• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Chitchat Trump dossier

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
How an unverified dossier became a crisis for Donald Trump

The story began in September 2015 when a Republican donor hired a research firm to compile a dossier about Trump’s past scandals and weaknesses, according to a person familiar with the effort.

WASHINGTON — Seven months ago, a respected former British spy named Christopher Steele won a contract to build a file on Donald Trump’s ties to Russia. Last week, his lurid account — unsubstantiated accounts of frolics with prostitutes, real estate deals that were intended as bribes and coordination with Russian intelligence of the hacking of Democrats — was summarized for Trump in an appendix to a top-secret intelligence report.

The consequences have been incalculable and will play out long past Inauguration Day. Word of the summary, which was also given to President Barack Obama and to congressional leaders, leaked to CNN on Tuesday, and the rest of the media followed with sensational reports.

Trump denounced the unproven claims Wednesday as a fabrication, a Nazi-style slander concocted by “sick people.” It has further undermined, at least temporarily, his relationship with the intelligence agencies and cast a shadow over the new administration.

Parts of the story remain out of reach — most critically the basic question of how much, if anything, in the dossier is true. But it is possible to piece together a rough narrative of what led to the current crisis, including lingering questions about the ties binding Trump and his team to Russia. The episode also offers a glimpse of the hidden side of presidential campaigns, involving private sleuths-for-hire looking for the worst they can find about the next American leader.

The story began in September 2015, when a wealthy Republican donor who strongly opposed Trump put up the money to hire a Washington research firm run by former journalists, Fusion GPS, to compile a dossier about the real estate magnate’s past scandals and weaknesses, according to a person familiar with the effort. The person described the opposition research work on condition of anonymity, citing the volatile nature of the story and the likelihood of future legal disputes. The identity of the donor who funded the effort is unclear.

Fusion GPS, headed by a former Wall Street Journal journalist known for his dogged reporting, Glenn Simpson, most often works for business clients. But in presidential elections, the firm is sometimes hired by candidates, party organizations or donors to do political “oppo” work — shorthand for opposition research — on the side.

It is routine work and ordinarily involves creating a big, searchable database of public information: past news reports, documents from lawsuits and other relevant data. For months, Fusion GPS gathered the documents and put together the files from Trump’s past in business and entertainment, a rich target.

After Trump emerged as the presumptive Republican nominee in the spring, the Republicans no longer wanted to finance the effort. But Democratic supporters of Hillary Clinton were very interested, and Fusion GPS kept doing the same deep dives into Trump’s record, but on behalf of new clients.


In June, the tenor of the effort suddenly changed. The Washington Post reported that the Democratic National Committee had been hacked, apparently by Russian government agents, and a mysterious figure calling himself “Guccifer 2.0” began to publish the stolen documents online.

Simpson hired Steele, a former British intelligence officer with whom he had worked before. Steele, in his early 50s, had served undercover in Moscow in the early 1990s and later was the top expert on Russia at the London headquarters of Britain’s spy service, MI6. When he stepped down in 2009, he started his own commercial intelligence firm, Orbis Business Intelligence.

The former journalist and the former spy, according to people who know them, had a similar dark view of President Vladimir Putin of Russia, a former KGB officer, and the varied tactics he and his intelligence operatives used to smear, blackmail or bribe their targets.

As a former spy who had carried out espionage inside Russia, Steele was in no position to travel to Moscow to study Trump’s connections there. Instead, he hired native Russian speakers to call informants inside Russia and made surreptitious contact with his own connections in the country as well.

Steele wrote up his findings in a series of memos, each a few pages long, that he began to deliver to Fusion GPS in June and continued at least until December. By then, the election was over, and neither Steele nor Simpson had a client to pay them, but they did not stop what they believed to be very important work. (Simpson declined to comment for this article, and Steele did not immediately reply to a request for comment.)

The memos described two different Russian operations. The first was a yearslong effort to find a way to influence Trump, perhaps because he had contacts with Russian oligarchs whom Putin wanted to keep close track of. According to Steele’s memos, it used an array of familiar Russian tactics: the gathering of “kompromat,” compromising material such as alleged tapes of Trump with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel, and proposals for business deals attractive to Trump to win his allegiance.

The goal would probably never have been to make Trump a knowing agent of Russia, but to make him a source who might provide information to friendly Russian contacts. But if Putin and his agents wanted to entangle Trump using business deals, they did not do it very successfully — Trump has said he has no major properties inside Russia.

The second Russian operation described was recent: a series of contacts with Trump’s representatives during the campaign, in part to discuss the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton’s campaign chairman, John D. Podesta. According to Steele’s sources, it involved, among other things, a late-summer meeting in Prague between Michael Cohen, a lawyer for Trump, and Oleg Solodukhin, a Russian official who works for Rossotrudnichestvo, an organization that promotes Russia’s interests abroad.

By all accounts, Steele has an excellent reputation with American and British intelligence colleagues and had done work for the FBI on the investigation of bribery at FIFA, soccer’s global governing body. Colleagues say he was acutely aware of the danger he and his associates were being fed Russian disinformation. Russian intelligence had mounted a complex hacking and leaking operation to damage Clinton, after all, and a similar operation against Trump was an obvious possibility.

But much of what he was told, and passed on to Fusion GPS, was very difficult to check. And some of the claims that can be checked seem problematic. Cohen, for instance, said on Twitter on Tuesday night that he has never been in Prague; Solodukhin, his purported Russian contact, denied in a telephone interview that he had ever met Cohen or anyone associated with Trump. The president-elect on Wednesday cited news reports that a different Michael Cohen with no Trump ties may have visited Prague and that the two Cohens might have been mixed up in Steele’s reports.

But word of a dossier had begun to spread through political circles. Rick Wilson, a Republican political operative who was working for a super PAC supporting Marco Rubio, said he heard about it in July, when an investigative reporter for a major news network called him to ask what he knew. Other campaigns and super PACs were also developing more limited opposition research into Trump’s Russia ties.

By early fall, some of Steele’s memos had been given to the FBI and to journalists. An MI6 official, whose job does not permit him to be quoted by name, said that in late summer or early fall, Steele also passed the reports he had prepared on Trump and Russia to British intelligence. Steele was concerned about what he was hearing about Trump, and he thought that the information should not be solely in the hands of people looking to win a political contest.

Now, after the most contentious of elections, Americans are divided and confused about what to believe about the incoming president. And there is no prospect soon for full clarity on the veracity of the claims made against him.

“It is a remarkable moment in history,” said Wilson, the Florida political operative. “What world did I wake up in?”
 

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Donald Trump and the ‘compromising’ Russian report, explained
What are the allegations against Trump? How does Buzzfeed factor into this?

American President-elect Donald Trump has a news conference this morning, when he’s expected to answer a shocking new wave of allegations that Russia collected information that could be used to compromise him.

The allegations run from the time before Trump entered the political stage, when he developed business interests in Russia up to the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

What are the allegations?

The allegations are that Russia has collected compromising sex videos and personal information about President-elect Donald Trump.

The allegations reportedly centre around memos delivered to Trump and out-going U.S. President Barack Obama last week by intelligence chiefs.

The memos suggest that for many years the Russian government has looked for ways to influence Trump, who has travelled repeatedly to Moscow to investigate real estate deals or to oversee the Miss Universe competition, which he owned for several years.

The memos describe sex videos involving prostitutes with Trump in a 2013 visit to a Moscow hotel. The videos were supposedly prepared as “kompromat,” or compromising material, with the possible goal of blackmailing Trump in the future.

The memos also suggest that Russian officials proposed various lucrative deals, essentially as disguised bribes in order to win influence over the real estate magnate.

The memos also describe several purported meetings during the 2016 presidential campaign between Trump representatives and Russian officials to discuss matters of mutual interest, including the Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee and John Podesta, campaign chairman for Trump’s presidential rival, Hillary Clinton.

Are they proven?

No.

What’s Trump’s reaction?

On Tuesday night, Trump responded on Twitter: “FAKE NEWS - A TOTAL POLITICAL WITCH HUNT!”

A spokesperson for the Russian government also categorically denied the allegations as totally false.

Why are they circulating if they aren’t proven?

The material was not corroborated, and the New York Times has not been able to confirm the claims. But intelligence agencies considered it so potentially explosive that they decided Obama, Trump and congressional leaders needed to be told about it and informed that the agencies were actively investigating it.

Intelligence officials were concerned that the information would leak before they informed Trump of its existence, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the summary is classified and talking about it would be a felony.

What are allegations based upon?

The memos were generated by political operatives seeking to derail Trump’s candidacy.

The two-page summary of the memos was presented as an appendix to the intelligence agencies’ report on Russian hacking efforts during the election, sources told The New York Times.

Who drew up allegations?

The memos were prepared mainly by a retired British intelligence operative for a Washington political and corporate research firm. The firm was paid for its work first by Trump’s Republican rivals and later by supporters of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. The Times has checked on a number of the details included in the memos but has been unable to substantiate them.

The former British intelligence officer who gathered the material about Trump is considered a competent and reliable operative with extensive experience in Russia, U.S. officials told The Times. But he passed on what he heard from Russian informants and others, and what they told him has not yet been vetted by U.S. intelligence.

When did Trump hear them?

Obama and Trump were presented with a summary of the unsubstantiated reports last week by the chiefs of the U.S. intelligence agencies, The Times reports.

How does Buzzfeed enter into this?

Buzzfeed published what they call a copy of the allegations online. The website said it did this, even though the allegations aren’t proven “so that Americans can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest levels of the US government.”

With files from The New York Times
 

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Astonishing: An adjective I must husband, as in conserve, because here we are, nine days left in Donald Trump’s “president-elect” phase and already the astonishings runneth amok.

Gobsmacking? Staggering? Flagitious?

But never could I have foreseen the media handing Trump the moral high road.

A tiny sliver of the media, true — the digital online site BuzzFeed, which describes itself as “a social news and internet company” and boasts upwards of 473 million look-ins over the past month alone.

Or, “a failing pile of garbage,” as described Wednesday by Trump, first on his own heap o’ balderdash Twitter account and later at the first press conference he’s held in six months, an eagerly anticipated spectacle that surpassed expectations.

Down the rabbit hole we skitter.

There’s no doubt that America’s 45th commander-in-chief, pending, wallowed righteously in the malicious gook-gabble that BuzzFeed dumped into the public realm the previous day, the entirety of an unverified 35-page dossier allegedly written by a former British intelligence operative containing, well, an astonishing array of spectacular, shocking and salacious allegations about Trump’s private conduct and purported blackmail-pungent involvement with Russia.

Trump was entirely justified in his outrage over the unsubstantiated slime poured on his head by a document so toxic that no other media agency, mainline or peripheral, dared touch it. CNN, though, came enticingly close, albeit focusing their explosive Tuesday disclosures on the two-page synopsis — including claims of compromising personal and financial information about Trump — provided last week to Trump and President Barack Obama by four senior-most U.S. intelligence chiefs. The synopsis was an “annex” to a larger classified brief delineating Russian hacking and interference in the 2016 election.


Trump indisputably and unfairly conflated the BuzzFeed and CNN splashes, which led to a remarkably ugly verbal pas-de-deux between a thuggish Trump and the cable network’s correspondent at the press conference, with the president-elect refusing to take his question.

Reporter: “Since you’re attacking us, can you give us a question?”

Trump: “Not you. Not you. Your organization’s terrible.”

When the reporter persisted, as another journalist attempted to put a query, Trump doubled down. “Don’t’ be rude. Don’t be rude. DON’T BE RUDE. I’m not going to give you a question. You are fake news.”

While not the most important element in Wednesday’s deign-to-engage presser, media as shameful protagonist — as indefensible player — in what has all the appearance of fake news dissemination, gave Trump the pulpit he gleefully seized to further smack around the Fourth and Fifth Estates, although I would categorize BuzzFeed and their unsourced splatter-prone platform fellow travellers as black hole outer dimension non-estate holders.

Industry-wide condemnation of BuzzFeed’s decision to go full-frontal revealing of the intel-porn also allowed Trump to go all smarmy complimentary about media enemies that didn’t rise to the bait of material which apparently has been floating out there as leaked goods for at least a few weeks, unverifiable by journalists who received it.

“I thank a lot of the news organization, some of whom have not treated me very well, a couple in particular, and they came out so strongly against that fake news.”

The most prurient bits of the “annex” contents won’t be repeated here, even if those dubious details are now easily accessible on the web and some parts — specifically the allegation that Trump’s special counsel Michael Cohen had travelled to Prague to meet with Russian officials last summer — definitely disproven. He was never there; wrong Michael Cohen.

But Trump himself sailed close to the edge of those allegations in refuting them, in a way that would surely send the curious scrambling to track down: what the hell is he talking about?

“When I leave our country — I’m a very high-profile person, wouldn’t you say? — I am extremely careful. I’m surrounded by body guards. I’m surrounded by people. And I always tell them . . . be very careful because in your hotel rooms and no matter where you go, you’re going to probably have cameras. I’m not just referring to Russia, but I would certainly put them in that category. Cameras are so small, you can’t see them and you won’t know. You better be careful or you’ll be watching yourself on nightly television.”

Then added: “Does anyone really believe that story? I’m also very much of a germaphobe, believe me.”

Yech.

In his own Twitter bleats, Trump has been no less careless and harmful than BuzzFeed, un-presidential, undignified and as evincing of thin skin as onion paper. But nothing about this looming presidency will come anywhere close to normal, clearly. Trump is making up the rules, including those that apply to the division of powers, as he goes along, blithely ignoring the Constitution in the process.

Almost lost in the blather was Trump’s understated acknowledgment that he now — screeching U-turn — accepts the overwhelming intelligence consensus that Russia went hacker trolling in the election, though he’s clearly not going to grant this interposition, aimed at damaging Hillary Clinton (bitterly resented by Vladimir Putin) catapulted him into the White House.

“I think it was Russia,” Trump allowed, when asked who was behind the covert manipulation.

But hey, yeah Russia, he implied. “Look at what was learned from that hacking.”

And tough titties that the Democratic National Committee got their bell rung by disclosure of John Podesta’s emails. They should have taken more hack-proof measures.

There was, again, an undertone of admiration for Putin, the purported hack-master massaging information to Trump’s electoral benefit. “If Putin likes Donald Trump, I consider that an asset, not a liability . . . I don’t know if I’m going to get along with Vladimir Putin. I hope I do. And if I don’t, do you honestly believe that Hillary would be tougher on Putin than me? Give me a break.’’

Trump may be seeking an ally against Daesh in Putin. But he seems to be wilfully pre-trashing his relationship with America’s intelligence community — which in less than a fortnight will be, by oath, committed to doing his covert bidding. The war of words with intelligence officials by an incoming president is unprecedented.

He doesn’t trust them. He’s all but accused them of leaking the intel dossier. “I have many meetings with intelligence and every time I meet (them), people are reading about it. Somebody’s leaking it out.’’

So he set up a super-secret meeting, to outsmart the culprits.

“The meeting was over, they left and immediately the word got out that I had a meeting.”

Outing the spooks, he smirked.

We are truly into uncharted presidential territory, and treachery.

I’d say astonishing, if it didn’t sound so Trumpian tweet-dimension trite.


Rosie DiManno usually appears Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday.
 

winnipegjets

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
White House press secretary says Trump hasn’t tried to disprove accusations

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said the president-elect has fallen short of meeting the “bare standard of transparency” in proving that accusations lodged against Trump are false.

Earnest went on to compare the current accusations to the “birther” conspiracy theory — stoked for years by Trump — that president Obama was not born in the United States.

“The conspiracy theories were propagated even in the face of significant, overwhelming, and convincing evidence,” Earnest said, referring to the president’s birth certificate.

He went on to say that Obama’s administration sought to disprove the claims by providing evidence against it, whereas Trump’s administration has taken a different approach.

“There’s ample evidence they could marshal to make public, to refute those claims, those accusation they say are baseless, but they refuse to do so,” Earnest said. “That kind of secrecy only serves to sow public doubt. If you recall, during the campaign as the president-elect was refusing to release his tax returns, people were asking what he’s hiding. People are asking that question again.”
Earnest concluded by saying that even though the Obama administration may not always agree with a news organization’s editorial decisions, “the administration deeply respects and will protect” them.

“We respect that independent news organizations should make decisions independent of any government interference.”
—Mary Ann Georgantopoulos
 

Thick Face Black Heart

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
When will you chaps ever learn?

Infographic-How-4chan-Trolled-CIA-CNN-Buzzfeed-500.jpg
 
Top