U.S. And International Politics

[Richard Smith]

Dear Comrade Storing,

You're wrong, of course.

Regardless, that's what an FBI Director should do when he has reason to believe a "President" is a traitor.

Do stop watching Fox News, OANN and NewsMax, and try to get your facts straight, Comrade Storing.

ME: Did James Comey discuss wearing a "wire" to entrap Trump?

GROK: No, there is no evidence that James Comey discussed or proposed wearing a recording device (commonly referred to as a "wire") to entrap President Trump. The incident often misattributed to Comey actually involved Rod Rosenstein, the then-Deputy Attorney General, who floated the idea in May 2017 amid concerns over Trump's firing of Comey as FBI Director. This was documented in a memo by Andrew McCabe, Comey's successor as Acting FBI Director.

Key Facts from the Incident

What Happened: Rosenstein suggested he could wear a wire during White House meetings with Trump to gather evidence on potential obstruction of justice related to Comey's dismissal and the ongoing Russia investigation. He also raised the possibility of invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office. McCabe's memo (released in 2019) described Rosenstein as serious about the wire idea, noting he believed it was feasible because he "was not searched when he entered the White House."
Comey's Role: Comey was not involved in this discussion—he had already been fired by Trump on May 9, 2017, just days before the conversation. The proposal stemmed from fallout over Comey's ouster, but Comey himself did not participate or advocate for it.

Public Revelation: The story emerged in September 2018 via a New York Times report, sparking backlash from Trump, who called it "treasonous." McCabe confirmed details in a 2019 60 Minutes interview, emphasizing Rosenstein's sincerity.

Legal Outcome: No charges resulted from this. Rosenstein testified in 2018 that he was exploring ways to preserve evidence, not entrap anyone, and described his comments as exploratory.

Context and Misconceptions

The confusion may arise because the episode is tied to the broader Trump-Russia probe, which Comey oversaw until his firing. Trump has repeatedly accused Comey of orchestrating investigations against him, but no records or testimonies link Comey to the wire proposal.

Recent 2025 developments (e.g., Comey's indictment for allegedly lying to Congress) relate to unrelated claims about the Russia probe, not this incident.

This event highlights tensions in the Trump administration's early days but does not involve Comey in any entrapment scheme.

. . . . . . .

The New York Times, 9/21/18

The deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, suggested last year that he secretly record President Trump in the White House to expose the chaos consuming the administration, and he discussed recruiting cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump from office for being unfit.

Mr. Rosenstein made these suggestions in the spring of 2017 when Mr. Trump’s firing of James B. Comey as F.B.I. director plunged the White House into turmoil. Over the ensuing days, the president divulged classified intelligence to Russians in the Oval Office, and revelations emerged that Mr. Trump had asked Mr. Comey to pledge loyalty and end an investigation into a senior aide.

Mr. Rosenstein was just two weeks into his job. He had begun overseeing the Russia investigation and played a key role in the president’s dismissal of Mr. Comey by writing a memo critical of his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. But Mr. Rosenstein was caught off guard when Mr. Trump cited the memo in the firing, and he began telling people that he feared he had been used.

Mr. Rosenstein made the remarks about secretly recording Mr. Trump and about the 25th Amendment in meetings and conversations with other Justice Department and F.B.I. officials. Several people described the episodes in interviews over the past several months, insisting on anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The people were briefed either on the events themselves or on memos written by F.B.I. officials, including Andrew G. McCabe, then the acting bureau director, that documented Mr. Rosenstein’s actions and comments.

None of Mr. Rosenstein’s proposals apparently came to fruition. It is not clear how determined he was about seeing them through, though he did tell Mr. McCabe that he might be able to persuade Attorney General Jeff Sessions and John F. Kelly, then the secretary of homeland security and now the White House chief of staff, to mount an effort to invoke the 25th Amendment.

The extreme suggestions show Mr. Rosenstein’s state of mind in the disorienting days that followed Mr. Comey’s dismissal. Sitting in on Mr. Trump’s interviews with prospective F.B.I. directors and facing attacks for his own role in Mr. Comey’s firing, Mr. Rosenstein had an up-close view of the tumult. Mr. Rosenstein appeared conflicted, regretful and emotional, according to people who spoke with him at the time.

Mr. Rosenstein disputed this account.

“The New York Times’s story is inaccurate and factually incorrect,” he said in a statement. “I will not further comment on a story based on anonymous sources who are obviously biased against the department and are advancing their own personal agenda. But let me be clear about this: Based on my personal dealings with the president, there is no basis to invoke the 25th Amendment.”

A Justice Department spokeswoman also provided a statement from a person who was present when Mr. Rosenstein proposed wearing a wire. The person, who would not be named, acknowledged the remark but said Mr. Rosenstein made it sarcastically.

But according to the others who described his comments, Mr. Rosenstein not only confirmed that he was serious about the idea but also followed up by suggesting that other F.B.I. officials who were interviewing to be the bureau’s director could also secretly record Mr. Trump.

Mr. McCabe, who was later fired from the F.B.I., declined to comment. His memos have been turned over to the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, in the investigation into whether Trump associates conspired with Russia’s election interference, according to a lawyer for Mr. McCabe. “A set of those memos remained at the F.B.I. at the time of his departure in late January 2018,” the lawyer, Michael R. Bromwich, said of his client. “He has no knowledge of how any member of the media obtained those memos.”

The revelations about Mr. Rosenstein come as Mr. Trump has unleashed another round of attacks in recent days on federal law enforcement, saying in an interview with the newspaper The Hill that he hopes his assaults on the F.B.I. turn out to be “one of my crowning achievements,” and that he only wished he had terminated Mr. Comey sooner.

“If I did one mistake with Comey, I should have fired him before I got here. I should have fired him the day I won the primaries,” Mr. Trump said. “I should have fired him right after the convention. Say, ‘I don’t want that guy.’ Or at least fired him the first day on the job.”

Days after ascending to the role of the nation’s No. 2 law enforcement officer, Mr. Rosenstein was thrust into a crisis.

On a brisk May day, Mr. Rosenstein and his boss, Mr. Sessions, who had recused himself from the Russia investigation because of his role as a prominent Trump campaign supporter, joined Mr. Trump in the Oval Office. The president informed them of his plan to oust Mr. Comey. To the surprise of White House aides who were trying to talk the president out of it, Mr. Rosenstein embraced the idea, even offering to write the memo about the Clinton email inquiry. He turned it in shortly after.

A day later, Mr. Trump announced the firing, and White House aides released Mr. Rosenstein’s memo, labeling it the basis for Mr. Comey’s dismissal. Democrats sharply criticized Mr. Rosenstein, accusing him of helping to create a cover story for the president to rationalize the termination.

“You wrote a memo you knew would be used to perpetuate a lie,” Senator Christopher Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, wrote on Twitter. "You own this debacle.”

The president’s reliance on his memo caught Mr. Rosenstein by surprise, and he became angry at Mr. Trump, according to people who spoke to Mr. Rosenstein at the time. He grew concerned that his reputation had suffered harm.

A determined Mr. Rosenstein began telling associates that he would ultimately be “vindicated” for his role in the matter. One week after the firing, Mr. Rosenstein met with Mr. McCabe and at least four other senior Justice Department officials, in part to explain his role in the situation.

During their discussion, Mr. Rosenstein expressed frustration at how Mr. Trump had conducted the search for a new F.B.I. director, saying the president was failing to take the candidate interviews seriously. A handful of politicians and law enforcement officials, including Mr. McCabe, were under consideration.

To Mr. Rosenstein, the hiring process was emblematic of broader dysfunction stemming from the White House. He said both the process and the administration itself were in disarray, according to two people familiar with the discussion.

Mr. Rosenstein then raised the idea of wearing a recording device, or “wire,” as he put it, to secretly tape the president when he visited the White House. One participant asked whether Mr. Rosenstein was serious, and he replied animatedly that he was.

If not him, then Mr. McCabe or other F.B.I. officials interviewing with Mr. Trump for the job could perhaps wear a wire or otherwise record the president, Mr. Rosenstein offered. White House officials never checked his phone when he arrived for meetings there, Mr. Rosenstein added, implying it would be easy to secretly record Mr. Trump.

Mr. Rosenstein mentioned the possibility of wearing a wire on at least one other occasion, the people said, though they did not provide details.

The suggestion itself was remarkable. While informants or undercover agents regularly use concealed listening devices to surreptitiously gather evidence for federal investigators, they are typically targeting drug kingpins and Mafia bosses in criminal investigations, not a president viewed as ineffectively conducting his duties.

In the end, the idea went nowhere, the officials said. But they called Mr. Rosenstein’s comments an example of how erratically he was behaving while he was taking part in the interviews for a replacement F.B.I. director, considering the appointment of a special counsel and otherwise running the day-to-day operations of the more than 100,000 people at the Justice Department.

At least two meetings took place on May 16 involving both Mr. McCabe and Mr. Rosenstein, the people familiar with the events of the day said. Mr. Rosenstein brought up the 25th Amendment during the first meeting of Justice Department officials, they said. A memo about the second meeting written by one participant, Lisa Page, a lawyer who worked for Mr. McCabe at the time, did not mention the topic.

Mr. Rosenstein’s suggestion about the 25th Amendment was similarly a sensitive topic. The amendment allows for the vice president and a majority of cabinet officials to declare the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”

Merely conducting a straw poll, even if Mr. Kelly and Mr. Sessions were on board, would be risky if another administration official were to tell the president, who could fire everyone involved to end the effort.

Mr. McCabe told other F.B.I. officials of his conversation with Mr. Rosenstein. None of the people interviewed said that they knew of him ever consulting Mr. Kelly or Mr. Sessions.

The episode is the first known instance of a named senior administration official weighing the 25th Amendment. Unidentified others have been said to discuss it, including an unnamed senior administration official who wrote an Op-Ed for The New York Times. That person’s identity is unknown to journalists in the Times news department.

Some of the details in Mr. McCabe’s memos suggested that Mr. Rosenstein had regrets about the firing of Mr. Comey. During a May 12 meeting with Mr. McCabe, Mr. Rosenstein was upset and emotional, Mr. McCabe wrote, and said that he wished Mr. Comey were still at the F.B.I. so he could bounce ideas off him.

Mr. Rosenstein also asked F.B.I. officials on May 14, five days after Mr. Comey’s firing, about calling him for advice about a special counsel. The officials responded that such a call was a bad idea because Mr. Comey was no longer in the government. And they were surprised, believing that the idea contradicted Mr. Rosenstein’s stated reason for backing Mr. Comey’s dismissal — that he had shown bad judgment in the Clinton email inquiry.

Mr. Rosenstein, 53, is a lifelong public servant. After graduating from the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard Law School, he clerked for a federal judge before joining the Justice Department in 1990 and was appointed United States attorney for Maryland.

Mr. Rosenstein also considered appointing as special counsel James M. Cole, himself a former deputy attorney general, three of the people said. Mr. Cole would have made an even richer target for Mr. Trump’s ire than has Mr. Mueller, a lifelong Republican: Mr. Cole served four years as the No. 2 in the Justice Department during the Obama administration and worked as a private lawyer representing one of Mrs. Clinton’s longtime confidants, Sidney Blumenthal.

Mr. Cole and Mr. Rosenstein have known each other for years. Mr. Cole, who declined to comment, was Mr. Rosenstein’s supervisor early in his Justice Department career when he was prosecuting public corruption cases.

Mr. Trump and his allies have repeatedly attacked Mr. Rosenstein and have also targeted Mr. McCabe, who was fired in March for failing to be forthcoming when he was interviewed in an inspector general investigation around the time of Mr. Comey’s dismissal. The inspector general later referred the matter to federal prosecutors in Washington.

The president’s allies have seized on Mr. McCabe’s lack of candor to paint a damning picture of the F.B.I. under Mr. Comey and assert that the Russia investigation is tainted.

The Justice Department denied a request in late July from Mr. Trump’s congressional allies to release Mr. McCabe’s memos, citing a continuing investigation that the lawmakers believed to be Mr. Mueller’s. Mr. Rosenstein not only supervises that investigation but is also considered by the president’s lawyers as a witness for their defense because he sought the dismissal of Mr. Comey, which is being investigated as possible obstruction of justice.

What an unhinged rambling.  There is zero credible evidence that Trump was a traitor.  None.  Your Russians pulled a fast one on Hillary and company and they took the bait.  Comey knew this whole thing was baseless.  It was used to damage and undermine Trump for three years.  Comey is the one who committed treason.  He just carried water for the political establishment who gave him power.   

[Richard Smith]

Perhaps it's not "Instant Karma" per Lennon but it is Karma poetry just the same when the chickens come home to roost:

"When powerful people cheat to get better loans, it comes at the expense of hardworking people. Everyday Americans cannot lie to a bank to get a mortgage, and if they did, our government would throw the book at them. There simply cannot be different rules for different people."

Letitia James - February 2024 post on X attacking President Donald Trump.

[Tom Graves]

What an unhinged rambling.

I'm sorry if it's too complicated for you.

Comey knew this whole thing was baseless.

"Whole thing"? What "whole thing"?

Given the fact that Comey knew that the GRU and the KGB had hacked the DNC's and Podesta's emails and arranged for Julian Assange to dump them on social media (the timing of which Roger Stone knew about in advance, possibly because he and Harley Schlanger had arranged it?), and given the fact that Trump's campaign manager had helped pro-Putin Yanukovich get elected president in Ukraine and was connected to Russian intelligence through his GRU-officer employee, Konstantin Kilimnik, and given the fact that Trump's potentially-blackmailable-by-the-Russians National Security Advisor had been caught (and then caught lying about) assuring the Russian ambassador that U.S. sanctions would be eliminated when Trump took office, etc., etc., Comey would have been guilty of negligence if he hadn't investigated the involvement of The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") and his lackeys with your buddy, "former" KGB officer Vladimir Putin and his beloved KGB. 

It was used to damage and undermine Trump for three years.

Poor widdle traitor.

Comey is the one who committed treason. He just carried water for the political establishment who gave him power.

Hopefully one of these days you'll realize that the only true "Deep State" is your and The Traitorous Orange Bird's beloved KGB*-Mafia and the sixty-six years (it started in 1959) it has waged disinformation, "active measures," and mole-based strategic deception counterintelligence operations against us and our NATO allies -- culminating (so far) in its installation of The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") as our "president" on 20 January 2017 and 20 January 2025.

*Today's SVR and FSB

[Richard Smith]

I'm sorry if it's too complicated for you.

"Whole thing"? What "whole thing"?

Given the fact that Comey knew that the GRU and the KGB had hacked the DNC's and Podesta's emails and arranged for Julian Assange to dump them on social media (the timing of which Roger Stone knew about in advance, possibly because he and Harley Schlanger had arranged it?), and given the fact that Trump's campaign manager had helped pro-Putin Yanukovich get elected president in Ukraine and was connected to Russian intelligence through his GRU-officer employee, Konstantin Kilimnik, and given the fact that Trump's potentially-blackmailable-by-the-Russians National Security Advisor had been caught (and then caught lying about) assuring the Russian ambassador that U.S. sanctions would be eliminated when Trump took office, etc., etc., Comey would have been guilty of negligence if he hadn't investigated the involvement of The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") and his lackeys with your buddy, "former" KGB officer Vladimir Putin and his beloved KGB. 

Poor widdle traitor.

Hopefully one of these days you'll realize that the only true "Deep State" is your and The Traitorous Orange Bird's beloved KGB*-Mafia and the sixty-six years (it started in 1959) it has waged disinformation, "active measures," and mole-based strategic deception counterintelligence operations against us and our NATO allies -- culminating (so far) in its installation of The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx") as our "president" on 20 January 2017 and 20 January 2025.

*Today's SVR and FSB

LOL.  This one is real simple.  The Russian peddled disinformation to Hillary and her fellow leftists who knowingly used this false information for political purposes.  Comey carried the water of his political masters knowing it was baseless.  In effect, Hillary and Comey acted as agents of a foreign adversary in an attempt to impact the election.  Comey should kiss the ground that he wasn't indicted for treason.  The real kind and not the unhinged made-up type of your bizarre imagination.

[Tom Graves]

The Russian peddled disinformation to Hillary and her fellow leftists who knowingly used this false information for political purposes.

ME: What percentage of the Steele Dossier's allegations have been proved to be true?

GROK:

The Steele Dossier, compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele in 2016, consists of 17 memos (totaling about 35 pages) alleging ties between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Russian operatives. It was funded indirectly by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the law firm Perkins Coie and opposition research firm Fusion GPS. The dossier was published unredacted by BuzzFeed News on January 10, 2017, with a disclaimer that its claims were "unverified and potentially unverifiable." It served as raw intelligence — essentially unconfirmed reports from Steele's sources — intended to guide further investigation, not as established facts.

The dossier's allegations fall into broad categories:

Russian election interference: Claims that Russia aimed to support Trump's candidacy and harm Hillary Clinton's, including hacking and leaking Democratic emails.

Trump campaign-Russia coordination: Specific meetings, communications, and a "well-developed conspiracy" involving figures like Paul Manafort, Carter Page, and Michael Cohen.

Compromising material (kompromat): Allegations of Russian possession of blackmail material on Trump, including the infamous "pee tape" (a claimed video of Trump with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel) and financial leverage.

Over the years, U.S. investigations (e.g., the Mueller Report, Senate Intelligence Committee reports, and DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's 2019 review) have scrutinized these claims. No single, definitive "percentage" of verified allegations exists, as the dossier isn't a checklist of discrete facts — many elements are hearsay or analytical judgments from Steele's sub-sources. Steele himself estimated in 2020 that 70–90% of it is accurate, but this is subjective and not independently confirmed. Independent analyses suggest a more nuanced picture: broad themes partially corroborated, specific sensational claims largely unproven or debunked.

Key Verified, Unverified, and Debunked Elements

Verified: "Russia conducted a coordinated effort to interfere in the 2016 election to boost Trump and undermine Clinton, including DNC hacks and leaks via WikiLeaks."

U.S. Intelligence Community Assessment (January 2017) confirmed Putin's endorsement of the effort; Mueller Report (2019) indicted 12 Russian GRU officers for hacking DNC emails and leaking them to WikiLeaks. Senate Intelligence Committee (bipartisan, 2020) affirmed this as a "profound" operation. This aligns with the dossier's core thesis and comprises ~20-30% of its content by volume.


Partially Verified: "Russian intermediaries passed hacked materials to the Trump campaign, which welcomed the assistance."

Mueller Report detailed campaign contacts (e.g., Trump Jr.'s Trump Tower meeting with Russian-linked lawyer offering "dirt" on Clinton) and Manafort sharing internal polling data with Russian intelligence-linked associate Konstantin Kilimnik. No criminal conspiracy found, but "numerous links" existed.


Unverified: "Carter Page Meetings -- Page met senior Russian officials (e.g., Igor Sechin of Rosneft) in Moscow to discuss lifting sanctions in exchange for oil deals."

Mueller Report and Horowitz IG report could not corroborate specific meetings; Page denied them. FBI used dossier info in FISA warrants for Page surveillance but later found errors/omissions in applications. Partial overlap with Page's known 2016 Moscow trip.


Debunked: "Michael Cohen Prague Trip -- Cohen traveled to Prague to meet Russian operatives and coordinate election interference."

Cohen denied it; Mueller Report, phone records, and passports confirmed no travel. Horowitz IG report called this "not true." A key sub-source (Danchenko) later said it was based on speculation.


Partially Verified: "Paul Manafort Role -- Manafort orchestrated back-channel coordination with Russia, including debt relief offers."

Mueller convicted Manafort on unrelated charges; confirmed his ties to pro-Russian Ukrainians and sharing data with Kilimnik (a Russian intelligence officer). No direct proof of dossier's "orchestration" claim.


Unverified:  "Kompromat (Pee Tape) -- Russia has video of Trump engaging in sexual acts with prostitutes in Moscow (2013), used for blackmail."

No evidence emerged from Mueller, Senate, or other probes. Steele rated it ~50% likely; sources described it as rumor. FBI investigated but found no corroboration.


Partially Verified: "General Trump-Russia Ties -- Trump and associates vulnerable to Russian influence via finances/kompromat."

Deutsche Bank records (via Senate) showed Trump Organization's Russian-linked loans; Mueller noted potential leverage but insufficient for charges. Broad "influence" theme holds, but specifics unproven.


Overall Verification Rate: Based on analyses from the Mueller Report, Horowitz IG (2019), Senate Intelligence volumes, and fact-checks (e.g., Washington Post, CNN, Lawfare):~20-30%

Fully Verified: Broad interference claims and some peripheral contacts (e.g., Russia's anti-Clinton motive, DNC hack attribution).
~30-40%

Partially Verified: General patterns of outreach (e.g., Manafort/Kilimnik, Trump's public praise of WikiLeaks), but not the dossier's implied conspiracy.
~30-50%

Unverified or Debunked: Sensational specifics (e.g., Cohen in Prague, pee tape, exact Page-Sechin deal).

The IG report noted "limited corroboration" (mostly public info like dates/locations) and "inaccuracies" in several reports; sub-sources [sic; sub-source and probable KGB agent Igor Danchenko] described much as "hearsay" or "word of mouth."

No source provides an exact percentage, but Lawfare's 2023 retrospective concludes: "Not all... has been proven. But none has been disproven" as raw intel.

Why No Precise Percentage?

Nature of the Document: As "raw intelligence," it's not binary (true/false). Much relies on anonymous sub-sources (e.g., Igor Danchenko, acquitted in 2022 of lying to FBI but admitting speculation). Horowitz found Steele's primary sub-source rated corroboration as "zero" for key parts.

Investigative Limits: Although Mueller didn't charge conspiracy (citing insufficient evidence), he didn't exonerate on obstruction. Classified info may exist, but public records show mixed results.

Bias in Sources: Right-leaning outlets (e.g., Hoover Institution) call it "bogus" (~0% reliable); left-leaning (e.g., Slate, 2017) say "a lot... corroborated." Bipartisan probes (Senate Intel) lean toward partial validation of threats.

In summary, while no exact figure like "X%" is universally accepted, the dossier's allegations are roughly 20-30% proved true in their strongest form, with another 30-40% partially supported by evidence of Russian meddling and Trump orbit contacts. The rest remains unproven or refuted, underscoring its role as a flawed but prescient lead on interference.

For deeper dives, see the Mueller Report or Senate Intelligence findings.

Comey carried the water of his political masters knowing it was baseless.

LOL

In effect, Hillary and Comey acted as agents of a foreign adversary in an attempt to impact the election.

Your beloved KGB* works both sides of the political / economic / cultural spectrum.

*Today's SVR and FSB

[Richard Smith]

ME: What percentage of the Steele Dossier's allegations have been proved to be true?

GROK:

The Steele Dossier, compiled by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele in 2016, consists of 17 memos (totaling about 35 pages) alleging ties between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Russian operatives. It was funded indirectly by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the law firm Perkins Coie and opposition research firm Fusion GPS. The dossier was published unredacted by BuzzFeed News on January 10, 2017, with a disclaimer that its claims were "unverified and potentially unverifiable." It served as raw intelligence — essentially unconfirmed reports from Steele's sources — intended to guide further investigation, not as established facts.

The dossier's allegations fall into broad categories:

Russian election interference: Claims that Russia aimed to support Trump's candidacy and harm Hillary Clinton's, including hacking and leaking Democratic emails.

Trump campaign-Russia coordination: Specific meetings, communications, and a "well-developed conspiracy" involving figures like Paul Manafort, Carter Page, and Michael Cohen.

Compromising material (kompromat): Allegations of Russian possession of blackmail material on Trump, including the infamous "pee tape" (a claimed video of Trump with prostitutes in a Moscow hotel) and financial leverage.

Over the years, U.S. investigations (e.g., the Mueller Report, Senate Intelligence Committee reports, and DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's 2019 review) have scrutinized these claims. No single, definitive "percentage" of verified allegations exists, as the dossier isn't a checklist of discrete facts — many elements are hearsay or analytical judgments from Steele's sub-sources. Steele himself estimated in 2020 that 70–90% of it is accurate, but this is subjective and not independently confirmed. Independent analyses suggest a more nuanced picture: broad themes partially corroborated, specific sensational claims largely unproven or debunked.

Key Verified, Unverified, and Debunked Elements

Verified: "Russia conducted a coordinated effort to interfere in the 2016 election to boost Trump and undermine Clinton, including DNC hacks and leaks via WikiLeaks."

U.S. Intelligence Community Assessment (January 2017) confirmed Putin's endorsement of the effort; Mueller Report (2019) indicted 12 Russian GRU officers for hacking DNC emails and leaking them to WikiLeaks. Senate Intelligence Committee (bipartisan, 2020) affirmed this as a "profound" operation. This aligns with the dossier's core thesis and comprises ~20-30% of its content by volume.


Partially Verified: "Russian intermediaries passed hacked materials to the Trump campaign, which welcomed the assistance."

Mueller Report detailed campaign contacts (e.g., Trump Jr.'s Trump Tower meeting with Russian-linked lawyer offering "dirt" on Clinton) and Manafort sharing internal polling data with Russian intelligence-linked associate Konstantin Kilimnik. No criminal conspiracy found, but "numerous links" existed.


Unverified: "Carter Page Meetings -- Page met senior Russian officials (e.g., Igor Sechin of Rosneft) in Moscow to discuss lifting sanctions in exchange for oil deals."

Mueller Report and Horowitz IG report could not corroborate specific meetings; Page denied them. FBI used dossier info in FISA warrants for Page surveillance but later found errors/omissions in applications. Partial overlap with Page's known 2016 Moscow trip.


Debunked: "Michael Cohen Prague Trip -- Cohen traveled to Prague to meet Russian operatives and coordinate election interference."

Cohen denied it; Mueller Report, phone records, and passports confirmed no travel. Horowitz IG report called this "not true." A key sub-source (Danchenko) later said it was based on speculation.


Partially Verified: "Paul Manafort Role -- Manafort orchestrated back-channel coordination with Russia, including debt relief offers."

Mueller convicted Manafort on unrelated charges; confirmed his ties to pro-Russian Ukrainians and sharing data with Kilimnik (a Russian intelligence officer). No direct proof of dossier's "orchestration" claim.


Unverified:  "Kompromat (Pee Tape) -- Russia has video of Trump engaging in sexual acts with prostitutes in Moscow (2013), used for blackmail."

No evidence emerged from Mueller, Senate, or other probes. Steele rated it ~50% likely; sources described it as rumor. FBI investigated but found no corroboration.


Partially Verified: "General Trump-Russia Ties -- Trump and associates vulnerable to Russian influence via finances/kompromat."

Deutsche Bank records (via Senate) showed Trump Organization's Russian-linked loans; Mueller noted potential leverage but insufficient for charges. Broad "influence" theme holds, but specifics unproven.


Overall Verification Rate: Based on analyses from the Mueller Report, Horowitz IG (2019), Senate Intelligence volumes, and fact-checks (e.g., Washington Post, CNN, Lawfare):~20-30%

Fully Verified: Broad interference claims and some peripheral contacts (e.g., Russia's anti-Clinton motive, DNC hack attribution).
~30-40%

Partially Verified: General patterns of outreach (e.g., Manafort/Kilimnik, Trump's public praise of WikiLeaks), but not the dossier's implied conspiracy.
~30-50%

Unverified or Debunked: Sensational specifics (e.g., Cohen in Prague, pee tape, exact Page-Sechin deal).

The IG report noted "limited corroboration" (mostly public info like dates/locations) and "inaccuracies" in several reports; sub-sources [sic; sub-source and probable KGB agent Igor Danchenko] described much as "hearsay" or "word of mouth."

No source provides an exact percentage, but Lawfare's 2023 retrospective concludes: "Not all... has been proven. But none has been disproven" as raw intel.

Why No Precise Percentage?

Nature of the Document: As "raw intelligence," it's not binary (true/false). Much relies on anonymous sub-sources (e.g., Igor Danchenko, acquitted in 2022 of lying to FBI but admitting speculation). Horowitz found Steele's primary sub-source rated corroboration as "zero" for key parts.

Investigative Limits: Although Mueller didn't charge conspiracy (citing insufficient evidence), he didn't exonerate on obstruction. Classified info may exist, but public records show mixed results.

Bias in Sources: Right-leaning outlets (e.g., Hoover Institution) call it "bogus" (~0% reliable); left-leaning (e.g., Slate, 2017) say "a lot... corroborated." Bipartisan probes (Senate Intel) lean toward partial validation of threats.

In summary, while no exact figure like "X%" is universally accepted, the dossier's allegations are roughly 20-30% proved true in their strongest form, with another 30-40% partially supported by evidence of Russian meddling and Trump orbit contacts. The rest remains unproven or refuted, underscoring its role as a flawed but prescient lead on interference.

For deeper dives, see the Mueller Report or Senate Intelligence findings.

LOL

Your beloved KGB* works both sides of the political / economic / cultural spectrum.

*Today's SVR and FSB

Are you being paid by the word?  Bizarre.

[Tom Graves]

Are you being paid by the word?  Bizarre.

Dear Comrade/Herr Molotov-Ribbentrop,

I'm sorry it's so difficult for you.

Are you still waiting to hear from your boss, "former" KGB counterintelligence officer Vladimir Putin, about how to respond?

-- Tom