Now, after two years of using the dossier to perpetuate the "Collusion" narrative, the New York Times has finally acknowledged what those of us not parroting the collusion delusion have known for years - the dossier was garbage.
"[T]he release on Thursday of the report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, underscored what had grown clearer for months - that while many Trump aides had welcomed contacts with the Russians, some of the most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove.
The dossier will now be the subject of at least two inquiries - one from congressional Republicans and one from the Department of Justice's Inspector General, who is looking into whether the FBI improperly relied on the propaganda document to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page.
The FBI, according to the Times, appears to have been suspicious of the dossier since early 2017.
Instead, media outlets like the Times spent years talking to "Sources" - some of whom were likely Fusion GPS operatives - claiming Mueller had evidence supporting claims in the dossier.
"NYT: 'Ha ha, funny story, you'll never believe it. That dossier we spent years defending as legitimate and a worthy basis for FISA wiretaps on citizens is so unfounded it might actually be Russian disinformation, just like the collusion skeptics warned,'" she tweeted.
Journalist Patrick Poole tweeted: "This is very telling. It was clear in Jan 2017 that this was likely part Russian disinformation since **the very first page** of Steele's dossier reveals his Source B is"a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/46240/nyt-finally-acknowledges-steele-dossier-might-not-ashe-schow
"[T]he release on Thursday of the report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, underscored what had grown clearer for months - that while many Trump aides had welcomed contacts with the Russians, some of the most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove.
The dossier will now be the subject of at least two inquiries - one from congressional Republicans and one from the Department of Justice's Inspector General, who is looking into whether the FBI improperly relied on the propaganda document to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page.
The FBI, according to the Times, appears to have been suspicious of the dossier since early 2017.
Instead, media outlets like the Times spent years talking to "Sources" - some of whom were likely Fusion GPS operatives - claiming Mueller had evidence supporting claims in the dossier.
"NYT: 'Ha ha, funny story, you'll never believe it. That dossier we spent years defending as legitimate and a worthy basis for FISA wiretaps on citizens is so unfounded it might actually be Russian disinformation, just like the collusion skeptics warned,'" she tweeted.
Journalist Patrick Poole tweeted: "This is very telling. It was clear in Jan 2017 that this was likely part Russian disinformation since **the very first page** of Steele's dossier reveals his Source B is"a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/46240/nyt-finally-acknowledges-steele-dossier-might-not-ashe-schow
No comments:
Post a Comment