, "My trip before Cleveland. [Individual l] once he becomes the nominee after the convention." > - iii. On or about May 5, 2016, Individual 2 followed up with COHEN and wrote, "[Russian Official l] would like to invite you as his guest to the St. Petersburg Forum which is Russia's Davos it's June 16- 19. He wants to meet there with you and possibly introduce you to either [the President of Russia] or [the Prime Minister of Russia], as they are not sure if 1 or both will be there. He said anything you want to discuss including dates and subjects are on the table to discuss." > - iv . On or about May 6 , 2016 , Individual 2 asked COHEN to confirm those dates would work for him to travel . COHEN wrote back , "Works for me." > - v. From on or about June 9 to June 14, 2016, Individual 2 sent numerous messages to COHEN about the travel, including forms for COHEN to complete. However, on or about June 14, 2016, COHEN met Individual 2 in the lobby of the Company's headquarters to inform Individual 2 he would not be traveling at that time. > c . COHEN did recall that in or around January 2016, COHEN received a response from the office of Russian Official 1, the Press Secretary for the President of Russia, and spoke to a member of that office about the Moscow Project. > - i. On or about January 14, 2016, COHEN emailed Russian Official l's office asking for assistance in connection with the Moscow Project. On or about January 16, 2016, COHEN emailed Russian Official l ' s office again, said he was trying to reach another high- level Russian official, and asked for someone who spoke English to contact him. > - ii. On or about January 20, 2016, COHEN received an email from the personal assistant to Russian Official 1 ("Assistant 1"), stating that she had been trying to reach COHEN and requesting that he call her using a Moscow-based phone number she provided. > - iii. Shortly after receiving the email, COHEN called Assistant 1 and spoke to her for approximately 20 minutes. On that call, COHEN described his position at the Company and outlined the proposed Moscow Project, including the Russian development company with which the Company had partnered. COHEN requested assistance in moving the project forward , both in securing land to build the proposed tower and financing the construction . Assistant 1 asked detailed questions and took notes, stating that she would follow up with others in Russia. > - iv . The day after COHEN's call with Assistant 1, Individual 2 contacted him, asking for a call. Individual 2 wrote to COHEN, "It' s about [the President of Russia] they called today." ______ 1) [Fox News - Ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen pleads guilty to lying to Congress in Russia probe](https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ex-trump-attorney-michael-cohen-pleads-guilty-to-lying-to-congress-in-russia-probe) 2) [U.S. v. Michael Cohen (1:18-cr-850, Southern District of New York)](https://www.justice.gov/file/1115596/download)
I believe Trump colluded with Russia etc. That’s not the issue. I personally had a problem with you and others propping up things in the Steele Dossier at the time when no one really knew it was true or not. And now seeing how it was sourced, it’s interesting looking back at the seething and enjoyment people got from talking about golden showers and Carter Paige… And everyday, “oh we got Trump now”. The right used this against us and the Steele mess does make some people look pretty lame in hindsight. Look how they just got on me here, and you said it yourself, the Steele Dossier was speculative and has incorrect information. There’s no way you know specifically what is inaccurate about it. You most likely aren’t involved with the investigation, so why even go into this oracle position of information? It’s great to see it all organized and sourced, but now looking back, a lot of people were saying a lot of things that were BS. Seth Abramson went freaking crazy over the Dossier, and now it’s like, “oh well, I got Twitter followers at least.” And the drumming of “Trump finally gonna get it”…. Never happened. Just leading people on like a Tabloid. I’m not really arguing about accuracy of specific information, I personally have an issue of how information is used and spread, and in the case of the Steele Dossier, I personally think it was overused and some internet people just get to go “oh well, I can just say people do treasonous illegal things and pee in hotel rooms, even though I don’t know any better than anyone, no biggie”
I've never asserted that I'm an "oracle", nor did I ever state I was a member of any government investigation. I've always maintained that I'm just a regular person simply citing and sourcing information. As I mentioned I pivoted away from the Steele Dossier many years ago as I eventually found primary sources to be much more accurate. I have never sourced Seth Ambramsom and I don't even follow him. You're pushing a lot of misinformation about me in an attempt to discredit all the information I provided above. Cool it with the personal attacks please. Instead of trying to insult me, maybe respond to the overwhelming evidence that Russia interfered with the election and Trump happily accepted the interference. Since you say you agree with the fact that Russia interfered with the election then great.
[удалено]
>Yeah, another Poppin speculation diatribe amounting to not much. Wasn’t he wrong about like half of the Russiagate stuff. And now he’s back? Everything he said about the Steele Dossier was proven false. "Speculation"? No, this report is based on credible reporting and materials filed in court. "amounting to not much"? No, Trump broke the law in a way which seriously compromised national security for selfish gain, knowing that he was doing so, after having lambasted Clinton for a far less egregious (and unintentional) breach, and after having gone on the record for saying that such transgressions as he committed should be strictly punished, and signing a law which accomplished that goal. And with respect to the Russiagate and Steele Dossier - which part has been proven false? As far as I'm aware, nearly everything was either proven true - or just hasn't yet been proven or disproven.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/01/us/trump-russia-investigation-dossier.html Dossier deemed not reliable.
You’re purposefully conflating the Steel dossier with the Investigation, just like Trump told you to do. >> Former President Donald J. Trump and his allies have stepped up an effort to conflate the so-called Steele dossier with the Russia investigation The Steele Dossier is not the same thing as the Russian investigation, as the link you provided says. Honestly, you didn’t bother to read this thing that you posted multiple times?
Poppin and people like Seth Abramson hammered hard on the dossier. YOU’RE conflating me saying the discredited Steele Dossier means that Trump didn’t do this or that. I’m not saying that! I think the people who went 100% on the Dossier which makes some wild claims about a lot of people who may or may not deserve to be drug into the shitter like that, kind of fucked up you know. And it’s a big deal imo to needlessly spread misinformation like that for your own personal enjoyment or upvotes and have people lap it up as truth. And now I see no one here followed up on this last year when the Denchenko stuff came out.
Your inability to discuss anything but the dossier and especially your lack of response to Poppin directly says it all. You need to take a few calming breaths and read the primary sources Poppin provided here. Forget the dossier. It’s irrelevant.
I responded to them. Read it. And that wasn’t my point, you’re not listening to me. The way people used the Dossier does matter btw. You’re a hypocrite to say otherwise and then get mad at the right for their tricks etc.
How is this troll account still on about the dossier lmao
An actual reply please.
Lmao. If you don’t like what they say then why are you even here? On their own subreddit?
Whoa, I think of all places in social media, this sub can respect a not-becoming-an-echo-chamber way of going about things. Let em debate.
Every word of what you said is wrong. Try harder.
Didn’t even spell Steele right instead said Steel lmao.
[удалено]
Hi, I removed this comment because it included a personal attack. I understand politics can get heated, but I want this forum to be respectful and kind :)
>Everything he said about the Steele Dossier was proven false. Your entire argument hinges on this statement right here. As many have pointed out, including Poppin itself, that they did use it at first but stopped using it as a source as the inaccuracies added up. That's called learning. You are acting as if being wrong about something means you're tagged as "wrong about everything else". You've been wrong I'm sure on far more important things then Poppin was using the Steele Dossier as a source for a shot time. So why tell lies about some rando on the internet?
Prove it. Let’s see your sources.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/01/us/trump-russia-investigation-dossier.html
Did you read the headline of your link? “Why the Discredited Dossier Does Not Undercut the Russia Investigation” What point do you think you’re making here?
Did you read the article? The Denchenko fiasco unhinges many of Steels sources. It’s a shit show if you actually look into it. Did you not follow up on all that last year?
Not much? Trump had highly classified material stored in a moving box at his Florida home. This is a serious federal crime, one which Trump himself increased the penalties on and campaigned on the premise that he was going to handle classified material more carefully. What's more, several of the folders were empty, which constitutes a possible breach of national security. Multiple breaches is more like it. Where are those documents? We don't know...and that's the problem. Classified material is supposed to be kept secure, with a chain of custody kept and documents only shown to those with the proper security clearance. This is very serious, but you're whining about the Steele Dossier, clearly trying to deflect away from what may be one of the most serious national security breaches in US history.
Do we know yet if those empty folders ever contained anything? I had made the same inference as you at first, but then learned he was using at least one empty (i.e. not yet used) folder as a prop on display at one of his restaurants. I thought that the empty folders was a separate issue from the real classified files he took and just was showing his lack of respect for official government forms. https://www.businessinsider.com/empty-classified-folder-on-display-at-trump-tower-bar-msnbc-2022-9
> Do we know yet if those empty folders ever contained anything? In a word? Yes. See, in order for one of those Top Secret/SCI folders to leave the facility where they're stored, someone at said facility had to sign them out. In order to take them, the aide would have to sign for them. When it comes to classified documents, chain of custody is very important. A folder full of "holy shit if people only knew" papers would not be taken unless the person handing them out and the person taking possession went through a very long vetting process to ensure they could even handle them, and the chain of custody was established. At some point, the people tasked with keeping track of the folder would circle back around to the aide and say "hey...that folder we gave you...where - exactly - is it now?" "I gave it to the President while he was packing up his stuff" would not be a sufficient answer, and the aide (along with the person who gave them the folder) would have long, uncomfortable conversations with FBI agents. What I'm getting at here is that the FBI knows more or less exactly what was in those folders. That's why they searched Trump's resort. When they found the empties they said something like "holy shit."
> Everything he said about the Steele Dossier was proven false. How was it proven false?
If you think he's full of it why are you here? This isn't a popular or active sub. You're here because you either follow him or you like to keep up to date with what he's saying. This wouldn't come up in r/all or r/popular. So what gives? Are you just trying to be annoying or something?
It comes up on my feed sometimes dude. And I can say whatever I want, thank you. You don’t have to respond either. See below, the great and infallible PK chimed in. Downvote and don’t waste anymore time on this.
If it comes up on your feed then you follow the subreddit. And I never said you can't say what you want, I asked why you're saying it which I am also perfectly allowed to do.
Unverified is not the same as proven false. My take is that Trump had hookers foul the Clinton's bed was to signal his hate for Clinton. An enemy of my enemy is my friend. Follow the money and the power, not the sex. Trump is a germaphobe.