emptywheel

Cheryl, where did I say you were evil? I didn't. I said that the project would be better served if it noted things that were definitively wrong in real time, much less now.

As I've noted, to extent dossier might bear out it's on the trips to RU, not on hack&leak. But that itself raises real questions, Qs that might be answered by Steele's forté ($, not digits) or by disinfo.

What I have done is collected evidence and set it against the dossier's claims. I have made my work public so that others can use it. I do not claim that it is exhaustive or definitive.

What you have done is collect evidence that might support claims the dossier. What you haven't done is collect (or note) obvious counterevidence. It seems that's important for understanding what the dossier actually did.

No - there is counterevidence as well. But not exhaustive. Add in what you think is missing.

Again I think it critically important to note that that first cyber report -- one of the only two that might have helped Dems respond to hack b4 WL release -- conflicted w/all public evidence abt APT29. https://www.emptywheel.net/2017/11/24/did-the-steele-dossier-lead-the-democrats-to-be-complacent-after-they-got-hacked/ …

You have noted it.

I don't see our work as competing. You may use my compilation or not as you see fit. I don't claim it is definitive - there is too much going on for anyone's work to be definitive. One of the rules of analysis is not to fall in love with one's analysis.