Wasn't really any need to respond, but thanks for admitting it.
It's always been apparent you don't understand this.
What to make of the Durham filing?
- Thread starter Courtsensetwo
- Start date
It's always been apparent you don't understand this.
What evidence do you have that Sullivan was a "democratic hard ass"? Loony Sidney Powell was so thrilled with Sullivan's prior ruling in the Ted Stevens case, that she asked him to autograph her book in which she lauded him as an anti govt crusader. And Sullivan was more upset with Flynn over his undisclosed work for Turkey, than he was over the lesser charge that Flynn plead guilty to...
And it was Reagan who first appointed him to the DC Superior Court, and in '91 Bush appointed him as an associate Judge to the DC Court of Appeals. So how does that make him a "democrat"? And since Flynn Jr was up to his eyeballs with his coup approving, Qanon-loving religious nut job of a papa in the plot to kidnap the Turkish cleric, why wouldn't Weissman threaten to prosecute Jr as well?
I don't think that came out right...
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that, considering the subject of that post was technically about Trump and lefties opinions about him, I'll chalk that up as a simple mistake and not a Freudian slip.
Last edited:
Sussman lied to the FBI. The democrat jurors in DC nullified just like Simpson was set free.
Durham wasting his time in DC. Sussman could have shot a Republican in the courtroom in front of the jurors and walked. Our Justice system is broke.
Durham wasting his time in DC. Sussman could have shot a Republican in the courtroom in front of the jurors and walked. Our Justice system is broke.
Wow. That's some kind of bullshit, even for you.
How is it a blow? When a prosecutor indicts, he wants and expects a conviction. An acquittal is a loss. A humiliating failure. A blow to the investigators and prosecuting attorneys who spent countless hours putting the case together and presenting it to a jury.
And I have no effing idea what "just because he wasn't exonerated doesn't mean he didn't do it" is supposed to mean.
Always bringing the receipts.
I must have missed all those apologies. I sure saw a lot of insults hurled your way, even though you were 100% on target while others were predictably delusional.
I am curious why you are so positive he lied? I am certainly not certain he did not. But the charge was based on Sussman's conversation with one FBI agent. That agent did not record it in his notes, did not tell the investigators in his first interrogation. In a second one, he remembered being lied to.
It easily could be he remembered correctly. I will not disagree. But there is a heck of a lot of room for doubt. I did not see any of the trial, I don't know how that agent sounded in testifying about remembering. If he sounded credible, I could see jurors delivering guilty. If not, I can see not guilty. Tooany people see definitely guilty or definitely not guilty based solely on what they want.
The FBI agent’s memory would have been perfect if this was a Trump associate. Instead it was his friend so he was Sergeant Schultz. FBI, Justice and IRS just an arm of the Democrats.
Using double negatives is tricky. lolI don't think that came out right...
I will give you the benefit of the doubt that, considering the subject of that post was technically about Trump and lefties opinions about him, I'll chalk that up as a simple mistake and not a Freudian slip.
It was meant to confuse you, which wasn't difficult.
Well, the trial brought out 3 things you leftists have denied for the last 6 years.
1) The reports about a link between a Trump server and the Russian bank, Alfa, was made up out of whole cloth. It was a hoax designed to impugn the Trump campaign without a shred of evidence.
2) Hillary approved the spreading of false information.
3) The FBI cooperated with the Clinton campaign to push the server link theory in order to promote a bogus Mueller investigation.
If you're proud of that, then good for you. It's much more insidious than anything Nixon did.
If you believe Sussman didn't lie to the FBI that he didn't represent the Clinton campaign when he worked for the Clinton campaign, you're Hickory stupid.
This argument always makes me laugh. Why, then, did the Democrat puppet FBI announce an investigation into the Clinton server issue well before the 2016 election, announce on October 28, 2016 (11 days before the election, while early voting was underway) that they were reopening the investigation, but not announce that they were investigating Trump and Trump campaign links to Russia - - - an investigation that began in July 2016 - - until after the election?
Because he was covering his ass after he knew his FBI was getting information from the Clinton campaign. Duh! How ****ing naive can you be?
He can’t think that hard. He spends most of his brain power remembering which person he is posting as. He’s the greatest of all time. 😂
Just amazing how poor old Donnie is always the victim. Trump U. did nothing wrong, but he paid $25 million to settle because the judge was bias against him. His Trump foundation fund was closed for misuse of funds and he and children are barred from opening another one, but if was another democratic judge out to get him. The investigation of the Trump Organization is a political witch hunt by a dem who hates him just like the Georgia folk's investigation. Ted Cruz didn't win the Iowa primary, he stole it. His 60 lawsuits on a fraudulent election all dismissed because all those judges were biased against him. He didn't lose the popular vote to Clinton because 3 million illegals voted. He didn't lose the popular vote to Biden by 7 million votes because it was rigged, and he won by a landslide.
His phone call to Selensky was perfect and the 17 people who testified against him were a bunch of lying no goods. The 11 tweets from December 1 to January 5 inviting "patriots" to come to Washington to stop the steal and his speech to march on the Capitol had nothing to do with the attack on the building. His campaign manager Manafort gave internal polling information to a Russian oligarch who gave it to Russian intelligence but there was no collusion (Mueller Report). He asked WH counsel McGahn to stop the Mueller investigation, but it was not obstruction Mueller report).
I suppose Trumps attempt to overturn the election is just an unfounded rumor.
His phone call to Selensky was perfect and the 17 people who testified against him were a bunch of lying no goods. The 11 tweets from December 1 to January 5 inviting "patriots" to come to Washington to stop the steal and his speech to march on the Capitol had nothing to do with the attack on the building. His campaign manager Manafort gave internal polling information to a Russian oligarch who gave it to Russian intelligence but there was no collusion (Mueller Report). He asked WH counsel McGahn to stop the Mueller investigation, but it was not obstruction Mueller report).
I suppose Trumps attempt to overturn the election is just an unfounded rumor.
Complete bullshit, like virtually all of your posts.
The FBI's pre-election disclosure of its active investigation of the private server issue, and in particular Comey's public letter to Congress dated October 28, 2016, was a huge setback for the Clinton campaign. Trump, on the other hand, benefited enormously from the non-disclosure of the FBI's active investigation of him and his campaign and their demonstrable ties to Russia. If the investigation of the Trump/Russia links (and there were many) had been disclosed by the FBI prior to the November 2016 election, his candidacy would have been toast.
Trump hates Comey, but he really should be sending Comey a nice gift every Christmas after the gift Comey gave him.
Christie: Comey was ‘single biggest factor’ in giving Trump momentum before election
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) said Monday that ex-FBI Director James Comey was “the single biggest factor” in shifting momentum toward President Trump in the closing days of…
thehill.com
'He swung an election': Kellyanne Conway appears to slip up and credit Comey with Trump's win
Kellyanne Conway, the counselor to President Donald Trump, said the former FBI Director James Comey "swung" the 2016 election in favor of Trump.
www.businessinsider.com
I don't know what this means but, then again, I doubt that you do either.
So naive.Complete bullshit, like virtually all of your posts.
The FBI's pre-election disclosure of its active investigation of the private server issue, and in particular Comey's public letter to Congress dated October 28, 2016, was a huge setback for the Clinton campaign. Trump, on the other hand, benefited enormously from the non-disclosure of the FBI's active investigation of him and his campaign and their demonstrable ties to Russia. If the investigation of the Trump/Russia links (and there were many) had been disclosed by the FBI prior to the November 2016 election, his candidacy would have been toast.
Trump hates Comey, but he really should be sending Comey a nice gift every Christmas after the gift Comey gave him.
Christie: Comey was ‘single biggest factor’ in giving Trump momentum before election
Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) said Monday that ex-FBI Director James Comey was “the single biggest factor” in shifting momentum toward President Trump in the closing days of…
'He swung an election': Kellyanne Conway appears to slip up and credit Comey with Trump's win
Kellyanne Conway, the counselor to President Donald Trump, said the former FBI Director James Comey "swung" the 2016 election in favor of Trump.
RIP Durham Investigation...
Another attempt by Trump to gunk up the system. Was never really sure what Durham's role was, and what Trump wanted him to prove. But as usual with anything connected to Trump it was a disaster from start to finish...
So will Trump wing media actually tell their viewers that the dream has died, or will they just keep quiet and hope no one asks aloud when the Durham report is going to start dropping bombshells? Maybe he can hook up with D'Souza on his next book?
Keep in mind that Trump set Durham up in his role back in 2019, which means this exercise in futility has lasted THREE YEARS. The entire Mueller Investigation lasted less than half that, and resulted in some pretty positive developments. For example...
"A cost–benefit analysis of the investigation shows a net benefit for the government, with far more income than expenses.
By December 2018, the investigation had cost approximately $32 million[149] but gained approximately $48 million. More than half of the cost of the investigation was for personnel compensation and benefits. The gains were accrued primarily by uncovering unpaid taxes by targets in the investigation, seizing assets, and collecting fines." (Seems like a good thing)...
Also despite some uninformed people referring to Mueller as a "Hoax", it resulted in a significant number of criminal convictions...
"The Special Counsel indicted 34 people—seven U.S. nationals, 26 Russian nationals, and one Dutch national—and three Russian organizations. Two additional individuals were charged as a result of referrals to other FBI offices."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–2019)#:~:text=The%20Mueller%20investigation%20culminated%20with,criminal%20conspiracy%20to%20charge%20Trump.
Apologies for linking to Wiki, but those numbers seem pretty accurate...
How does Durham's probe stack up by comparison? Well the 3 yr GJ appointment has expired...They did get that dastardly FBI agent Clinesmith for a false statement regarding Page's history...
I realize the Trumpers will never believe this, but I think Clinesmith's personal animosity towards Page was probably more attributable to lingering distrust of Page by the Bureau relative to the suspicious circumstances of his attempted recruitment by GRU agents back in 2013, rather than some animus towards Trump. In fact the FBI didn't even apply for the FISA warrant till a month after Page had announced he was LEAVING the Trump campaign...
But hey, Durham sure showed him who was boss...
Durham Inquiry Appears to Wind Down as Grand Jury Expires
WASHINGTON — When John Durham was assigned by the Justice Department in 2019 to examine the origins of the investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, President Donald Trump and his supporters expressed a belief that the inquiry would prove that a “deep state” conspiracy...
Not so fast, rube.RIP Durham Investigation...
Another attempt by Trump to gunk up the system. Was never really sure what Durham's role was, and what Trump wanted him to prove. But as usual with anything connected to Trump it was a disaster from start to finish...
So will Trump wing media actually tell their viewers that the dream has died, or will they just keep quiet and hope no one asks aloud when the Durham report is going to start dropping bombshells? Maybe he can hook up with D'Souza on his next book?
Keep in mind that Trump set Durham up in his role back in 2019, which means this exercise in futility has lasted THREE YEARS. The entire Mueller Investigation lasted less than half that, and resulted in some pretty positive developments. For example...
"A cost–benefit analysis of the investigation shows a net benefit for the government, with far more income than expenses.
By December 2018, the investigation had cost approximately $32 million[149] but gained approximately $48 million. More than half of the cost of the investigation was for personnel compensation and benefits. The gains were accrued primarily by uncovering unpaid taxes by targets in the investigation, seizing assets, and collecting fines." (Seems like a good thing)...
Also despite some uninformed people referring to Mueller as a "Hoax", it resulted in a significant number of criminal convictions...
"The Special Counsel indicted 34 people—seven U.S. nationals, 26 Russian nationals, and one Dutch national—and three Russian organizations. Two additional individuals were charged as a result of referrals to other FBI offices."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–2019)#:~:text=The%20Mueller%20investigation%20culminated%20with,criminal%20conspiracy%20to%20charge%20Trump.
Apologies for linking to Wiki, but those numbers seem pretty accurate...
How does Durham's probe stack up by comparison? Well the 3 yr GJ appointment has expired...They did get that dastardly FBI agent Clinesmith for a false statement regarding Page's history...
I realize the Trumpers will never believe this, but I think Clinesmith's personal animosity towards Page was probably more attributable to lingering distrust of Page by the Bureau relative to the suspicious circumstances of his attempted recruitment by GRU agents back in 2013, rather than some animus towards Trump. In fact the FBI didn't even apply for the FISA warrant till a month after Page had announced he was LEAVING the Trump campaign...
But hey, Durham sure showed him who was boss...
Durham Inquiry Appears to Wind Down as Grand Jury Expires
WASHINGTON — When John Durham was assigned by the Justice Department in 2019 to examine the origins of the investigation into the 2016 Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, President Donald Trump and his supporters expressed a belief that the inquiry would prove that a “deep state” conspiracy...www.yahoo.com
Looks like the FBI got exposed once again for their political bias.
Main Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko was FBI operative: court document
The Russian analyst charged with lying to the FBI about his role in the infamous “Steele dossier” was allegedly a paid confidential human source for the agency.
nypost.com
When they started paying him and what that meant for him w.r.t. answering questions is the story there.Not so fast, rube.
Looks like the FBI got exposed once again for their political bias.
Main Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko was FBI operative: court document
The Russian analyst charged with lying to the FBI about his role in the infamous “Steele dossier” was allegedly a paid confidential human source for the agency.
The people at the top of the FBI are corrupt. Most of the rank and file are probably OK, but at the very least their needs to be a purge at the top.
Don't they normally come up through the ranks? At what point do they become corrupt?
Probably about the same time and through a similar process as the wide eyed idealistic Congressman or Senator who goes to D.C. thinking they are going to be a change agent and then they get subsumed by the system.
Washington D.C. is full of rot.
once a govt becomes for sale to the highest bidders, which ours absolutely has, doesn't being corrupt become a qualifier for top positions.
or in Trump's case, the qualifier being total subservience to Trump no matter what, rather than to the country or citizenry.
that said, at least Trump was open from the start that that was the no exceptions qualifier with him.
on the "for sale" side, those doing the buying haven't been so open about being "buyable" as the prime qualifier, but just as strict about that being the absolute must have qualification.
Last edited:
To the DANC-for-brains posters on here, it is when they begin investigating "my guy" or "my cult"
It wasn't a good question and the answer would be different for each one who was "corrupt" or has overstepped the boundaries of their job.
Drivel. You would notice it when they are knowingly lying to courts in order to get warrants to do fishing expeditions for, from off the cuff remarks to each other outside of normal "work" conversations, appears to be politically motivated. Or maybe you see it when they go into groups and become the biggest pushers of the conspiracies they are supposedly investigating, to the point where they are suggesting the crimes that should be undertaken and they are supplying the "resources" for the criminals to use all so that they can get their big splash convictions.
And you talking about a cult is laughable. Cults separate people out from what they have previously believed and have them spouting the dogma of the cult in short order. Mr. Former Republican who is now a walking and talking SJW, lefty-prog, bumper sticker quoting bot fits the cult bill pretty well....
Not only did I read what you linked, but I also read the link within that story to his original not-guilty pleas in 2021. Nothing that I read supports what you posted here. In the 2021 article Ratcliffe made some stupid statement about "lots of indictments to come", but the GJ has ended and there are no more indictments...Not so fast, rube.
Looks like the FBI got exposed once again for their political bias.
Main Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko was FBI operative: court document
The Russian analyst charged with lying to the FBI about his role in the infamous “Steele dossier” was allegedly a paid confidential human source for the agency.
Danchenko was originally charged with "lying to the FBI", so I have no idea how that story "exposes" the political bias for the FBI, as you posted above? This was in the link your article linked to, a different NYP story from Nov 2021...
"The indictment states that the FBI interviewed Danchenko several times between January and November 2017 and was unable to “confirm or corroborate” many of the claims listed in the dossier."
That is what Danchenko was charged with- lying to the FBI. The article says he was supposed to go to trial in April 2022. I guess that is the court your linked article refers to? Again from the 2021 article...
"The charging document also details several times Danchenko allegedly lied. On one occasion, he told investigators he had received an anonymous phone call in July 2016 from a person he believed to be former Russian-American Chamber of Commerce head Sergei Millian, who told him about a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin — a claim included in the dossier.
“In truth and fact, and as Danchenko well knew, Danchenko never received such a phone call or such information,” the indictment reads. “Danchenko fabricated these facts.”
Danchenko is the third person to be indicted in Durham’s investigation into the Russia-Trump conspiracy origins, but he may not be the last.
Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said Sunday that he is expecting “many indictments,” arguing that everyone involved in creating the fallacious report is in “jeopardy.”
Key Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko pleads not guilty to lying to FBI
Igor Danchenko was arrested after he was indicted as part of Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the FBI probe of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
nypost.com
Actually Danchenko may in fact be the last, since the GJ (which issues indictments) has dissolved...
But I have no idea what your article purports to show other than Danchenko may now be in jail over his charge of lying to the FBI?
So go ahead and explain to me (without skipping steps) how the article you linked supports your post, or even what relevance it has to my post which basically shows that Durham's investigation (not with standing the trial of Danchenko- the last of his 3 indictments) is pretty much finished?
None of this relates to Danchenko, which is the article DANC posted. The only FBI agent that "lied" was Clinesmith, and he has already gone to trial. And I still am waiting for a single Trumper to explain to me how the FBI applying for a FISA warrant to watch Page in Oct 2016 had relevance to the Trump Campaign? Page announced in Sept 2016 that he was LEAVING the Trump Campaign...
Fact- the FBI viewed Page with suspicion (regarding events of 20113) before he joined Team Trump...
‘Carter Page Is a Very Unlikely GOP Hero’
President Trump and House Republicans are declassifying documents to allege the campaign aide was spied on by Hillary Clinton partisans, but the FBI had been investigating Page’s ties to Russian intelligence for years.
The Trump team (unintentionally) thrust themselves into FBI scrutiny in April 2016 when they hired TWO people the FBI had security concerns with- Manafort and Page. There were 4 FISA warrants issued over Page ,and 2 of the 4 were ruled invalid. But the motivation to surveil Page was based on Page and lingering doubts he had caused...
"While Russia was meddling in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump, investigators wanted to monitor Page because of his web of Russian connections. This included ties to known Russian spies, his past work with Kremlin-controlled Gazprom and a pro-Russia speech that he delivered in Moscow at the height of the campaign."
Federal judge dismisses Carter Page lawsuit over government surveillance | CNN Politics
A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit brought by Trump 2016 campaign adviser Carter Page, who sued the FBI and Justice Department for damages stemming from the controversial government surveillance he faced due to his Russian ties.
The issue that involved Trump was the July 2016 speech, because it advocated lifting the embargo on Russian Energy which was enacted in response to Crimea. It wasn't an official act of the Trump Campaign, but Page did travel to Moscow as a member of the Trump campaign...
Don't expect to read or hear about it from any place other than Fox or the NY Post before the election.
Paid. By. The. FBI.Not only did I read what you linked, but I also read the link within that story to his original not-guilty pleas in 2021. Nothing that I read supports what you posted here. In the 2021 article Ratcliffe made some stupid statement about "lots of indictments to come", but the GJ has ended and there are no more indictments...
Danchenko was originally charged with "lying to the FBI", so I have no idea how that story "exposes" the political bias for the FBI, as you posted above? This was in the link your article linked to, a different NYP story from Nov 2021...
"The indictment states that the FBI interviewed Danchenko several times between January and November 2017 and was unable to “confirm or corroborate” many of the claims listed in the dossier."
That is what Danchenko was charged with- lying to the FBI. The article says he was supposed to go to trial in April 2022. I guess that is the court your linked article refers to? Again from the 2021 article...
"The charging document also details several times Danchenko allegedly lied. On one occasion, he told investigators he had received an anonymous phone call in July 2016 from a person he believed to be former Russian-American Chamber of Commerce head Sergei Millian, who told him about a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin — a claim included in the dossier.
“In truth and fact, and as Danchenko well knew, Danchenko never received such a phone call or such information,” the indictment reads. “Danchenko fabricated these facts.”
Danchenko is the third person to be indicted in Durham’s investigation into the Russia-Trump conspiracy origins, but he may not be the last.
Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said Sunday that he is expecting “many indictments,” arguing that everyone involved in creating the fallacious report is in “jeopardy.”
Key Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko pleads not guilty to lying to FBI
Igor Danchenko was arrested after he was indicted as part of Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the FBI probe of Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
Actually Danchenko may in fact be the last, since the GJ (which issues indictments) has dissolved...
But I have no idea what your article purports to show other than Danchenko may now be in jail over his charge of lying to the FBI?
So go ahead and explain to me (without skipping steps) how the article you linked supports your post, or even what relevance it has to my post which basically shows that Durham's investigation (not with standing the trial of Danchenko- the last of his 3 indictments) is pretty much finished?
He was paid by the FBI to provide them information. Durham says that he lied to them. Did you think the article said they paid him in 2016 (which would be DURING the POTUS campaign?
That's NOT what the article says, which is why your "political bias" post makes ZERO sense...
"Igor Danchenko became a paid FBI informant in March 2017 — months after the feds started questioning him over his involvement in the dossier on former President Donald Trump, according to the filing by special counsel John Durham."
How is this political? This is just the Post trying to add some level of confusion to the Danchenko story, as in Durham said Danchenko lied to the FBI but he was actually an FBI informant. They just briefly mention it, but then offer no reason it's even significant. They've convinced you it's important, but I'm not really sure that even you can actually articulate why you think so? They started questioning him and then later in March decided he'd make a valuable CI.
Again, they use that as their headline, but it takes only a single sentence within the actual article. And they don't offer a single reason why it's supposed to be significant. Because it isn't, but they want to pretend that it is...
Now if you want to spell it out for me I'll read it. But again, it was during the course of questioning him IN 2017 that they decided his info was worthy of being paid for. Not before. He certainly wasn't under FBI employ while he was working on the dossier (in 2016), although I highly suspect that is what YOU THOUGHT the article said...
You guys seem to be confused on your timeline. The article says that they started questioning him in 2017 over the role he played in providing info for the Steele Dossier (which was basically May-Oct 2016). For whatever reason, they began to employ him as a CI in March 2017, and I would assume that was for info he could provide them about Putin/Russia going forward...
Sounds like you're talking about Madison Cawthorn who started out as a wild eyed Trumper before falling prey to the orgy and cocaine snorting scene among the members of his party who he previously idealized. At least that's what he claimed...
"It wasn't a good question and the answer would be different for each one who was "corrupt" or has overstepped the boundaries of their job.
Drivel. You would notice it when they are knowingly lying to courts in order to get warrants to do fishing expeditions for, from off the cuff remarks to each other outside of normal "work" conversations, appears to be politically motivated. Or maybe you see it when they go into groups and become the biggest pushers of the conspiracies they are supposedly investigating, to the point where they are suggesting the crimes that should be undertaken and they are supplying the "resources" for the criminals to use all so that they can get their big splash convictions."
Going to bump this thread (and this post in particular) in light of events which have been revealed in the past 5 days, but have not yet been mentioned here. The irony is that I doubt crazy had any idea at the time that he was describing what we would eventually find out about the Durham investigation and the role Barr and Durham played. But the fact that we now know that Durham (and particularly Barr) were actually guilty of the type of conduct they were (supposedly) investigating within the confines of the Russia Investigation is a sweet irony...
Remember when the news broke (gleefully on Fox) that the Durham probe had opened a CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, and wing nuts everywhere were ecstatic? Everyone assumed that the newly launched investigation was because Barr/Durham had discovered "criminal activities" by the deep state. .This was in the wake of a (not publicly known) trip Barr and Durham made jointly to England and Italy, seeking out info from those Governments which would support Barr's contention that the Russian Investigation was a "deep state plot" against Trump.
To return to crazies post, this would qualify as "a fishing expedition and conversations together outside of normal work conversations that were politically motivated"...Not to mention, becoming "the biggest pushers of the conspiracies they are supposedly investigating"... Signs of corruption, he (unwittingly) predicted would occur. He didn't realize he was discussing Barr/Durham...
But the weaponization of DOJ revealed in the NYT expose which detailed the corrupt nature of the Durham probe is even more damning to Barr. Because while Barr/Durham were "fishing" in England and Italy and dining in fine restaurants while sipping smooth scotch, they got news that made them do a spit take. When they questioned British and Italian authorities about a plot to persecute Trump, the Italian Govt presented them with very credible evidence linking Trump to possible financial crimes...
The info from the Italians was too strong to ignore, so Barr did the next best thing in order to avoid damage to Trump. He assigned Durham to investigate it, which meant he basically tried to keep it under wraps and avoid bringing in another investigator. It was after all a few weeks prior to the 2020 election...
Of course the news got leaked to Fox that Barr had ordered Durham to initiate a criminal investigation and the Fox bots were more than willing to just assume that the target was the "deep state" and gleefully allow it to dominate their air waves. We saw it here in various posts because wingnut media is very organized and they all assumed amplifying it would hurt Biden and help Trump. And of course Barr was perfectly content to allow people to labor under false assumptions, since propaganda was the entire basis for the Durham probe in the first place...
This video does a great job of tying things together, including the supercut of Fox personalities all reveling in the joy of announcing that Durham had launched a criminal investigation. But of course the Fox bots on tv, and many of their allies here who celebrated as well, had no idea that the target (of the ONLY criminal probe the Durham investigation ever launched) was Trump...
The NYT article further exposes the fact that it was Barr/Durham who pushed the entire "blame Clinton" conspiracy which resulted in 3 different members (including his 2nd in command) of Durham's team resigning over ethical concerns. Basically Durham's disastrous boondoggle resulted in 2 embarrassing court cases which separate juries basically laughed at...
How Barr’s Quest to Find Flaws in the Russia Inquiry Unraveled
The review by John Durham at one point veered into a criminal investigation related to Donald Trump himself, even as it failed to find wrongdoing in the origins of the Russia inquiry.
Last edited:
