In early 2017, media reported Steele saying 70% of the raw intel in the dossier was accurate, and that the whole was comprised of public info, some accurate nonpublic info, a few wrong things, and much that hadn't been or couldn't be corroborated. That's still where we are today.
1/ What media did was falsely attribute to Maddow and many others a claim that the entire dossier was *accurate*, something not only no one ever said but even the author of the dossier insisted wasn't the case. Now we get thinkpieces in 2019 drafting off 2017 misquotes of people.
2/ The sum total of arguably *disproven* components of the dossier in 2019 is identical to the sum total of arguably disproven components of the dossier in 2017: i.e. Cohen's Prague trip. All the chatter in media about the Horowitz Report is not going to change that central fact.
3/ Horowitz admits that he and his staff made no effort to corroborate *or* disprove the dossier, and is merely repeating in his 2019 report what the FBI had said about the dossier in its internal deliberations. And what they say now is what they said in 2017. Nothing's changed.
4/ Horowitz vaguely implies that the only confirmed-to-be-accurate info in the Steele dossier is public info, which is provably false. One needn't look further than who Page met with in Moscow, which was nonpublic info Page lied about for a *year* after the dossier got it right.
5/ I guess what I'm saying is this: you have a lot of folks who decided to do no research on the dossier so that they could come back two years later and wag their finger at anyone who actually put in the legwork as I and Maddow and others did. Yet even their *wagging* now is BS.
