I tend to think partisan cable news on both sides are very detrimental to the nation. McNeil Lehrer and Christian Science Monitor are very informative and objective- it’s disappointing on this forum when folks are too entrenched, too one sided in their takes to actually do any research on a topic. Both sides suck, both sides take money only from the middle class, and both sides are corrupt and immoral- if you think it’s only one side- you are intellectually lazy. I hope many on this board don’t hold IU degrees or are under age 30
What to make of the Durham filing?
- Thread starter Courtsensetwo
- Start date
Ostrich syndrome for sure- only one side is dirty, now where did I put my bong. Tucker is on in five minutes spewing the “truth” and cashing those Russian checks!
Last edited:
The latest
https://justthenews.com/government/...rector-predicts-more-indictments-durham-probe
"The coordinated effort here that took place in 2016 was wide and broad," Ratcliffe told the Charlie Kirk Show last week, The Epoch Times reported. "I think it involved folks in the Clinton campaign, in the Democratic national party, elected officials, media officials, folks that coordinated — intelligence community officials, and on down the line."
"I'm not saying that every single one of those folks have criminal liability or exposure," Ratcliffe said during his interview with Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA.
"I'm just saying this was a very coordinated effort, and the more and more the public finds out about the things that I've seen that remain classified, they'll be more and more appalled by those efforts in 2016," he said.
https://justthenews.com/government/...rector-predicts-more-indictments-durham-probe
"The coordinated effort here that took place in 2016 was wide and broad," Ratcliffe told the Charlie Kirk Show last week, The Epoch Times reported. "I think it involved folks in the Clinton campaign, in the Democratic national party, elected officials, media officials, folks that coordinated — intelligence community officials, and on down the line."
"I'm not saying that every single one of those folks have criminal liability or exposure," Ratcliffe said during his interview with Kirk, founder of Turning Point USA.
"I'm just saying this was a very coordinated effort, and the more and more the public finds out about the things that I've seen that remain classified, they'll be more and more appalled by those efforts in 2016," he said.
Good Stuff Here...WOW he is being so careful, but this stuff is classified. This is a must see video.
rumble.com
Fmr. DNI John Ratcliffe Hints at 'More Indictments Coming' from Classified Documents He's Reviewed
For more exclusive interviews, insight, and analysis like this, SUBSCRIBE to The Charlie Kirk Show TODAY: https://apple.co/2VCxGsh And for EVEN MORE—tune in to The Charlie Kirk Show LIVE on Salem Radi
rumble.com
Last edited:
I was told that "The Epoch Times" is some so-called source, one that not even Trumpers have heard of...
Nobody else is gonna report it. Its buried. You want an eye opener. Watch that Ratcliffe video.
Ratcliffe, Charlie Kirk, and the Epoch Times. I'm sold.
Charlie is very fair when he asks questions and is clear he is not throwing anyone under the bus or assuming anything unless it comes out. Ratcliffe is sharing as much as he can without crossing the line. Who do you think got the documents de-classified so Durham could start? It was Ratcliffe.
The epoch times reported it but this is the actual interview.
It's too bad the libs on this board won't watch it. See no evil, hear no evil.Good Stuff Here...WOW he is being so careful, but this stuff is classified. This is a must see video.
Fmr. DNI John Ratcliffe Hints at 'More Indictments Coming' from Classified Documents He's Reviewed
For more exclusive interviews, insight, and analysis like this, SUBSCRIBE to The Charlie Kirk Show TODAY: https://apple.co/2VCxGsh And for EVEN MORE—tune in to The Charlie Kirk Show LIVE on Salem Radi
Theres more another filing. These people have screwed themselves. The e-mails are damning.
Durham's latest: He has hundreds of e-mails between Fusion GPS and reporters
Also - DARPA Contracts and Classified data
technofog.substack.com
And here's the best part:Theres more another filing. These people have screwed themselves. The e-mails are damning.
Durham's latest: He has hundreds of e-mails between Fusion GPS and reporters
Also - DARPA Contracts and Classified data
the Special Counsel has issued trial subpoenas to the Clinton Campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
It's absolutely amazing how buried this is. Again if the roles were reversed this would be on every station nearly 24/7. Durham has his work cut out for him. 5 people have already taken the 5th and won't say anything. Now that these emails are out in the open they are clearly either at fault or not. I just hope after all the firings and how careful he has been this all comes out. It's huge and there are alot of people and agencies involved.
Ratcliffe (I think it was him) said people were taking the 5th so they couldn't be exposed as purjuring themselves after their previous testimony.
Unfortunately, taking the 5th has worked for Democrats like Lois Lerner, who was caught dead-to-rights for the IRS targeting conservative groups.
I think Durham is very throrough and has enough evidence without relying on their personal testimony.
It is amazing how little information is getting out about the investigation. Even on Fox, there is very little, outside Maria's Sunday show.
Last edited:
These kinds of shenanigans have always gone on. Its just that computers have now saved the paper trail.
But … Only Republican lies and shenanigans matter. Media and the Looney Left eat their hypocrisy for breakfast. “By any means necessary.” The Social Justice Warriors dont care what their side does. Their violence is OK. Their lies are justified. Their election frauds are necessary. So just shut up and teach your third grade white male grandson about his oppression of everyone in the world. (Teaching them/they/it to read properly will just harm everybody more.)
Last edited:
"Charlie is very fair when he asks questions"
This is bizarre on so many levels, the idea that you seem to be characterizing Charlie Kirk as some non-partisan muckraking "journalist". Charlie Kirk is not in any sense a "journalist"- just another grifter who used Daddy's money to establish Turning Point USA as a focal point of indoctrinating college students towards right wing ideals.
He doesn't bring anyone of opposite political views on his show to debate, so the idea that he asks fair questions is ludicrous. He brings people on that he already agrees with, and then by virtue of confirmation bias doesn't have to worry about having his ideas challenged...
Beyond that he's a mental midget, and there's a reason his appearances at colleges are strictly regulated about who asks questions and what they are allowed to ask. This is a google entry I found, which refers to Charlie as the next big thing in talk radio. Only problem is the "source" for that quote is charliekirk.com- nobody is hailing him as the next big thing- it's just embarrassingly shameless self promotion...
NI John Ratcliffe + Dave Rubin & MORE | The Charlie Kirk ...
https://thecharliekirkshow.com › charlie-kirk › video6 days ago — Charlie Kirk is the next big thing in conservative talk radio and he's now hosting a daily radio show called "The Charlie Kirk Show" on the ...
Equally bizarre is the idea that you would promote the ramblings of John Ratcliffe- the least qualified person to serve as DNI in HISTORY, as if we should be impressed. If Kirk was any kind of journalist he'd ask Ratcliffe to refute that claim, which an article in WIRED pointed out during the confirmation hearings when Republicans basically turned around and ran roughshod over the qualifications both parties had insisted were necessary for a DNI. Not even Mancin or Sinema voted for this clown...From May 2020...
"Perhaps the clearest sign that three-term Texas congressman Ratcliffe is manifestly unqualified to serve as the nation’s director of national intelligence isn’t the fact that he embellished his résumé, nor that only a minority of the US Senate would vote to confirm him, nor that the first time he was floated for the post last summer he was so soundly rejected that he withdrew almost immediately.
Instead, it’s that years before just 49 senators of the 116th Congress—all Republicans—voted to confirm him last week as the head of the nation’s 17 intelligence agencies and the president’s top intelligence adviser, the 108th Congress tried to stop a man like Ratcliffe from assuming that very role in the first place. They wrote into the law that created the job, 50 US Code § 3023, “Any individual nominated for appointment as Director of National Intelligence shall have extensive national security expertise.”
And John Ratcliffe definitely doesn’t."
Trump's New Intelligence Chief Spells Trouble
John Ratcliffe is the least-qualified director of national intelligence in history—and a staunch partisan as well.
Previously votes for DNI have basically been rubber stamps, because the quality of experience was undeniable. Two have been confirmed unanimously and the rest have had a smattering of no votes .Dan Coats is probably the least qualified prior to Ratcliffe but even he was involved in foreign affairs/intelligence over a 25 yr span in Congress. Ratcliffe had 5 yrs in Congress preceded by being mayor of a small Texas town and prior to that he made money as a personal injury lawyer in Texas. As usual, Trump wanted Ratcliffe because Ratcliffe had been outspoken in defending Trump during Impeachment, and most Pubs fell in line. But 4 Pubs including people like Murkowski and Alexander who had some National Security experience decided to abstain from voting...
Now I know enough about your posting history to realize that this talk of Ratcliffe's being unqualified for the position is not going to faze you. But I just want to explain why Mark put Ratcliffe and Charlie in his post along with Epoch Times ,and why none of this stuff you're posting has the slightest bit of relevance for most of us. And when I described Charlie as a "mental midget", here is an example of Charlie claiming that the the taller the building, the more liberal the occupant...He just spews conspiracy wack and nonsense...
Thanks thats the most uninformed thing I've seen all day and thats saying a lot regarding the quacks I gave a second too. LMAO"Charlie is very fair when he asks questions"
This is bizarre on so many levels, the idea that you seem to be characterizing Charlie Kirk as some non-partisan muckraking "journalist". Charlie Kirk is not in any sense a "journalist"- just another grifter who used Daddy's money to establish Turning Point USA as a focal point of indoctrinating college students towards right wing ideals.
He doesn't bring anyone of opposite political views on his show to debate, so the idea that he asks fair questions is ludicrous. He brings people on that he already agrees with, and then by virtue of confirmation bias doesn't have to worry about having his ideas challenged...
Beyond that he's a mental midget, and there's a reason his appearances at colleges are strictly regulated about who asks questions and what they are allowed to ask. This is a google entry I found, which refers to Charlie as the next big thing in talk radio. Only problem is the "source" for that quote is charliekirk.com- nobody is hailing him as the next big thing- it's just embarrassingly shameless self promotion...
NI John Ratcliffe + Dave Rubin & MORE | The Charlie Kirk ...
https://thecharliekirkshow.com › charlie-kirk › video
6 days ago — Charlie Kirk is the next big thing in conservative talk radio and he's now hosting a daily radio show called "The Charlie Kirk Show" on the ...
Equally bizarre is the idea that you would promote the ramblings of John Ratcliffe- the least qualified person to serve as DNI in HISTORY, as if we should be impressed. If Kirk was any kind of journalist he'd ask Ratcliffe to refute that claim, which an article in WIRED pointed out during the confirmation hearings when Republicans basically turned around and ran roughshod over the qualifications both parties had insisted were necessary for a DNI. Not even Mancin or Sinema voted for this clown...From May 2020...
"Perhaps the clearest sign that three-term Texas congressman Ratcliffe is manifestly unqualified to serve as the nation’s director of national intelligence isn’t the fact that he embellished his résumé, nor that only a minority of the US Senate would vote to confirm him, nor that the first time he was floated for the post last summer he was so soundly rejected that he withdrew almost immediately.
Instead, it’s that years before just 49 senators of the 116th Congress—all Republicans—voted to confirm him last week as the head of the nation’s 17 intelligence agencies and the president’s top intelligence adviser, the 108th Congress tried to stop a man like Ratcliffe from assuming that very role in the first place. They wrote into the law that created the job, 50 US Code § 3023, “Any individual nominated for appointment as Director of National Intelligence shall have extensive national security expertise.”
And John Ratcliffe definitely doesn’t."
Trump's New Intelligence Chief Spells Trouble
John Ratcliffe is the least-qualified director of national intelligence in history—and a staunch partisan as well.www.wired.com
Previously votes for DNI have basically been rubber stamps, because the quality of experience was undeniable. Two have been confirmed unanimously and the rest have had a smattering of no votes .Dan Coats is probably the least qualified prior to Ratcliffe but even he was involved in foreign affairs/intelligence over a 25 yr span in Congress. Ratcliffe had 5 yrs in Congress preceded by being mayor of a small Texas town and prior to that he made money as a personal injury lawyer in Texas. As usual, Trump wanted Ratcliffe because Ratcliffe had been outspoken in defending Trump during Impeachment, and most Pubs fell in line. But 4 Pubs including people like Murkowski and Alexander who had some National Security experience decided to abstain from voting...
Now I know enough about your posting history to realize that this talk of Ratcliffe's being unqualified for the position is not going to faze you. But I just want to explain why Mark put Ratcliffe and Charlie in his post along with Epoch Times ,and why none of this stuff you're posting has the slightest bit of relevance for most of us. And when I described Charlie as a "mental midget", here is an example of Charlie claiming that the the taller the building, the more liberal the occupant...He just spews conspiracy wack and nonsense...
So these folks taking the 5th bothers you, but the tens if not hundreds of people being probed under various Trump investigations taking the 5th doesn't bother you? There are at least 3 separate criminal probes involving Trump currently ongoing, and THIS bit of nonsense which you can't even explain to us in a cohesive manner why we should be outraged is what you focus on?
I'm not interested in reading your rumble articles or Epoch Times- so can you summarize exactly what you think happened and why we should be outraged? I notice one of your sources is a substack, and that is an immediate red flag because by definition substack is an email designed to earn income. If you're writing an email to encourage Trumpers to give you money, it's pretty obvious you aren't going to be posting anything considered remotely anti-Trump...
So this is an issue I haven't been able to wrap my head around- Why aren't Trumpers angry with Steve Bannon, and furious at Trump for pardoning him? I mean just last week his business partners in his "convince people to donate to build a wall and RIP them off PLEADED GUILTY. The only reason Bannon won't face similar consequences are because Trump PARDONED him...
Now you could claim it was a savvy political move to pardon Bannon to protect him from "the left". But Bannon and his two buds ripped off Trumpers. They solicited donations to build the wall with private funds, then proceeded to steal the money and finance lavish lifestyles for themselves. These guys raised $25 Million from ripping off Trumpers, the two who Trump didn't pardon will get 3-5 yr sentences and Bannon gets off scott free because Trump pardoned him. I know that Trumpers have no problem lining Donald's pockets, but does that extend to Bannon, Kolfage and Badolato as well?
"The co-founder of the “We Build The Wall” project aimed at raising money for a border wall pleaded guilty Thursday to charges in a case that once included Donald Trump’s adviser Steve Bannon.
Brian Kolfage admitted to pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars while promising all donations would pay for the wall. His plea came a month before a trial in a case that began in dramatic fashion in August 2020, when Bannon was pulled from a luxury yacht off the coast of Connecticut and arrested on allegations that he and three others ripped off donors trying to fund a southern border wall.
Bannon was pardoned by Trump just before he left office last year. Bannon had pleaded not guilty to charges he pocketed over $1m, using some of the money to secretly pay Kolfage, a 39-year-old air force veteran who lost both legs in a mortar attack in Iraq."
Two plead guilty to pocketing funds raised for ‘We Build the Wall’ project
Co-founder of project to raise money for US-Mexico wall pleads guilty in case that once included Trump’s adviser Steve Bannon
It truly mystifies how willingly people gave money and aren't even raising a stink about being ripped off...
Lois Lerner, bitch.So these folks taking the 5th bothers you, but the tens if not hundreds of people being probed under various Trump investigations taking the 5th doesn't bother you? There are at least 3 separate criminal probes involving Trump currently ongoing, and THIS bit of nonsense which you can't even explain to us in a cohesive manner why we should be outraged is what you focus on?
I'm not interested in reading your rumble articles or Epoch Times- so can you summarize exactly what you think happened and why we should be outraged? I notice one of your sources is a substack, and that is an immediate red flag because by definition substack is an email designed to earn income. If you're writing an email to encourage Trumpers to give you money, it's pretty obvious you aren't going to be posting anything considered remotely anti-Trump...
So this is an issue I haven't been able to wrap my head around- Why aren't Trumpers angry with Steve Bannon, and furious at Trump for pardoning him? I mean just last week his business partners in his "convince people to donate to build a wall and RIP them off PLEADED GUILTY. The only reason Bannon won't face similar consequences are because Trump PARDONED him...
Now you could claim it was a savvy political move to pardon Bannon to protect him from "the left". But Bannon and his two buds ripped off Trumpers. They solicited donations to build the wall with private funds, then proceeded to steal the money and finance lavish lifestyles for themselves. These guys raised $25 Million from ripping off Trumpers, the two who Trump didn't pardon will get 3-5 yr sentences and Bannon gets off scott free because Trump pardoned him. I know that Trumpers have no problem lining Donald's pockets, but does that extend to Bannon, Kolfage and Badolato as well?
"The co-founder of the “We Build The Wall” project aimed at raising money for a border wall pleaded guilty Thursday to charges in a case that once included Donald Trump’s adviser Steve Bannon.
Brian Kolfage admitted to pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars while promising all donations would pay for the wall. His plea came a month before a trial in a case that began in dramatic fashion in August 2020, when Bannon was pulled from a luxury yacht off the coast of Connecticut and arrested on allegations that he and three others ripped off donors trying to fund a southern border wall.
Bannon was pardoned by Trump just before he left office last year. Bannon had pleaded not guilty to charges he pocketed over $1m, using some of the money to secretly pay Kolfage, a 39-year-old air force veteran who lost both legs in a mortar attack in Iraq."
Two plead guilty to pocketing funds raised for ‘We Build the Wall’ project
Co-founder of project to raise money for US-Mexico wall pleads guilty in case that once included Trump’s adviser Steve Bannonwww.theguardian.com
It truly mystifies how willingly people gave money and aren't even raising a stink about being ripped off...
Mueller...Mueller...Mueller What a joke and waste of money that was. Here is the truth from 2 lead investigators years ago.
The left will continue on, but I've lost all faith in our government. These are things that some of us around here have known for years and its been buried. Then today I saw that James A Baker is the lead counsel for twitter...Wonder why Elon was blocked for awhile? Now Baker is going to testify for Durham? This is the guy that took Sussman for his word about the Russia hoax? This is a clustef*cking corruption den the largest anyone has ever seen. Its taking years and it will be a miracle if he can make it stick because its so dripping with lies.
The left will continue on, but I've lost all faith in our government. These are things that some of us around here have known for years and its been buried. Then today I saw that James A Baker is the lead counsel for twitter...Wonder why Elon was blocked for awhile? Now Baker is going to testify for Durham? This is the guy that took Sussman for his word about the Russia hoax? This is a clustef*cking corruption den the largest anyone has ever seen. Its taking years and it will be a miracle if he can make it stick because its so dripping with lies.
Hopefully Nunes will be running the FBI in the next Republican Administration.
He researches his facts and was right all along about Schiff and they liars in Congress and the media.
He could restore integrity to an organization that badly needs it.
Amen. X 10..What bothers me is Baker. He was on the hook and he better be careful. Even though Baker is going to testify for Durham and try and bury Sussman, he could turn the tables on Baker. I'm sure there are docs with Bakers name on it from the Hillary camp. Why else would Sussman have gone to him in the first place.
This could be a situation where they start to turn on each other. If Sussman feels betrayed by Baker, he could spill a lot of beans.
Did you see that the jury selection today picked 1 Democrat DC bureaucrat who dontated to the DNC and another Democrat who admitted he hated Trump?
I hope Durham knows what he's doing.
You never know...There could be threats involved blah blah blah...The Clintons.
Yea, 1 nea and its over for Durham. Thats why this is so hard to prove. Did not see that.
Last edited:
He probably ran out of pe-empts. That means he kicked off jurors who were worse.
It's in DC, right? What are the odds of finding a non-hyper partisan Democrat?
Oh you mean taking the fifth like Republicans have been doing for Jan. 6? Or just refusing to answer to subpoenas, like Republicans did during the entire Trump administration? Spoiler alert: you’re going to be disappointed.
You should be disappointed you just defined yourself.
Are you sure your family has teachers? You sure have a thing for blaming them for everything wrong in the world. I hope they know a bit more about education than you do.
You know what zeke. Both parties would be 10 times better off without the Clintons. But here you are spouting off about something you know nothing about. Why in the hell you are employed to teach kids leaves me smh. You wouldn't last up here for a minute. Get your head out of your ass for a change and lets have some justice.
Or like Lois Lerner did?
https://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/irs-hearing-091732
Or like Clinton associates are doing?
Durham: Five Hillary Clinton Associates Are Taking the Fifth in Russia Hoax Prosecution
Five associates of Hillary Clinton and her presidential campaign are reportedly invoking their Fifth Amendment rights, refusing to cooperate.
www.breitbart.com
What is it with you Democrats and your penchant for hypocrisy?
My father got a Masters and a Ph.D. in Education from Indiana University.
He taught in public middle schools, high schools and a private college. He RAN the student teaching program at his college. Taught for over 40 years. After he retired he worked as a consultant to school systems on improving teachers and teaching methods.
My mother taught and was a principal in elementary schools her whole career. Also over 40 years.
Had a grandfather who taught.
I took all the educational requirements to teach except for student teaching. Used those 12 hours to finish a history minor and go to law school.
My wife works with students in K-3 who need extra, non-classroom assistance in reading and math.
I now teach college students myself.
Bad teachers who permeate their teaching with political indoctrination are blameworthy and need to be stopped. If you don’t know the difference between teaching and indoctrination, or don’t care about that difference, you don’t belong in a classroom.
Nothing is going to come of this. Durham is providing cover for the deep state by going after some low hanging fruit while the real criminals walk as always. The statue of limitations for many are expiring soon. This is the Ghislaine Maxwell trial part 2.
We may see a not guilty.
How you guys can claim Trump is not exonerated after a special prosecutor with a team of Democrat lawyers couldn't find any evidence of the fabled Collusion by him after a 2 1/2 year investigation and $40 million and no charges were brought, I have no idea.
But I'm sure you'll crow if Sussman is found not guilty by a single nay vote.
I wouldn't say nothing. But unless a guy like Sussman makes a deal and divulges more information, it will be tough to go after higher officials.
Can you imagine all the perp walks if Trump's team had destroyed their cell phones after they were subpoena'd?
Just revealed in the Sussmann trial that the judge is married to the lawyer of one of the two “lovers,” Lisa Page, and Attorney General Merrick Garland presided over their wedding. Rigged! https://truthsocial.com/users/realDonaldTrump/statuses/108319208875314146
