[ETL]

If you've been listening to Sean Hannity lately, you probably have heard him talking about the New York Times recently reporting (shockingly) that the Clinton, bought and paid for, dossier may have actually been "Russian disinformation"(from the Kremlin). However, this 2017 piece here infers that this been known for some time.

[ETL]

The case for Russia collusion -- against the Democrats

http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/

[pepsionice]

In the past six months, some of these pieces lead back to the Ukraine, and appear to be Ukrainian pro-Russian enthusiasts. Victor Davis Hanson has a great 14 minute detailed explanation on the various details and how they all fit together (called the ‘Russia Collusion Hoax’). For simplicity, it really explains all the details and the players involved.

[Mount Athos]

This makes no sense.

The only source for the claim that Russians fed disinformation to Steele, was steele himself.

But Steele’s document was absolutely full of misinformation.
So... why couldn’t this claim also be misinformation?

Why does this article dismiss the possibility that Steele simply made up the wild claims himself?

Sure seems possible, if not likely to me