Trump compromised by Russian intelligence, reports say

Erm, no... it's called slander

It's ******** and you know it
Liberal fake news again desperate to try and stop Trump

Very good history of the dossier in the Guardian this evening.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/11/trump-russia-report-opposition-research-john-mccain

It would appear that this is a solid piece of research by a widely respected source who has in the past been relied on for accuracy and that it is taken seriously by the intelligence agencies, John McCain and the media organisations.

If you've got evidence that goes against what was said in the article then please share with us, otherwise your accusations of "slander" is complete *******s.

"fake news" - The new buzzword for the right wing when they find something they dont want to be true.

If you've got evidence that goes against what was said in the article then please share with us, otherwise your accusations of "slander" is complete *******s.

You're anti-Trump, obviously you'd try to damage his chances at a successful presidency because you're jealous that you've finally lost something, the forgotten people have finally won and you are desoerate to try and stop Trump. Go back to reading buzzfeed

"fake news" - The new buzzword for the right wing when they find something they dont want to be true.

It just means fake news. Get over yourself- we won, you lost.

If there is no evidence, there would be nothing to be verified. Thats a paradox. Are you struggling there?

"apparently" - No media source published it because it was a document handed to intelligence services including the UK. They were never known to the media.

The FBI investigations mean nothing.

"The FBI however continued to refuse to comment on the issue, despite reports that it had requested and perhaps acquired a warrant for further investigation from the Foreign intelligence surveillance (Fisa) court. The silence was not altogether surprising. The FBI counter-intelligence division, headquartered in Washington, is extremely secretive, much more so than the New York field office, which had strong links to former prosecutor and mayor Rudy Giuliani, who was by then working for Trump. The threat of leaks from New York about Clinton emails had reportedly pushed Comey into making his October surprise announcement."

Nothing magically is going to come to light. Only the truth. It's time you stop defending dirty drumpf and his piss fetish.

Nah, it's just means "Im a whiny pissbaby and I dont like it when things dont go my way". The mainstream media isnt fake.

Again, what is it with Trump supporters feeling like theyve won something?

That makes literally no sense. An allegation isn't evidence. Evidence is an established truth. Allegations become evidence after they have been verified. Until then they remain unfounded allegations.

No, it's transpired that this report has been around for months, simply most media outlets have refused to run it because it's completely unverifiable to the point of being unethical to publish. It was more recent intelligence briefing that led CNN and Buzzfeed to publish.

Everyone knows the FBI investigated Trump's alleged link to Russia. That has no relevance here.

I'll remember your attitude here if ever in the future you start whining about fake right wing news.

Well, they won the election.

No mate im just pointing out your paradox.

The report was just some investigative work. You make the judgement as to whether its true or not, CNN and buzzfeed has made it very clear that it may be complete bs.

Thats the thing though. Right wing fake news on twitter and facebook is really, it is provable completely false and designed by people to manipulate and brainwash people. These are large news outlets which are heavily regulated and make professional decisions. Calling the latter fake news is nothing more than ignorant distrust and a continuation of the silly childish "**** the establishment" rhetoric.

no mate im just pointing out your paradox.

The report was just some investigative work. You make the judgement as to whether its true or not, cnn and buzzfeed has made it very clear that it may be complete bs.

Thats the thing though. Right wing fake news on twitter and facebook is really, it is provable completely false and designed by people to manipulate and brainwash people. these are large news outlets which are heavily regulated and make professional decisions. calling the latter fake news is nothing more than ignorant distrust and a continuation of the silly childish "**** the establishment" rhetoric.

There is no paradox, merely you not knowing what 'evidence' means.

That's not how journalism works. It's completely unethical to publish an unverified smear job about someone. That's precisely why most media simply didn't.

This report originally was commissioned as a means to smear Trump. It's complete unproven and unverified and full of factual errors and inconsistencies. That's some gold-medal winning mental gymnastics from you there to try and justify that as anything other than fake news.

Bahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

Perhaps it's unethical, but I dont see you making a fuss about the FBI publicly announcing an investigation into Clinton days before the election which may have ended up costing her the election. It's also called transparent journalism, you seemed fine when hillarys emails got hacked and accusing her of stuff when she was never criminally convicted and here you are now making a fuss over this because it's unethical. You're fine with unethical practise when it suits you.

Here's a tweet: "Damn rich to hear caveats and warnings from the news media about 'rushing to judgment' when they spewed lies about Hillary a mile a minute."

We as the citizens have every write to see the Dossier. You can't stop us from seeing it. Earlier on you were saying that this was made up on 4chan and now some real backing has come to this.

Ofc it was to smear dirty Drumpf, but that in no way means that they wanted to make up lies about it. Where are the factual errors?
It's not fake news because theyve made it clear that it's unsubstantiated, they did not say that dirty Drumpf pissed on women. Unethical at most.

The FBI didn't detail what information they had that led them to re-opening their investigation of Clinton. There's also the fact that Clinton's email scandal is true. She did have a private e-mail server that had classified intelligence on it. She had the server wiped and then lied to congress about it. They are all verified facts.

What on Earth are you waffling about? Why do you keep saying that I was fine with so and so? I don't recall ever saying anything of the sort.
But regardless, again, Clinton's email scandal is true. The FBI themselves said she was recklessly careless in her handling of classified information. Director Comey simply believed her reckless carelessness did not meet the threshold required for criminal prosecution under relevant statutes.
Not that I'm sure what any of that has anything to do with this. Nice red herring. So to clarify, you think unverified smears against Trump is okay because in the past people used verified, true smears against Clinton?

They are facts that haven't led to a criminal conviction. They were also published at a time where it can easily affect the elections. This Dossier was published when it would have no impact on the elections.

Whilst it is unsubstantiated, it isnt necessarily a lie.

You're wrong in saying that the smear on Clinton was true, since opening up the investigation didnt necessarily mean she was guilty at such a crucial moment.

It's not a smear. You still can't seem to come up with a reason as to why we as the public are not allowed to see this Dossier even if it is completely unsubstantiated.