Connect with us


Steele Dossier Firm was Already Working on Manafort Dirt When Trump Came into Crosshairs

Steele was already knee deep in Kremlin contacts by the time the DNC hired him.



During the 2016 presidential election, we as Americans learned a whole lot more about the Deep State than we had ever planned.

Sure, we had an inkling of what could go on behind the closed doors of our federal government, particularly when it came to the clandestine work of the intelligence community, but the election of Donald Trump exposed schemes beyond our wildest dreams.  His promise to “drain the swamp” sent the rats and roaches scurrying, and leaving behind their tangled nests of deceit for all to see.

One such despicable den of dastardly deeds has now been exposed as being far more complicated than we originally thought.

Fusion GPS, the opposition research firm behind the infamous “pee dossier” on then-presidential candidate Donald Trump, was first hired by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele to obtain damaging information on Paul Manafort — weeks before the firm hired him to produce his now-discredited, conspiracy-weaving dossier.

The explosive admission was made by Fusion GSP co-founders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch in the pair’s recently-released book — Crime in Progress — and highlighted in a Monday report by American Greatness.

Trending: Virginia Democrats File Proposals To Begin “Confiscation” Of Lawfully Owned Firearms

“Weeks before Trump tapped Manafort to run his campaign, Christopher Steele had hired Fusion for help investigating Manafort,” write Fritsch and Simpson. “The matter had nothing to do with politics and was a typical commercial assignment.”

Steele’s Manafort expedition had the UK spy traveling in some of the same circles that we would later hear about in the Steele Dossier.

The Fusion GPS co-founders say their firm cut a nominal agreement to “research Manafort’s finances” for a client of Steele, now infamous for authoring a dossier alleging collusion between President Trump and the Kremlin.

Fritsch and Simpson contend that the retired Secret Intelligence Service MI6 agent’s client was Oleg Deripaska, an oligarch and close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Deripaska sought to determine whether Manafort had stolen money from him, according to the book.

The contents of the now-infamous “Steel Dossier” have been lambasted by observers as both unverified and unverifiable, and perhaps were nothing more than rumors originally alluded to by the Wall Street Journal.


Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.



Democrat Impeachment Witness Behind Idea For “Facebook Supreme Court”

Free speech is either absolutely free, no matter what is said, or it is not at all free.



Democrat Impeachment Witness Behind Idea For “Facebook Supreme Court”

Anti-Trump Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman played an instrumental role in the creation of Facebook’s content oversight board.

As reported by Breitbart News’ Kristina Wong: Gaetz then pointed out that witness Noah Feldman, professor at Harvard Law School, had written articles entitled: “Trump’s Wiretap Tweets Raise Risk of Impeachment” and “Mar-a-Lago Ad Belongs in Impeachment File.” Gaetz also noted that Feldman was the subject of an article that said, “A Harvard law professor thinks Trump could be impeached over fake news accusations.” Gaetz also got Feldman to admit that he once wrote an article entitled, “It’s Hard to Take Impeachment Seriously Now.”

My next discussion on the future of technology and society is focused on freedom of expression and governance. I'm joined by Jenny Martinez, the Dean of Stanford Law School, and Noah Feldman, a Professor at Harvard Law. They're both experts in constitutional law, and Noah is also an advisor to Facebook helping us define the independent oversight board where people will be able to appeal our content decisions. The idea is to create a separation of powers so that while Facebook is responsible for enforcing our policies, we aren't in the position to make so many decisions about speech on our own. This board will be tasked with upholding the principle of free expression while ensuring we keep our community safe.This morning we also released a report with all the feedback we've gotten from experts about how to best set up this board based on almost 30 workshops we've hosted around the world. It also covers many of the questions asked in our live discussion, including how the board members should be selected to ensure independence, what the scope of their decision-making should be, the importance of publishing their deliberations, and more. You can check out the full report here: is a major experiment in governance, and if it's successful, this board could become an important part of how online expression and communities work going forward. This is a nuanced topic and I'm grateful to Jenny and Noah for their input, as well as everyone who participated in these workshops and shared their thoughts on how to get this right.

Posted by Mark Zuckerberg on Thursday, June 27, 2019


Harvard Law School professor Noah Feldman, one of the anti-Trump witnesses at yesterday’s impeachment inquiry, is reportedly playing a critical role in Facebook’s establishment of its content oversight board, colloquially dubbed the “Facebook Supreme Court.”

The oversight board will, among other things, review cases from banned Facebook users who argue that the termination of their accounts was unwarranted. It is meant to give banned users the right to appeal — but this is corporate due process, not state due process. The “Facebook Supreme Court” will be set up by Facebook and could be shut down at any time by Facebook.

According to a report by Harvard Law Today, Feldman was the one who first proposed the idea of a “Facebook Supreme Court” in January 2018. The purpose, according to the report, is to help Facebook “balance competing values that range from supporting free expression to combating hate speech.”

The idea intrigued Facebook, which brought Feldman on as an adviser. The social network then asked him to produce a white paper on the idea, according to Harvard Law Today. Plans to establish the Oversight Board were officially announced by the company later in the year.

Feldman, a professor of constitutional law, was one of the Democrat-selected expert witnesses at this week’s impeachment hearings against President Donald Trump. More

Think you’ll be a Supreme Court Justice Noah? The Truth is no longer allowed on Social Media Platforms. Let’s speak the truth while we are still allowed to. If we don’t fight for our rights (by whatever legal means are available), they will eventually take away our free speech.

Continue Reading


Kellyanne Conway Rips Impeachment Witness: ‘Who The Hell Are You, Lady?’

Given the unspoken alliance between the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, this sort of partisan tomfoolery doesn’t look to be going anywhere anytime soon, either. 



Despite the patent absurdity of it, political discrimination seems to be at an all time high here in the United States, thanks to the mainstream media’s constant need for conflict to drive rantings.

The infotainment industry needs the US population to be divided, and angrily, in order to bring in the beaucoup bucks that their advertisers give them for commercial break real estate.  This means that, every time we engage in pedantic arguments with one another on the basis of politics, we are feeding the machine that aims to drive us apart.

And it’s not just the angry leftists on Facebook who are a problem here, it’s also those who find themselves with a soapbox from which to spout their divisive drivel.

Longtime White House adviser Kellyanne Conway recognizes just what’s at stake here, and is taking one of the Democrats’ impeachment witnesses to task for their attempts to keep us at each others’ throats.

One of the star witnesses for Congressional Democrats in President Trump‘s impeachment inquiry, Professor Pamela Karlan, should be ashamed of herself for showing such arrogance and looking down on half of America, said Kellyanne Conway on “Fox & Friends” Thursday.

Conway accused Democrats of using Trump’s Ukraine phone call as an excuse to boot him from office, before highlighting Karlan’s comments about conservatives, which were read aloud on Wednesday by Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla.

The Stanford law professor was quoted as saying, “Liberals tend to cluster more. Conservatives, especially very conservative people, tend to spread out more, perhaps because they don’t even want to be around themselves.”

Conway was rightfully brutal in her assessment.

“Let’s stop pretending it has a damn thing to do with the 15 witnesses over two committees, the Democrats have called over the last couple of weeks,” Conway told Fox News. “One, out of those 15 witnesses, has said that he or she has ever talked to the president about Ukraine.

Conway accused Karlan of “look[ing] her nose down” at average Americans and blue-collar workers

“She thinks that you are less than her. And I’ve had it… who the hell are you lady, to look down on half the country?”

Given the unspoken alliance between the Democratic Party and the mainstream media, this sort of partisan tomfoolery doesn’t look to be going anywhere anytime soon, either.

Continue Reading


Nancy Pelosi Snaps at Reporter, Scolds Him for Saying She ‘Hates’ the President

Where there was once a calm confidence with Nancy Pelosi, there is now little more than angst-ridden finger wagging and invocations of past patriots whom she has never met.



After years of “resistance” to the very idea of President Donald J. Trump, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is now insisting, in no uncertain terms, that she doesn’t “hate” him.

Yesterday’s impeachment hearings were a bit of a sideshow.  With no fact witnesses present, the entire affair was reduced to little more than an attempt by the left to somehow justify the thin evidence they’ve gathered so far.  By stacking the deck with three Democratically-called witnesses to the Republicans’ single scholar, the hearing appeared to be nothing more than a maneuver meant to convince the nation that they hadn’t been working to impeach the President simply because they wanted to.

That didn’t work, however, with Georgia Rep. Doug Collins openly and loudly demonstrating that the Democrats have been looking to impeach Donald Trump for years, based solely on their disdain for him personally.

When confronted with Collins’ words this morning, Nancy Pelosi lost her cool.

Sinclair reporter James Rosen had asked Pelosi: “Do you hate the president?”

“I don’t hate anybody,” she initially shot back. She wagged her finger and pointed at Rosen, telling him not to accuse her of hating someone. Rosen denied doing so.

Pelosi wasn’t done there.

“As a Catholic, I resent your using the word hate in a sentence that addresses me. I don’t hate anyone. I was raised in a way that is a heart full of love and always pray for the president. And I still pray for the president. And I pray for the president all the time, so don’t mess with me when it comes to words like that,” she said.

President Trump even weighed in on Pelosi’s tantrum.

Where there was once a calm confidence with Nancy Pelosi, there is now little more than angst-ridden finger wagging and invocations of past patriots whom she has never met.

Continue Reading


Pence Pushed to Fire Flynn Say Newly Released Notes from Mueller and FBI

These documents demonstrate a great deal of drama occurring on Pennsylvania Avenue.



President Trump’s arrival in Washington DC will likely serve as an historical marker for future generations.

Trump, in a stunning rebuke of the status quo, was elected President by We The People after promising to “drain the swamp” in Washington DC – a metaphor that has come to encapsulate a very broad and determined attempt to root out political corruption and collusion that, left unchecked, would tips the scales of power away from the people and into the hands of the public servants they’ve selected to serve them.

Of course, this Deep State cabal hasn’t yet been vanquished.  Rather, they are squirming ever more violently, writhing even, under the thumb of a political newcomer who is ready to tear it all down and start from scratch.

This flailing has been readily apparent throughout Trump’s first term, with a number of politicians and political appointees finding themselves at odds with one another, even in the White House itself.

Now, newly released documents from the FBI show that these conflicts went all the way to the top.  In these documents, former Trump campaign aide Rick Gates described infighting between one of the President’s most valuable advisers, General Michael Flynn, and Vice President Mike Pence.

Gates pinned some of the decision to fire national security adviser Michael Flynn on Vice President Mike Pence.

“Gates said Pence went to Trump about firing Flynn and he thought it was one of the few times Pence pushed Trump hard like that,” Mueller’s team wrote in the summary of Gates’ April 2018 cooperation interview.

Investigators also noted that Gates thought Trump and Flynn had had a good relationship, and that Trump didn’t want to fire his national security adviser but “felt like he had no choice” after Flynn lied to Pence about his contact with the Russian ambassador.

General Flynn is currently embroiled in a legal scandal surrounding his conservations with the FBI during their involvement in the Special Counsel investigation by Robert Mueller, in which he and his legal team claim that Flynn was being treated unfairly by the Bureau during his original questioning.


Continue Reading


Rudy Heads to Ukraine to Expose Corruption Being Ignored by Democratic Impeachment Circus

Rudy is finding facts while the House Democrats are simply attempting to shoehorn Trump’s actions into an ever-changing definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors”.



Today’s impeachment hearing has so far accomplished one thing and one thing only:  Exposing the Democrats’ desire to railroad the President’s actions into some malleable definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors”.

Todays’ witnesses are a cadre of Constitutional scholars, three who agree with the “resistance” that Donald Trump has committed such improprieties and should be impeached, and one who dissents from that stance.  The questioning today has been notoriously fact-less, instead focusing on the process itself, and how the Democrats can squeeze Donald Trump into this mold.  The left has already decided that impeachment will move forward, and this is just their attempt at convincing the American people of what they’ve been insinuating all along.

In order to get to the actual bottom of this UkraineGate malarky, President Trump’s personal lawyer is on the ground in Europe, finding facts.

Giuliani met Tuesday with a former Ukrainian prosecutor, Yuriy Lutsenko, in Budapest, The New York Times reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

On Wednesday, Giuliani traveled to Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, hoping to meet with other ex-Ukrainian prosecutors, including Viktor Shokin and Kostiantyn Kulyk, The New York Times reported.

Giuliani reportedly is also helping right-wing news network One America News produce episodes of a documentary series promoting his arguments against Democrats’ impeachment inquiry in the House.

Giuliani has been at the center of the impeachment controversy for some time, having been named by many of the Democrats’ fact witnesses as an integral piece of the UkraineGate puzzle.  President Trump has staunchly defended Rudy, however, indicating that any involvement the former NYC Mayor had with Ukrainian authorities was in the interest of rooting out corruption pursuant to the terms of America’s agreement with Kyiv regarding what it necessary for them to receive American aid money.


Continue Reading


French President Issues Scathing Statement on ‘Stolen’ Footage Meant to Embarrass Trump

Macron was incensed that the videotape was even recorded.



President Trump’s trip to London this week was a strange one, to say the least.  Not only was he away from Washington DC at a time in which the House Judiciary Committee could very well be deciding his political fate, but he found himself a participant in a number of confrontations, both willingly and unwillingly.

The first indication that this wasn’t your ordinary NATO summit came when Trump sat down for a joint public appearance with French President Emmanuel Macron in which the two world leaders seemed at odds, bickering over the reality on the ground as it pertains to the current strengths and weaknesses of the radical Islamic terror group ISIS.

Then, at a reception later in the day, Macron was seen speaking to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who himself was making some uncouth observations regarding President Trump.

Now, Macron is speaking out about the incident, and railing against those who used the footage to embarrass the US President.

FURIOUS French President Emmanuel Macron today hit out a “stolen” clip of him gossiping about Donald Trump.

Macron, 41, was caught on a hot mic chatting about Trump with Canadian PM Justin Trudeau at a Buckingham Palace gala last night.

When asked about the footage, he blasted: “I am not going to comment on stolen videos.

“That video wasn’t supposed to be filmed in that room”.

President Trump had earlier responded to the incident by asserting that Trudeau was “two-faced” and promptly announcing that he will be returning to Washington earlier than originally planned.


Continue Reading


Jonathan Turley Destroys Democrats Claims Of An Impeachable Offense



Jonathan Turley Destroys Dems Claims Of An Impeachable Offense

Rep Andy Biggs tweeted an important video: “In less than 10 minutes, Jonathan Turley destroys the Democrats’ flailing, poll-tested claims that @POTUS @realDonaldTrump committed bribery. This is a must-watch discussion.”

Professor Jonathan Turley is a nationally recognized legal scholar who has written extensively in areas ranging from constitutional law to legal theory to tort law. He has written over three dozen academic articles that have appeared in a variety of leading law journals at Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Harvard, Northwestern, University of Chicago, and other schools.

Twitter jumps in:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider

Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!

Send this to a friend