Mueller's indictment just put two more nails in the coffin of the Steele dossier's credibility:
1. Aleksej Gubarev - supposedly helped hack DNC
Not indicted
2. Michael Cohen - supposedly went to Europe to "pay off" hackers
Russian intelligence officers need paying off?
-
-
Also I was the first person to write on that 4/26/17 opinion. I've tracked those opinions meticulously for 10 years. Virtually everything written about it six months later that people tend to read is hysterically bad writing.
-
Moving on, when I asked about foreign spies, I wasn't asking abt cyber. I was talking about when other countries recruit Americans to betray their countries. Person to person. What should we do about it?
-
Assuming the recruit DOES betray their country, that's treason. A rope is called for.
-
Sure. But how do we find that out? (Technically, it's only treason if he betrayed the country in wartime, but I'm a stickler there.)
-
There is no one size fits all answer to that question. Interviewing the subject or his friends/co-workers, tracing the info back to source, surveillance of different sorts, etc
-
Okay. So if you suspect the guy has used past interviews to alert the adversary, and you've done some work w/friends/co-workers, then you're at surveillance, right? Reasonable?
-
I was not aware they thought Page had "alerted" anyone. Before you jump to surveillance of a presidential campaign which is what a FISA on Page provided w the hops, you might have considered warning Trump when he hired him in March or April
-
That has been my problem all along. Out of the chute, they have seemingly treated POTUS with suspicion. When Page was hired in March, there was no Russian conspiracy in the air, other than that being plotted by Podesta as a campaign smear. Trump w/h/b given a defensive briefing
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
OK. But I would assume the FBI would attempt to independently verify such info. It appears there was, to borrow Ben Rhodes term, an "echo chamber" created from Steele's work. Also understand verification isn't always possible, but the FBI had a working relationship w Page
-
Well, the FBI had interviewed Page in the past and reportedly suspected him of tipping off the Russians subsequently. They also knew that AFTER they interviewed him, he still sought out suspicious Russians. Is that what you mean by "working relationship"?
-
Didn't Page place a bug in some publicly sourced materials he gave some Russians, as well as testify in court? Didn't his work in bringing down that spy ring end just a few months before they decided he was now a threat? You must know more than I do about his story."sought out.."
-
Nah. None of that is true. The FBI considered him an ongoing suspected asset in March 2016, and then saw him join the Trump campaign and talk about making deals w/RU. So what do you do?
-
You send an Agent to Trump Tower at 10:00 am and ask to speak with Carter Page... If he allows, you interview him and express concern. (All done above the table...)
-
Because that is how CI works? All done above the table?
-
No. Apparently you just assume it needs to be a CI Investigation... and piss all over him and a campaign for POTUS! What could go wrong??
-
When you see an intel op try to infiltrate a campaign, yes, you open a CI investigation. It would be a dereliction of duty not to. I don't remember the FBI pissing on the Trump campaign in 2016.
- 16 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.