Trumps beloved durham probe ends in a whimper.

[IQ57]

You need to fact check your sources OP.

 

[justabubba]

You need to fact check your sources OP.

what was inaccurate?

 

[Atomic Kid]

Same as the Mueller investigation.

Mueller's investigation brought millions of dollars in penalties and seized illegally gotten assets and obtained 34 indictments, 7 guilty pleas and 5 others convicted and imprisoned.

 

[justabubba]

Mueller's investigation brought millions of dollars in penalties and seized illegally gotten assets and obtained 34 indictments, 7 guilty pleas and 5 others convicted and imprisoned.

clearly, the same [/s]

 

[Athanasius68]

Mueller's investigation brought millions of dollars in penalties and seized illegally gotten assets and obtained 34 indictments, 7 guilty pleas and 5 others convicted and imprisoned.

And none of them had anything to do demonstrating the existence of a Trump/Russia conspiracy.

Meanwhile, Durham has shown that the origins of the Trump/Russia conspiracy was in a Clinton campaign political hit.

And also showed that lies were needed to keep the theory alive.

 

[Atomic Kid]

The three facts that can't be escaped:

1. People unauthorized to change election laws and regulation in key battle ground stated did change those election laws and regulation
2. Those changes in election laws and regulation favored Democrats
3. Those changes in election laws and regulation still remain unaddressed by the courts

Pure hogwash! The legislature isn't authorized to make changes in election laws that help to accommodate their citizens desire for safer and easier methods to cast their votes? That's pure nonsense. The rules and the opportunity to cast votes under those rules was the same and equal for everyone. No group of voters or political party were being unduly burdened by those changes. They were designed to make voting easier and safer for all. It's not the Pennsylvania legislature's problem that the Orange Ogre foolishly discouraged his followers to take advantage of those rules. A costly and stupid mistake really. But you know I guess he was just following Putin's election playbook. And btw those changes have been addressed and upheld by the courts.

 

[MTAtech]

And none of them had anything to do demonstrating the existence of a Trump/Russia conspiracy.

Meanwhile, Durham has shown that the origins of the Trump/Russia conspiracy was in a Clinton campaign political hit.

And also showed that lies were needed to keep the theory alive.

Shown how, exactly? Durham was appointed special council and the grand jury that he has recently used to hear evidence has expired. Durham has not charged any conspiracy or put any high-level officials on trial. More indictments are unlikely and a conviction of the two indicted is also unlikely.

He hasn’t proven anything about Clinton.

 

[Atomic Kid]

And none of them had anything to do demonstrating the existence of a Trump/Russia conspiracy.

Meanwhile, Durham has shown that the origins of the Trump/Russia conspiracy was in a Clinton campaign political hit.

And also showed that lies were needed to keep the theory alive.

All of them had to with the Trump campaign's unprecedented cooperative effort to seek mutual benefit from a relationship with a hostile foreign power they had sought to keep hidden from the American people. Durham hasn't proved jack-shit. The only conviction he has is of a low level FBI legal counsel and that came via the DOJ's Inspector General's investigation, not his investigation. He got his ass handed to him in the Sussman trial and he's about to take an even worse and more embarrassing beatdown in the Danchenko case when it goes to trial because at this point Durham doesn't even have a witness.

 

[Athanasius68]

Shown how, exactly? Durham was appointed special council and the grand jury that he has recently used to hear evidence has expired. Durham has not charged any conspiracy or put any high-level officials on trial. More indictments are unlikely and a conviction of the two indicted is also unlikely.

He hasn’t proven anything about Clinton.

There was nothing illegal about spinning the Trump/Russia farce. It came out during that trial of Sussman, who went to the FBI with his poppycock tale as an agent of the Clinton campaignn.

And of course the lie of Clinesmith to support the allegation that such a conspiracy existed.

 

[Athanasius68]

All of them had to with the Trump campaign's unprecedented cooperative effort to seek mutual benefit from a relationship they sought to keep hidden from the American people.

None of them.

Durham hasn't proved jack-shit. The only conviction he has is of a low level FBI legal counsel and that came via the DOJ's Inspector General's investigation, not his investigation. He got his ass handed to him in the Sussman trial and he's about to take an even worse and more embarrassing beatdown in the Danchenko case when it goes to trial because at this point Durham doesn't even have a witness.

Durham could not prove that Sussman deliberately deceived the FBI over the fact that he represented the Clinton campaign when he spun his yarn.
But that he represented the Clinton campaign when he spun his yarn to the FBI is clear.

Danchenko was a suspected Russian agent. That is who supplied Steele with his stories. You guys hung your hats on that.

 

[post]

Definitely far from what all Trump and Trumpco were alleging.

But it's something.
It's another not-really-but-kinda-sorta-if you-squint-and-wish-really-hard thing.
Kinda like when Trump said Obama was wiretapping Trump Tower.
But what really happened was someone other than Trump (someone in Trump's campaign) was being investigated outside of Trump Tower.

What do you have proof Horowitz's December, 2019 was wrong about? Horowitz specifically addressed politicization as a motive or as
an influence resulting in errors or investigative abuse. Horowitz found none. All of that came from Trump, Barr, and Durham.

Bill Barr's Justice Department swings into action to undercut ...​

https://www.vox.com › 2019/12 › inspector-general-ho...
Dec 9, 2019 — Barr and Durham both made unusual statements disputing the inspector general on Monday. Once Horowitz's report was released on Monday, Barr and ...

Maybe on your way to your graves it will finally dawn on those serially grifted by TFG that the "Russia Hoax" was the dress rehearsal for the "Big Lie".

 

[post]

There was nothing illegal about spinning the Trump/Russia farce. It came out during that trial of Sussman, who went to the FBI with his poppycock tale as an agent of the Clinton campaignn.

And of course the lie of Clinesmith to support the allegation that such a conspiracy existed.

The FISA court judge who Clinesmith "lied" to disagrees with your partisan opinion. Mueller did not prosecute him, Durham only did because he had nothing else. You treat no Trump supporter so unreasonably on little to no justification.

Judge Sentences Ex-FBI Lawyer to 12 Months of Probation for ...​

https://www.law.com › nationallawjournal › 2021/01/29
Jan 29, 2021 — U.S. District Judge James Boasberg of the District of Columbia said he believed the former FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, did not knowingly ...

Ex-FBI lawyer spared prison for altering Trump-Russia probe ...​

https://www.politico.com › news › 2021/01/29 › fbi-la...
Jan 29, 2021 — Former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith, 38, received the sentence of 12 months probation and 400 hours community service from U.S. District Court ...

 

[NWRatCon]

what was inaccurate?

Lol. You're asking someone who wouldn't know a fact if it bit them in the face. He skipped the Red and Blue pill and took a handful of bubblegum . Blows bubbles out both ends.

 

[Athanasius68]

The FISA court judge who Clinesmith "lied" to disagrees with your partisan opinion. Mueller did not prosecute him, Durham only did because he had nothing else. You treat no Trump supporter so unreasonably on little to no justification.

The FISA court was "lied" to.

Durham was tasked with investigating why the FBI thought there was a Trump/Russia conspiracy.
Mueller was tasked with investigating if such a conspiracy existed.
The latter was not able to "establish" that such a conspiracy existed.
The former was able to explain that the FBI thought there was such a conspiracy because the Clinton campaign spun them a tale.

 

[Atomic Kid]

None of them.



Durham could not prove that Sussman deliberately deceived the FBI over the fact that he represented the Clinton campaign when he spun his yarn.
But that he represented the Clinton campaign when he spun his yarn to the FBI is clear.

Danchenko was a suspected Russian agent. That is who supplied Steele with his stories. You guys hung your hats on that.

What was exceedingly clear that jury saw Durham's case as being pure BS, and took very very little time to reach a verdict to acquit Sussman. The Steele Dossier didn't have one ****ing thing to with the FBI's decision to open Crossfire Hurricane. In fact Steele didn't know that the FBI had already opened an investigation into the Trump campaign's strange communications and surreptitious relationship with Russian state operatives.

 

[post]

Durham has found far more criminality by our DOJ-FBI-Hillary campaign than the witch hunt J6 investigation could ever find. The question is, will they be prosecuted equally. Unfortunately, the answer is NO WAY. The deep state slides again.

 

[post]

The FISA court was "lied" to.

Durham was tasked with investigating why the FBI thought there was a Trump/Russia conspiracy.
Mueller was tasked with investigating if such a conspiracy existed.
The latter was not able to "establish" that such a conspiracy existed.
The former was able to explain that the FBI thought there was such a conspiracy because the Clinton campaign spun them a tale.

That's Trump disinfo, why post it? Did Clinton team up with Seth to hack and steal her own & Podesta's emails?
Again, Fisa Judge who approved warrant Clinesmith influenced sentenced Clinesmith and judged nothing close to your
description.

 

[Athanasius68]

What was exceedingly clear that jury saw Durham's case as being pure BS, and took very very little time to reach a verdict to acquit Sussman.

Yes-- that he did not deliberately deceive the FBI when he claimed he was there as a private citizen.
That was the requirement for conviction.

What matters is that he was there as an agent of the Clinton campaign.

The Steele Dossier didn't have one ****ing thing to with the FBI's decision to open Crossfire Hurricane. In fact Steele didn't know that the FBI had already opened an investigation into the Trump campaign's strange communications and surreptitious relationship with Russian state operatives.

The dossier was used to continue the investigation, both for the FBI and in the court of public opinion.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

What do you have proof Horowitz's December, 2019 was wrong about? Horowitz specifically addressed politicization as a motive or as
an influence resulting in errors or investigative abuse. Horowitz found none. All of that came from Trump, Barr, and Durham.

Bill Barr's Justice Department swings into action to undercut ...​

https://www.vox.com › 2019/12 › inspector-general-ho...
Dec 9, 2019 — Barr and Durham both made unusual statements disputing the inspector general on Monday. Once Horowitz's report was released on Monday, Barr and ...

Maybe on your way to your graves it will finally dawn on those serially grifted by TFG that the "Russia Hoax" was the dress rehearsal for the "Big Lie".

I wonder what you think I wrote

 

[post]

I wonder what you think I wrote

Definitely far from what all Trump and Trumpco were alleging.

But it's something.
It's another not-really-but-kinda-sorta-if you-squint-and-wish-really-hard thing.
Kinda like when Trump said Obama was wiretapping Trump Tower.
But what really happened was someone other than Trump (someone in Trump's campaign) was being investigated outside of Trump Tower.

My reply to your post was to readers, generally, intending to dispel the false narrative of politically motivated, "deep state" federal LEO conspiracy against Trump still used as his political and criminal legal immunity today. Trump, Barr, and Durham pushed it to this emerging, pathetically thin, anti- climactic result.

 

[eohrnberger]

Pure hogwash! The legislature isn't authorized to make changes in election laws that help to accommodate their citizens desire for safer and easier methods to cast their votes? That's pure nonsense.

Civics fail.

Article I Legislative Branch​

• Section 4 Congress​

  • Clause 1 Elections Clause
  • The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.​
    • ArtI.S4.C1.1 Historical Background on the Elections Clause
    • ArtI.S4.C1.2 States and the Elections Clause
    • ArtI.S4.C1.3 Congress and the Elections Clause

Article I Section 4 | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

constitution.congress.gov

It is only the state legislators who can change their state's election laws and regulations.
Not a court.
Not a state's executive branch.
Only the state legislature.

The rules and the opportunity to cast votes under those rules was the same and equal for everyone. No group of voters or political party were being unduly burdened by those changes. They were designed to make voting easier and safer for all. It's not the Pennsylvania legislature's problem that the Orange Ogre foolishly discouraged his followers to take advantage of those rules. A costly and stupid mistake really. But you know I guess he was just following Putin's election playbook. And btw those changes have been addressed and upheld by the courts.

 

[Athanasius68]

My reply to your post was to readers, generally, intending to dispel the false narrative of politically motivated, "deep state" federal LEO conspiracy against Trump still used as his political and criminal legal immunity today. Trump, Barr, and Durham pushed it to this emerging, pathetically thin, anti- climactic result.

Durham has already demonstrated:

1. The Trump/Russia conspiracy theory, at least with with respect to the Alfa Bank component, was a creation of the Clinton campaign.

2. The FBI based their general investigation largely based upon a lie (Climesmith) and the words of a suspected Russian agent (Danchenko).

 

[Superfly]

I seem to remember Mycroft stating that the Durham Probe was going to do great things.

Not the first time Mycroft was wrong. Will guarantee it will not be the last. He’ll be wrong again before he finishes his morning coffee.

 

[post]

Civics fail.

Article I Legislative Branch​

• Section 4 Congress​

  • Clause 1 Elections Clause
  • The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.​
    • ArtI.S4.C1.1 Historical Background on the Elections Clause
    • ArtI.S4.C1.2 States and the Elections Clause
    • ArtI.S4.C1.3 Congress and the Elections Clause

Article I Section 4 | Constitution Annotated | Congress.gov | Library of Congress

constitution.congress.gov

It is only the state legislators who can change their state's election laws and regulations.
Not a court.
Not a state's executive branch.
Only the state legislature.

Supreme Court to take on controversial election-law case - NPR​

https://www.npr.org › 2022/06/30 › supreme-court-to-tak...
Jun 30, 2022 — "At issue is a legal theory that would give state legislatures unfettered authority to set the rules for federal elections, ...
....The independent state legislature theory was first invoked by three conservative U.S. Supreme Court justices in the celebrated Bush v. Gore case that handed the 2000 election victory to George W. Bush. In that case, the three cited it to support the selection of a Republican slate of presidential electors....
Thomas is one of four conservatives on the current court who have indicated their support for the independent state legislature theory. The others are Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh worked on the legal team supporting then-Texas Gov. Bush in the aftermath of the 2000 election. Bush v. Gore, a decision often referred to as a ticket "for this train only," was never cited in any subsequent Supreme Court decision. Until 2020, when Kavanaugh, by then a Supreme Court justice, cited it in a Wisconsin election case dealing with rules for absentee ballots at the height of the pandemic.

In a previous iteration of the North Carolina case last March, Kavanaugh said the court should at some point "carefully consider" the independent state legislature issue, "as it is almost almost certain to keep arising" until it is definitely resolved. Justices Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch took things a step further, declaring, "there must be some limit on the authority of state courts to countermand actions taken by state legislatures when they are prescribing rules for the conduct of federal elections." Just where the court will end up on this issue is not yet clear. Chief Justice John Roberts, writing for the court's five most conservative justices in 2019, said one of the checks on partisan gerrymandering is that state courts can continue to oversee congressional redistricting plans..."

 

[jpevans]

I don't view finding out more information about the government investigating the potus as a win or a loss. It's a fact gathering mission.

What is the Jan.6th Committee, then?