The dossier doesn’t read like something from a native English speaker. Did Steele really write it?

The dossier doesn’t read like something from a native English speaker. Did Steele really write it?
Seriously?

[Ed. – This career intelligence officer picked up on these points right away.]

The articles we have unearthed from Steele’s tenure at Varsity read like someone who knew his own language.  Much of the Steele dossier reads like the sentence above: a syntactical nightmare with a near random use of punctuation. …

[T]oo many of the sentences read as though written by an individual not fully fluent in English, British or American.  Here is one of several: “Trump’s previous efforts had included exploring the real estate sector in St. Petersburg as well as Moscow but in the end Trump had had to settle for the use of extensive sexual services there from local prostitutes rather than business success.” …

There are several basic misuses of the language that should have cautioned officials who read this document.  One sentence, for instance, begins with the phrase “Speaking to a trusted compatriot.”  After parsing the sentence, it becomes clear that the author meant “According to a trusted compatriot.”  The “speaking to” misdirection makes a jumble out of the sentence. …

Trending: So it begins: The Greta Thunberg mystique begins to unravel

A former KGB spy who defected to the United States, Konstantin Preobrazhenky, did not feel qualified to assess the language of the dossier.  English is not his first language.  As to content, however, he told us, “There is no information in the dossier whatsoever.  It’s just foolish speculation.  There are no references.  It is not an intelligence document of any kind.  I was laughing when I was reading it.”

Continue reading →