Durham probe
- Thread starter stollcpa
- Start date
Univee, my son is an inventory manager for a large produce warehouse. He constantly has to deal with upper management who cannot understand why the computers can differ from actual counts.
You don't have to be a green kid from the FDA to have blind faith in computers and computer programs. Trust this doesn't surprise you.
Thanks for not ordering me to leave. Lol. You're a piece of work.
P.S. Take your own advice and read the report so you're better informed.
All of this and the FBI gets to pull a Dylan Mulvaney. "oops, we stirred up quite the rukus, but we'll do even better next time".
effing pathetic. Nothing will happen.
effing pathetic. Nothing will happen.
Just like our very own goat. Has his head stuck in the fence. That is the pasture equivalent to dropping the soap in gen pop.
“According to Brennan’s handwritten notes and his recollections from the meeting, he briefed on relevant intelligence known to date on Russian election interference, including the Clinton Plan intelligence,” Durham wrote. “Specifically, Director Brennan’s declassified handwritten notes reflect that he briefed the meeting’s participants regarding the ‘alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on 26 July of a proposal from one of her [campaign] advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.'”
The dots were all there. They wi fully were not connected.
If you remember, that was a major plot line in Centennial. The Venneford folks send someone to audit the ranch, and he simply cannot understand the concept of "book count," by which the ranch buys and sells cattle without actually counting them, and just keeps track on paper. Eventually he orders teams to go the entire length of the ranch and count every head of cattle by hand to compare it to the book count.
That had nothing to do with Steele. I mean, it could have, if the Steele Dossier really was a secret Clinton operation, or it didn't, if the secret Clinton operation was Alfa, or perhaps there was no "Clinton Plan" at all, since Durham failed to demonstrate that the intelligence was even accurate. At any rate, during that meeting, Brennan would have had no way of drawing a line between the two. You said Brennan advised Obama that the Steele Dossier was a Clinton campaign op. That's not what was reported about the meeting you're referencing.
In the article below, Brennan specifically says the Clinton part was unverified as well though the article doesn't provide an exact quote:
He also stressed claims about Mrs. Clinton wanting to possible start a scandal involving Mr. Trump and Russia were unverified allegations that would not be unlawful or illegal even if true.
John Brennan rips John Ratcliffe for declassifying Clinton, Russia notes
John O. Brennan, the former director of the CIA, accused President Trump's director of national intelligence on Wednesday of selectively declassifying information to advance political interests. "Just the way Donald Trump has abused the responsibilities and authorities of the office of the...
apnews.com
You probably have to be judged guilty of something before you send someone to prison.
Uhhhhhhh.....are you forgetting Manafort? Michael Flynn? Papadopoulos? Manafort plead guilty for colluding with Russian officials. Trump's relationship with Russia's Alpha Bank?
That is the whole point , it is fixed so none of that ever happens . The Democrats are an evil force set on destroying what is left of this country but you don't care.
Ok, dick beater. That was no platitude. It was the truth. Another truth….the federal courts are supposed to provide a check on the executive. They failed.
FBI surveillance is a problem.
Investigative overreach is a problem.
Congress needs to look into this issue. It is not new.
Now go back to putting your head in the sand
A few things regarding your bullet points.
1. True, who was also drinking in a bar.
2. Not true, the statements were relayed to Australian intelligence by Australian diplomats who were at the meeting. There was no one from any intelligence community present.
3. Again, those comments were made by a man drinking in a bar. I’m not sure how much weight I’d assign to them.
There’s also that a full investigation was opened within days of receiving this information and without ever even talking to the aussies or Papadoupolos.
Oh, and the investigation was opened by Strozk, who was at the same time sending text messages to friends saying “Trump won’t be elected, I’ll stop it”.
The fbi looks horrible here for a thousand reasons.
It's Alfa Bank. And the FBI determined there were no links between the bank and Trump. The people who originally did the research probably did it in good faith, and really believed they had found something, but it turned out to be nothing.
A few things regarding your things.
1. I don't see how the involvement of alcohol is relevant to the fact that he was with the campaign.
2. I'll grant that correction. I meant an "agent of the government" generally, not an intelligence agent. Poor wording on my part. But I don't see the change as relevant to my point.
3. Again, the presence of alcohol doesn't change the fact that the alleged statements appeared to line up with the subsequent release of the WikiLeaks dump.
4. You ignored 4 and 5.
5. I have already agreed multiple times the FBI comes off poorly in this report.
6. Again, my argument here is simply that the whole context of the Australian report, surrounded by real world events, I think would justify even a non-partisan FBI to open an investigation.
From the testimony of the FBI’s assistant legal attaché in London on Strozks meeting with the Australian diplomats in London.
“UK ALAT-1 also recalled Strzok making a comment in the taxi on their way to the Australian High Commission to the effect that "there's nothing to this, but we have to run it to ground."
So this guy testified that Strozk himself said there was nothing to this.
“From his vantage point, UK ALAT-1 saw that FBI executive management was pushing the matter so hard that "there was no stopping the train," and he told the OIG that," I mean it was, this thing was coming. So my job was to grease the skids for it, and that's what I did."”
Wow.
“UK ALAT-1 also recalled Strzok making a comment in the taxi on their way to the Australian High Commission to the effect that "there's nothing to this, but we have to run it to ground."
So this guy testified that Strozk himself said there was nothing to this.
“From his vantage point, UK ALAT-1 saw that FBI executive management was pushing the matter so hard that "there was no stopping the train," and he told the OIG that," I mean it was, this thing was coming. So my job was to grease the skids for it, and that's what I did."”
Wow.
I believe your comments from earlier in this thread were “so the fbi didn’t properly start an investigation. Big whoop” and that this is all one big “wet fart”.
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were just clowning around.
He's conflating the "Clinton Plan" and the Steele dossier. I'm assuming the far-right media is doing the same. Tying themselves in knots trying to make this look like a bombshell report.
I mean I guess I was partially being ridiculous for effect, but I was also being serious. This report doesn't say what Trumpers want it to say, which is that the entire investigation was a Hillary/Deep State attack on Trump.
Well that wasn't very nice!
The truth is that Durham came up short in this supposed "Crime of the Century!" investigation.
It seems that some here (cough goat cough) would dismiss their wife being pregnant with some other guys kid as...
"Well she had the best intentions, but then some guy slipped and bounced into her. repeatedly, over and over and over. It was just a strange set of events. The fact that she waited to tell me until the kid is 12, well I'll admit that it's a bad look for her".
"Well she had the best intentions, but then some guy slipped and bounced into her. repeatedly, over and over and over. It was just a strange set of events. The fact that she waited to tell me until the kid is 12, well I'll admit that it's a bad look for her".
Everyone calm down. It's a tie game. Both sides tried to steal an election.
Dems with Russia collusion, they lost. Repubs with false electors/Jan6, they lost.
Dems with Russia collusion, they lost. Repubs with false electors/Jan6, they lost.
You could plausibly make the argument that this was an attack on Trump by the deep state. And I’m a guy who thinks the deep State stuff is silly.
But this whole thing, from the opening of crossfire hurricane to the release of the Mueller report, could realistically be said to have been orchestrated and carried out by extremely biased individuals within the intelligence community. And that’s not even getting into the constant leaks.
It’s not a stretch at all to make that case, especially in light of the fact that no one from the Trump team was EVER found to have been colluding with the Russians or anyone else.
I wondered why the fbi apologized on the same day this report was released. Now I know why. They look absolutely AWFUL in this.
I’m not sure how they’ll ever recover.
I stated earlier what the report concluded or the takeaways if you prefer that terminology. I didn’t say anything about “crime of the century”.
Things were done inappropriately. FBI agents were in the wrong but that could have been mitigated if the court did its job. It did not.
This issue needs fixed…I don’t care if it’s Trump or Biden or someone in Appalachia that is targeted
FBI looks bad. Agents involved allowed their biases to affect their judgment. I'm good with that.
Mueller never should have happened. I'm sort of okay with this, as long as you add a "probably." As I said to Marvin, a competent Crossfire Hurricane might have wrapped up before Trump even took office. In that case, Mueller never happens.
"This was clearly orchestrated by evil Democrats who are ruining our country and they all need to be locked up!" which is a surprisingly (and sadly) fair paraphrase of at least one poster in this thread. I'm definitely not okay with that. The Durham report describes an incompetent and hostile FBI. It does not describe a vast conspiracy.
You didn't read my earlier post. I said the FBI's conduct in 2016/early 2017 was indefensible.
But I've read much of the report and the findings are underwhelming. And in the place where Durham hoped to make the biggest splash - - the courtroom - - he was a big loser.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
Message to our non-subscribers that frequent the site.
- Latest: benhyoung14
-