So why did IG's investigators say that his information was sufficiently credible?
I'm not interested in going around in circles. When the IG completes the investigation and your OMGZ FBI LIED bullshit theory is blown to pieces, I'll be around to feed you some crow.
"Kavalec apparently needed just a single encounter with Steele at State to find one of his key claims about Trump-Russia collusion was blatantly false."
The Steele dossier made no claims at all. The dossier was raw intelligence gathered without comment or analysis. It's akin to the reports that a cop collects after a crime. The cop takes statements from witnesses. He doesn't decide if there's any veracity in them until much later.
So if the Russian consulate wasn't in Miami as the witness stated, does that mean there was no such operation, or just that the witness got the city wrong? Because Robert Mueller concluded that the operation very much did exist.
That's not called "blatantly false".
By the way, here's some interesting analysis of the dossier. It even discusses Page. A lot of the dossier is unconfirmed. None of it has been disproven.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
