Intelligence Officials: Russians may have Compromising Information on Trump - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Mythman;51655946]There is now a name attached to the document, the 'ex British intelligence officer' is one Christopher Steele according to the WSJ. The fact that more stuff is coming out shows that the story has legs and isn't some BS hoax by /pol. [url]http://www.wsj.com/articles/christopher-steele-ex-british-intelligence-officer-said-to-have-prepared-dossier-on-trump-1484162553[/url][/QUOTE] JESUS CHRIST The hole gets deeper every minute

[QUOTE=Mythman;51655946]There is now a name attached to the document, the 'ex British intelligence officer' is one Christopher Steele according to the WSJ. The fact that more stuff is coming out shows that the story has legs and isn't some BS hoax by /pol. [url]http://www.wsj.com/articles/christopher-steele-ex-british-intelligence-officer-said-to-have-prepared-dossier-on-trump-1484162553[/url][/QUOTE] It never was a BS hoax just 4chan trying to take credit. Nothing on 4chan has any fucking weight or anything they said can be verified with shit like this.

[QUOTE=Mythman;51655946]There is now a name attached to the document, the 'ex British intelligence officer' is one Christopher Steele according to the WSJ. The fact that more stuff is coming out shows that the story has legs and isn't some BS hoax by /pol. [url]http://www.wsj.com/articles/christopher-steele-ex-british-intelligence-officer-said-to-have-prepared-dossier-on-trump-1484162553[/url][/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Mr. Burrows, reached at his home outside London on Wednesday, said he wouldn’t “confirm or deny” that Orbis had produced the report. A neighbor of Mr. Steele’s said Mr. Steele said he would be away for a few days. In previous weeks Mr. Steele has declined repeated requests for interviews through an intermediary, who said the subject was “too hot.””[/QUOTE] EVEN THE GUY WHO IS THE CO-OWNER WITH THE GUY WHO WROTE THE DOSSIER WON'T CONFIRM THAT THEY WROTE IT. Along with that, the guy who [B]wrote the dossier will not even TALK about the fucking thing.[/B] This story has legs made of cardboard.

You know that when the first result for his name is literally the WSJ that was just posted that you're talking about someone who's definitely not been on the radar until now, which is making me think this definitely has some truth to it. Oh boy. What's going to happen?

[QUOTE=Stroheim;51655960]EVEN THE GUY WHO IS THE CO-OWNER WITH THE GUY WHO WROTE THE DOSSIER WON'T CONFIRM THAT THEY WROTE IT. This story has legs made of cardboard.[/QUOTE] you are just the most precious thing, you know that

[QUOTE=chernisreal?;51655926]I think the reality is that Trump won the election. He will be president for the next four years, at the least. And you say I reverted, reverted from what?[/QUOTE] Not just you personally, just some people in general have a weird habit of acting like the election was the end of the matter and that "but trump won!" is the only retort necessary no matter how unfit he proves himself to be.

[QUOTE=RearAdmiral;51655928]I decided to check /r/the_donald to see how they're all reacting, but it was just one big denial-fueled circlejerk so literally nothing had changed.[/QUOTE] They break character too sometimes, I checked what were the reactions when Rick Perry was chosen as Secretary of Energy, and people were actually upvoting comments how this was a bad choice until mods shut everybody down like "Trump surely knows what he is doing, this is good etc"

[QUOTE=Stroheim;51655960]EVEN THE GUY WHO IS THE CO-OWNER WITH THE GUY WHO WROTE THE DOSSIER WON'T CONFIRM THAT THEY WROTE IT. This story has legs made of cardboard.[/QUOTE] Or maybe you don't talk or confirm anything before speaking to your lawyers?

[QUOTE=Mythman;51655946]There is now a name attached to the document, the 'ex British intelligence officer' is one Christopher Steele according to the WSJ. The fact that more stuff is coming out shows that the story has legs and isn't some BS hoax by /pol. [url]http://www.wsj.com/articles/christopher-steele-ex-british-intelligence-officer-said-to-have-prepared-dossier-on-trump-1484162553[/url][/QUOTE] By the time we finish going down the rabbit hole, we're going to be all the way in China

[QUOTE=Stroheim;51655960]EVEN THE GUY WHO IS THE CO-OWNER WITH THE GUY WHO WROTE THE DOSSIER WON'T CONFIRM THAT THEY WROTE IT. This story has legs made of cardboard.[/QUOTE] 'Neither confirm nor deny' - if they didn't write it they would just simply say 'no'.

[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;51655973]By the time we finish going down the rabbit hole, we're going to be all the way in China[/QUOTE] Everything is a Chinese conspiracy.

[QUOTE=rilez;51655783]Can we all just take a moment to reflect on the fact that our President was happily interviewed by Alex Jones, a 9/11 truther who posits that our government faked Sandy Hook, and drugged our water supply. But behind the seal of the President-elect, called CNN "fake news" and told a reporter to be quiet. This shit isn't funny anymore. Our soon to be President has had three months to stop posting Twitter rants, and start acting like our leader. Is it ever going to happen?[/QUOTE] It's funny that the majority of you guys didn't share the same sentiment when Obama criticized Fox News.

Trump confirmed that he is running for another 4 years of office in 2020.

[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;51655979]It's funny that the majority of you guys didn't share the same sentiment when Obama criticized Fox News.[/QUOTE] yeah remember when obama had a tantrum during one of his press conferences and called fox news a big fat mess oh wait obama wasn't a manchild

[QUOTE=Stroheim;51655960]EVEN THE GUY WHO IS THE CO-OWNER WITH THE GUY WHO WROTE THE DOSSIER WON'T CONFIRM THAT THEY WROTE IT. Along with that, the guy who [B]wrote the dossier will not even TALK about the fucking thing.[/B] This story has legs made of cardboard.[/QUOTE] Posted without comment: [url]https://order-order.com/2017/01/11/d-notice-issued-naming-trump-allegations-source/[/url] (It is Guido Fawkes which is terrible source so take with a bucket of salt & if it's true we are unlikely to corroboration from other British media)

[QUOTE=Mythman;51655974]'Neither confirm nor deny' - if they didn't write it they would just simply say 'no'.[/QUOTE] For real, if someone knows they didn't write something, and there's this much heat on them they'd just say "no". "Neither confirm nor deny" are the weasel words used to mitigate culpability of something you actually had some hand in.

[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;51655979]It's funny that the majority of you guys didn't share the same sentiment when Obama criticized Fox News.[/QUOTE] Obama didn't tweet articles from fake news sites and do interviews with conspiracy nuts. He also didn't throw a paddy like a literal child.

[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;51655979]It's funny that the majority of you guys didn't share the same sentiment when Obama criticized Fox News.[/QUOTE] There's a difference between one incident and a concerted effort. On top of that the reasons behind the incidents matter as well. Trump is outright trying to ignore what's inconvenient to him. Criticizing news media when there's an issue is perfectly fine. Criticizing them and acting like a total child just because they said something that doesn't fit your narrative is not.

#PissGate

btw, if people were ever really willing to immediately believe those who claim they sent in the info on 4chan: Seven years ago the final evolutions of the Pokémon Black and White starters were "leaked." They were so ridiculous nobody wanted to believe them. Everyone cried "fake!" 4chan was rife with people showing bits and pieces of "proof" they weren't real. Eventually one gentleman, anonymous of course, came forth and claimed he had made the fakes himself, providing pictures and detailed descriptions on how he came to create them. Everyone bought it [t]https://archive.nyafuu.org/foolfuuka/boards/vp/image/1365/10/1365105820563.png[/t] Spoiler alert: They were real. Anonymous 4chan users claimed they were behind it just for laughs. they were real, no matter how absurd they were food for thought

[QUOTE=Stroheim;51655960]EVEN THE GUY WHO IS THE CO-OWNER WITH THE GUY WHO WROTE THE DOSSIER WON'T CONFIRM THAT THEY WROTE IT. Along with that, the guy who [B]wrote the dossier will not even TALK about the fucking thing.[/B] This story has legs made of cardboard.[/QUOTE] I pity you, I really do. What happens if it ends up being true? It's already looking more and more credible with every passing hour, what with all the new info coming out. What would you do then?

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656009]I pity you, I really do. What happens if it ends up being true? It's already looking more and more credible with every passing hour, what with all the new info coming out. What would you do then?[/QUOTE] "it's still fake"

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656009]I pity you, I really do. What happens if it ends up being true? It's already looking more and more credible with every passing hour, what with all the new info coming out. What would you do then?[/QUOTE] "America voted Trump in a fair election. Disagree?"

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656009]I pity you, I really do. What happens if it ends up being true? It's already looking more and more credible with every passing hour, what with all the new info coming out. What would you do then?[/QUOTE] Cognitive dissonance does wonders on people

[QUOTE=Llamaguy;51656013]"America voted Trump in a fair election. Disagree?"[/QUOTE] Which would be cute, but tangential to the actual issue, which is that Trump would essentially be a puppet of the Russian government.

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656018]Which would be cute, but tangential to the actual issue, which is that Trump would essentially be a puppet of the Russian government.[/QUOTE] Oh sorry, wrong reply. "No puppet. No puppet. You're the puppet!"

[QUOTE=archangel125;51656009]I pity you, I really do. What happens if it ends up being true? It's already looking more and more credible with every passing hour, what with all the new info coming out. What would you do then?[/QUOTE] Oh goody Canadian pity points. If I get enough do I get a trip to Tim Hortons? If it ends up being true, I'll be proven wrong and accept that I was wrong. But until that BI guy or his company actually comes out and confirms the dossier, which the agent had refused to talk about for [I]at least a month[/I] according to the WSJ article, I'll still be skeptical. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Extended - Shitposting Elsewhere" - rilez))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;51655979]It's funny that the majority of you guys didn't share the same sentiment when Obama criticized Fox News.[/QUOTE] This is what Obama said about Fox News. “we’ve got a tradition in this country of a press that oftentimes is opinionated,” “I think Fox is part of that tradition — it is part of the tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view. It’s a point of view that I disagree with,” Mr. Obama said. “It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world.” This is [I]entirely[/I] fair to say when Fox News pushed the Birther Movement, has shown repeated conservative bias, and has engaged in petty conflict with the Obama administration for his entire tenure as president. Nothing he said was false in the least. Trump, on the other hand, said, and I quote, "I am not going to give you a question, you are fake news." in a live press conference directly to a reporter. There's a pretty marked difference here. CNN's bias comes nowhere near Fox's extensive campaigns against Obama and his administration that were often based on conspiracy and falsehoods. For Trump to call CNN "Fake news" when he repeatedly sources and pushes tabloids and legitimate fake news sites (such as Lifezette as recently as yesterday) is outrageous.

[QUOTE=Stroheim;51656033]Oh goody Canadian pity points. If I get enough do I get a trip to Tim Hortons? If it ends up being true, I'll be proven wrong and except it. Congratulations. But until that BI guy or his company actually comes out and confirms the dossier, which the agent hadn't talked about for [I]at least a month[/I] according to the WSJ article, I'll still be skeptical.[/QUOTE] Skeptical is fine - Until something's proven true, you shouldn't believe it, after all. But you must at least admit that if there *are* in fact multiple intelligence sources on this thing, it's very, very concerning.

on a slightly different note I am saddened that nobody is protesting that we shouldn't assume anything until we know all the facts blah blah.... I wonder how long this is going to run and whether we will ever actually know what is true or not?