Thread by @ChuckRossDC

Watched the @GStephanopoulos doc on Chris Steele. As expected, it's overly sympathetic towards Steele, albeit with some strong criticism from @BarryMeier. Mini thread:

The most glaring problem with the documentary is it does not name Steele collector Igor Danchenko or go into the many problems with Danchenko's collection methods, i.e. poorly placed sub-sources, mental health issues, alcoholism.

ABC's Pierre Thomas nods at how poorly placed the source network is, but it's mentioned in passing and not revisited. Basically, Danchenko would be the more useful interview in terms of knowing about how the dossier came together. Steele was merely a middleman.

Steele won't talk about his source and the sub-sources, saying only that they were at risk of arm and that he couldn't discuss something that happened to one of the sources. Steele often uses this dodge to avoid giving insight into his (shoddy) source network

ABC's Martha Raddatz is useful in the documentary in that she hammers home that the dossier shaped perception of Trump. It "set the stage for his entire presidency." Democrats now like to pretend the dossier was insignificant.

Stephanopoulos presses Steele at times, but he also asks a bunch of soft questions like: "Are you still a target of Vladimir Putin?" In reality, Steele is a useful idiot for Russia.

Steele also distances himself from FBI using the dossier to get FISAs on @carterwpage. He says the FISA decision "has nothing to do with us." But Steele pushed the dossier on the FBI in order to get them to investigate. The faulty FISA was part of the investigation Steele wanted.

Barry Meier adds useful context by noting that the IG report was "devastating" for Steele and the dossier.

Steele stands by the Cohen-Prague allegation, even as Stephanopoulos notes the FBI and Mueller said it didn't happen. He says Cohen still denies it b/c it's "self incriminating." Well, the same rationale applies to Steele refusing to admit he was wrong.

Steele knows how significant the Cohen allegation is to his credibility. It's the most specific allegation of collusion in the entire dossier, and it's also the one easiest to prove/disprove. Steele admitting it's wrong would be devastating for him.

This is where the documentary could show just how weak Steele's collection methods were. The source for the Cohen story has a ton of personal problems and no insight into Kremlin activities.

Steele remains defiant. Laughably, the only mistake he admits to making is speaking to @DavidCornDC for the infamous Oct. 31, 2016 article in Mother Jones.

Lastly, Steele acknowledges there's "a chance" he was fooled by Russian disinfo, but he deems it "very unlikely."