Christopher Steele, the former British spy who wrote the infamous anti-Donald Trump dossier, acknowledges that a sensational charge his sources made about a tech company CEO and Democratic Party hacking is unverified.
In a court filing, Mr. Steele also says his accusations against the president and his aides about a supposed Russian hacking conspiracy were never supposed to be made public, much less posted in full on a website for the world to see on Jan. 10.
He defends himself by saying he was betrayed by his client and that he followed proper internal channels by giving the dossier to Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, to alert the U.S. government.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: The key part of this post ....
.... Mr. Steele acknowledges that the part of the 35-page dossier that identified Mr. Gubarev as a rogue hacker came from “unsolicited intelligence” and “raw intelligence” that “needed to be analyzed and further investigated/verified.”
For the past few months I have lost count on the number of media reports, Trump critics, former intelligence officials, etc. who have used this report to justify their belief that there was collusion between the Trump team and Russia. And now .... the author of the report itself is admitting for the first time in court that a major part of it was never verified (i.e. not proven). In short .... it was all hearsay and rumor. The media's response to this admission that a major part of the report should be considered as discredited .... with the exception of the Washington Times and a few websites .... silence.
4 comments:
No surprise. The goal for the middle managers who would be implicated in politicizing the spying apparatus against Trump is to simply draw out the investigation long enough that people don't really care anymore. Eventually the scandal will make it's way back to John Brennan but by then it won't matter.
I have seen the full report and also note that numerous times the FBI noted that the document was being studied for verification and no source I have seen ever said it was The Real Thing but rather a document in need of study.
Fred. The media narrative .... as predicted ... has changed. Absent this now discredited report .... what does anyone have but anonymous sources and opinions to push this entire Trump-Russian collusion story. My prediction .... this story will continue, but a lot of its energy is now gone.
"I have seen the full report and also note that numerous times the FBI noted that the document was being studied for verification and no source I have seen ever said it was The Real Thing but rather a document in need of study. "
But we will publish, publish, publish ad infinitum so as to shape a public narrative for the political sphere.
Post a Comment