I think the March timeframe makes more sense than a July timeframe for a strategic plan. I think they wanted to run against Trump (Biden’s remarks in December 2015 about Hillary beating Trump)
July 12, 2015 (few days before Trump came down the escalator)
“So, unless the Kremlin’s America-watchers believe Bernie Sanders or Rand Paul will win the 2016 election, waiting for the next president looks like a bad bet. And it’s a bad bet that Putin has made before — and lost.”
I think this reporters perspective of the life of the dossier helps provide a framework of why the strategic plan in terms of a Trump potential nomination would make sense to be in March instead of July
From Matt Taibbi’s recent article (Who knows where they were getting their intelligence from, but President Trump is obviously an atypical Republican president, which voters expected him to be):
The ICA authors also made a linguistic change. The original intelligence was that Russia “historically found it easier to reach agreements with US Presidents from the Republican Party” because Republicans were “less concerned with issues that were unpleasant for Russia like democracy and human rights.” Our investigators rewrote the phrase, “historically found it easier to reach agreements” as “strongly preferred Republicans.”
All I can say is the intelligence-analytical function seems to have broken down for whatever reason. Probably too many folks wanting to be part of history and tell their story. You can’t create something like that imo.
I think the March timeframe makes more sense than a July timeframe for a strategic plan. I think they wanted to run against Trump (Biden’s remarks in December 2015 about Hillary beating Trump)
July 12, 2015 (few days before Trump came down the escalator)
“So, unless the Kremlin’s America-watchers believe Bernie Sanders or Rand Paul will win the 2016 election, waiting for the next president looks like a bad bet. And it’s a bad bet that Putin has made before — and lost.”
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/will-putin-prefer-obamas-successor/
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/13/podcasts/the-daily/steele-dossier-donald-trump-igor-danchenko.html?showTranscript=1
I think this reporters perspective of the life of the dossier helps provide a framework of why the strategic plan in terms of a Trump potential nomination would make sense to be in March instead of July
From Matt Taibbi’s recent article (Who knows where they were getting their intelligence from, but President Trump is obviously an atypical Republican president, which voters expected him to be):
The ICA authors also made a linguistic change. The original intelligence was that Russia “historically found it easier to reach agreements with US Presidents from the Republican Party” because Republicans were “less concerned with issues that were unpleasant for Russia like democracy and human rights.” Our investigators rewrote the phrase, “historically found it easier to reach agreements” as “strongly preferred Republicans.”
All I can say is the intelligence-analytical function seems to have broken down for whatever reason. Probably too many folks wanting to be part of history and tell their story. You can’t create something like that imo.
https://substack.com/@taibbi/note/c-138618917?r=57kj06&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action