Is the "Steele Dossier" more credible or less credible..?

[kentuck]

...than when first made public?

As months have gone by, it seems that more and more material in the dossier has been proven to be true. More and more details have been shown to be factual.

In my opinion, it is difficult to discredit the research that was done by the former British Intel agent, Christopher Steele.

With passing time, it looks more and more credible.

[NewJeffCT]

1. agreed

it's gotten more credible over time - I believe just about everything has been proven to be true outside of the pee pee tape, though I have not seen additional confirmation of the story that Mueller had pictures of Michael Cohen meeting Russian agents in Prague.

[Gothmog]

8. From Prof. Tribe

Link to tweet

[onecaliberal]

2. More credible over time. In fact, nothing has been discredited that I'm aware of.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. Scott Dworkin did an analysis almost a year and a half ago on it and posted it

(he is co-founder of the Democratic Coalition)

Link to tweet

TEXT

Scott Dworkin
✔
@funder
· Mar 2, 2017
Replying to @funder

.we had professors-fmr military-research scientists & elected officials sign a letter authenticating our trump dossier analysis #trumprussia

Scott Dworkin
✔
@funder

.Here's the Trump Dossier Analysis. Please RT & share far & wide 🇺🇸🔥#trumprussia #russiagate #resist #firesessions https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RbpBxJ3QNyvts_w16UcSSGeH7cSrXK9U3wIq0OOq-Xs …
10:29 PM - Mar 2, 2017

It would be interesting to even revisit it based on where we are now. Link to the analysis Feb. 2017 - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RbpBxJ3QNyvts_w16UcSSGeH7cSrXK9U3wIq0OOq-Xs/edit

[FakeNoose]

4. I'd like to know this

When will we see the full un-redacted version of the Steele dossier? Obviously the FBI has it, and I would guess the original "customer" who ordered the report and paid Steele for it. Somebody has the original, when are they going to leak it to us?

[duforsure]

5. Nothing has been disproven

In the dossier that I've heard of.

[Wounded Bear]

9. That is my impression also...

For one thing, there really isn't any credible reason for Steele to falsify the report.

[uponit7771]

11. +1

[Tommy_Carcetti]

6. More credible. It can be independently verified by none other than Michael McFaul.

Which is why McFaul was targeted by the Russians last week.

[Gothmog]

7. How much of the infamous document ended up being corroborated elsewhere? A whole lot.

A significant amount of the dossier has been verified http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/09/a_lot_of_the_steele_dossier_has_since_been_corroborated.html

One large portion of the dossier is crystal clear, certain, consistent, and corroborated. Russia’s goal all along has been to do damage to America and our leadership role in the world. Also, the methods described in the report fit the Russians to a tee. If the remainder of the report is largely true, Russia has a powerful weapon to help achieve its goal. Even if it is largely false, the Kremlin still benefits from the confusion, uncertainty and political churn created by the resulting fallout. In any regard, the administration could help cauterize the damage by being honest, transparent and assisting those looking into the matter. Sadly, the president has done the opposite, ensuring a Russian win no matter what. In any event, I would suspect the Russians will look to muddy the waters and spread false and misleading information to confuse investigators and public officials.

As things stand, both investigators and voters will have to examine the information in their possession and make sense of it as best they can. Professional investigators can marry the report with human and signals intelligence, they can look at call records, travel records, interview people mentioned in the report, solicit assistance from friendly foreign police and intelligence services, subpoena records and tie it to subsequent events that can shed light on the various details. We, on the other hand, will have to do our best to validate the information at hand. Looking at new information through the framework outlined in the Steele document is not a bad place to start

[H2O Man]

15. Nope.

[LeftInTX]

10. I still don't believe the pee stuff

Maybe Trump said that he thought it would be funny if hookers peed on the Obama's bed. (Said out of spite for Obama)

Even if the hookers peed on the bed, (more of an act of vandalism and aggression than anything) I think at the most, Trump sat in a chair and watched. After they peed, Trump left the room as soon as they left. No way would Trump stay in a room with pee. I don't think Trump would let hookers pee on him. Trump is too much of a germaphobe.

There is also no way Trump would get in the same bed that the Obama's had slept in.

I don't know how often hotels change mattresses, but Trump would probably have an idea if the mattress in the room was the same as the Obama's. If the hotel had changed the mattress, why would Trump want to have it peed on? Also Trump always wants to publicly humiliate Obama. Were prostitutes peeing an act of public humiliation? Was this incident spread throughout the region to humiliate President Obama over there?


Unfortunately, the pee stuff became the focus of the dossier.

[OnDoutside]

17. Trump is too much of a germaphobe yet sticks his dickey into anything with a pulse ?

As with the rest of the "dossier" nothing has been disproven, and it's probably best not to be conclusive over someone who is utterly amoral.

[H2O Man]

16. Recommended.

Thus far, much of it has proven to be correct, and none of it has been proven false.

On a side note, regarding the possible "pee tape" .....too many people, including here on this forum, have a clue about what it actually claims to entail. This includes remaining ignorant of what Trump was definitely doing earlier that night, where and with whom, and thus what the tape may actually show.