Seth Abramson on the memo:

[Cha]

4. 3/ Third, understand that the CIA told the BBC in January '17 that the most controversial..

allegation in Steele's dossier—the allegation the Kremlin has blackmail material on Trump of a sexual nature—was true. This means the CIA had likely told the FBI the same many months before."

30/ In other words, this memo is written like a campaign ad—not an official document, and *certainly* not a legal document. It gets every fact wrong and every point of law wrong and *wildly* so. This is an embarrassing piece of work, but I'll keep on analyzing it anyway. We must.

52/ That pro-Trump conspiracy among some rank-and-file agents—*rogue* agents—in the New York field office of the FBI was *confirmed* when, immediately before the election, those agents told the New York Times that the FBI had nothing on Trump. When in fact they had the Dossier

53/ I now have new favorite part: Page 3, which argues that Steele's desire that Trump not be elected—as expressed in *September '16* (note the date)—proves his research was biased. Does the GOP realize the info Steele had by September? Of *course* he didn't want him to be POTUS!

54/ Just because the GOP has rejected Steele's research doesn't mean that *Steele* is obligated to: indeed, him telling a DOJ attorney he didn't want Trump to be president in September '16 is *confirmation* that—and this seems important—he *believed his research to be accurate*

PS/ I really want to hammer home a point: the sum total result of this memo is a catastrophic *underscoring* of how bad a situation this is for Trump and how *little* bias—to be clear, zero—was involved in his treatment by the FBI. This memo *supports* Trump critics' contentions.

Thank you, Q! Seth Abramson makes so interesting.. I can understand it!

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/959494066840002560.html