With that caveat, here are excerpts from the dossier that correspond with details contained in official documents. ![]() But there is, at present, no evidence in the official record that confirms other direct ties or their relevance to the 2016 presidential campaign. and a Kremlin-connected lawyer was to obtain “dirt” on Hillary Clinton. Most significantly, the dossier reports a “ well-developed conspiracy of co-operation between and the Russian leadership,” including an “ intelligence exchange had been running between them for at least 8 years.” There has been significant investigative reporting about long-standing connections between Trump, his associates and Kremlin-affiliated individuals, and Trump himself acknowledged that the purpose of a June 2016 meeting between his son, Donald Trump Jr. The dossier holds up well over time, and none of it, to our knowledge, has been disproven.īut much of the reporting simply remains uncorroborated, at least by the yardstick we are using. These materials buttress some of Steele’s reporting, both specifically and thematically. We also considered the draft statement of offense released by author Jerome Corsi, a memorandum released by House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Ranking Member Adam Schiff related to the Carter Page FISA applications and admissions directly from certain speakers. In this effort, we considered only information in the public domain from trustworthy and official government sources, including documents released by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office in connection with the criminal cases brought against Paul Manafort, the 12 Russian intelligence officers, the Internet Research Agency trolling operation and associated entities, Michael Cohen, Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos. With that in mind, we thought it would be worthwhile to look back at the dossier and to assess, to the extent possible, how the substance of Steele’s reporting holds up over time. In that sense, notes taken by a special agent have much in common with the notes that a journalist might take while covering a story-the substance of those notes could be true or false, depending on what the source tells the journalist, but the transcription should be accurate. The substance of these memoranda can be true or false, but the recording of information is (or should be) accurate. Both of those forms are used by special agents of the FBI and DEA, respectively, to record what they are told by witnesses during investigations. In that sense, the dossier is similar to an FBI 302 form or a DEA 6 form. The dossier is, quite simply and by design, raw reporting, not a finished intelligence product. He neither made nor rendered bottom-line judgments. Steele neither evaluated nor synthesized the intelligence. Written in 2016, the dossier is a collection of raw intelligence. The dossier is actually a series of reports-16 in all-that total 35 pages. ![]() Rather, we returned to the document because we wondered whether information made public as a result of the Mueller investigation-and the passage of two years-has tended to buttress or diminish the crux of Steele’s original reporting. Our interest in revisiting the compilation that has come to be called the “Steele Dossier” concerns neither of those topics, at least not directly. Published almost two years ago by BuzzFeed News in January 2017, the document received significant public attention, first for its lurid details regarding Donald Trump’s pre-presidential alleged sexual escapades in Russia and later for its role in forming part of the basis for the government’s application for a FISA warrant to surveil Carter Page. Indeed, it was much discussed during former FBI Director Jim Comey’s testimony in front of the House Judiciary Committee on Dec. The dossier compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele remains a subject of fascination-or, depending on your perspective, scorn.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |