John Durham - Making a killing and finding nothing since 2018.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

11 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

But seriously, he needs another three years to cover for all the bogus investigations done on the Russia Hoax...lol

You do realize that the investigation that mattered was done by Republicans?  You do realize that outside of the narratives of the entertainment news, Russian interference was at the heart of the investigation and, was absolutely necessary?  You do see how so many contacts within a presidential campaign with Russians (not to mention lying about them) was a concern to national security?

The only "hoax" is believing the political cheerleading is all of reality.

[AU9377 4,960]

On 3/11/2022 at 12:10 PM, DKW 86 said:

And all that was about 10% of the  crap we were told was there in 1000s of articles, videos, etc. it really doesn’t matter at this point, the Blue Maga types aren’t going to believe anything found anymore than any of the Red Maga believed it about trump

What gets to me is that some act as though this was the overriding investigation that haunted the Trump presidency.  It wasn't.  The much more damning series of events led to his first impeachment.  Is there anyone that actually believes that Trump would have not done anything the Ukrainian president asked if he had been willing to play ball and announce a Biden investigation?  Zelenski likely regrets not having made a deal looking back and realizing the position he is in today.

[DKW 86 7,426]

2 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

You do realize that the investigation that mattered was done by Republicans?  You do realize that outside of the narratives of the entertainment news, Russian interference was at the heart of the investigation and, was absolutely necessary?  You do see how so many contacts within a presidential campaign with Russians (not to mention lying about them) was a concern to national security?

The only "hoax" is believing the political cheerleading is all of reality.

Brother, some folks here and nationally promised dozens of convictions for Collusion, Sedition, Treason, etc. We heard it day after day on every news outlet and on this forum for four years. To this day, not one person was found guilty nor plead guilty to  Collusion, Sedition, Treason, etc even though we heard it was a Smoking Gun Certainty from 1000s of news cast and videos. We actually heard this from Adam Schiff, A Trump Sized Liar if there ever was another....

All the Adam Schiff Transcripts - WSJ

All the Adam Schiff Transcripts

NEWLY RELEASED DOCUMENTS SHOW SCHIFF KNEW ALL ALONG THERE WAS NO PROOF OF TRUMP-RUSSIA COLLUSION.

Americans expect that politicians will lie, but sometimes the examples are so brazen that they deserve special notice. Newly released Congressional testimony shows that ADAM SCHIFF SPREAD FALSEHOODS SHAMELESSLY ABOUT RUSSIA AND DONALD TRUMP FOR THREE YEARS AS HIS OWN COMMITTEE GATHERED CONTRARY EVIDENCE. 

The House Intelligence Committee last week released 57 transcripts of interviews it conducted in its investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. The committee probe started in January 2017 under then-Chair Devin Nunes and concluded in March 2018 with a report finding no evidence that the Trump campaign conspired with the Kremlin. Most of the transcripts were ready for release long ago, but Mr. Schiff oddly refused to release them after he became chairman in 2019. He only released them last week when the White House threatened to do it first.

Now we know why. From the earliest days of the collusion narrative, Mr. Schiff insisted that he had evidence proving the plot. In March 2017 on MSNBC, Mr. Schiff teased that he couldn’t “go into particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now.”

In December 2017 he told CNN that collusion was a fact: “The Russians offered help, the campaign accepted help. The Russians gave help and the President made full use of that help.” In April 2018, Mr. Schiff released his response to Mr. Nunes’s report, stating that its finding of no collusion “was unsupported by the facts and the investigative record.”

None of this was true, and Mr. Schiff knew it. In July 2017, here’s what former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Mr. Schiff and his colleagues: “I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.” Three months later, former Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch agreed that while she’d seen “concerning” information, “I don’t recall anything being briefed up to me.” Former Deputy AG Sally Yates concurred several weeks later: “We were at the fact-gathering stage here, not the conclusion stage.”

The same goes for the FBI agents who started the collusion probe in 2016. Most remarkable, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe admitted the bureau’s reason for opening the case was nonsense. Asked in December 2017 why the FBI obtained a secret surveillance warrant on former Trump aide Carter Page, rather than on George Papadopoulos (whose casual conversation with a foreign diplomat was the catalyst for the probe), Mr. McCabe responded: “Papadopoulos’ comment didn’t particularly indicate that he was the person that had had—that was interacting with the Russians.” No one else was either.

On it went, a parade of former Obama officials who declared under oath they’d seen no evidence of collusion or conspiracy— Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Samantha Power. Interviews with Trump campaign or Administration officials also yielded no collusion evidence. Mr. Schiff had access to these transcripts even as he claimed he had “ample” proof of collusion and wrote his false report.

He’s still making it up. Last week he said the transcripts contain “evidence of the Trump campaign’s efforts to invite, make use of, and cover up Russia’s help in the 2016 presidential election.”

The question we’d ask our friends in the media is when are they going to stop playing the fool by putting him on the air? Mr. Schiff is a powerful figure with access to secrets that the rest of us don’t have and can’t check. He misled the country repeatedly on an issue that consumed American politics.

President Trump often spreads falsehoods and invents facts, but at least he’s paid a price for it in media criticism and public mistrust. An industry of media fact checkers is dedicated to parsing his every word.

AS FOR MR SCHIFF, NO ONE SHOULD EVER BELIEVE ANOTHER WORD HE SAYS.

Edited March 12, 2022 by DKW 86

[icanthearyou 4,463]

1 minute ago, DKW 86 said:

Brother, some folks here and nationally promised dozens of convictions for Collusion, Sedition, Treason, etc. We heard it day after day on every news outlet and on this forum for four years. To this day, not one person was found guilty nor plead guilty to  Collusion, Sedition, Treason, etc even though we heard it was a Smoking Gun Certainty from 1000s of news cast and videos. We actually heard this from Adam Schiff, A Trump Sized Liar if there ever was another....

All the Adam Schiff Transcripts - WSJ

All the Adam Schiff Transcripts

NEWLY RELEASED DCUMENTS SHOW SCHIFF KNEW ALL ALONG THERE WAS NO PROOF OF TRUMP-RUSSIA COLLUSION.

Americans expect that politicians will lie, but sometimes the examples are so brazen that they deserve special notice. Newly released Congressional testimony shows that ADAM SCHIFF SPREAD FALSEHOODS SHAMELESSLY ABOUT RUSSIA AND DONALD TRUMP FOR THREE YEARS AS HIS OWN COMMITTEE GATHERED CONTRARY EVIDENCE. 

The House Intelligence Committee last week released 57 transcripts of interviews it conducted in its investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election. The committee probe started in January 2017 under then-Chair Devin Nunes and concluded in March 2018 with a report finding no evidence that the Trump campaign conspired with the Kremlin. Most of the transcripts were ready for release long ago, but Mr. Schiff oddly refused to release them after he became chairman in 2019. He only released them last week when the White House threatened to do it first.

Now we know why. From the earliest days of the collusion narrative, Mr. Schiff insisted that he had evidence proving the plot. In March 2017 on MSNBC, Mr. Schiff teased that he couldn’t “go into particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now.”

In December 2017 he told CNN that collusion was a fact: “The Russians offered help, the campaign accepted help. The Russians gave help and the President made full use of that help.” In April 2018, Mr. Schiff released his response to Mr. Nunes’s report, stating that its finding of no collusion “was unsupported by the facts and the investigative record.”

None of this was true, and Mr. Schiff knew it. In July 2017, here’s what former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Mr. Schiff and his colleagues: “I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.” Three months later, former Obama Attorney General Loretta Lynch agreed that while she’d seen “concerning” information, “I don’t recall anything being briefed up to me.” Former Deputy AG Sally Yates concurred several weeks later: “We were at the fact-gathering stage here, not the conclusion stage.”

The same goes for the FBI agents who started the collusion probe in 2016. Most remarkable, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe admitted the bureau’s reason for opening the case was nonsense. Asked in December 2017 why the FBI obtained a secret surveillance warrant on former Trump aide Carter Page, rather than on George Papadopoulos (whose casual conversation with a foreign diplomat was the catalyst for the probe), Mr. McCabe responded: “Papadopoulos’ comment didn’t particularly indicate that he was the person that had had—that was interacting with the Russians.” No one else was either.

On it went, a parade of former Obama officials who declared under oath they’d seen no evidence of collusion or conspiracy— Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes, Samantha Power. Interviews with Trump campaign or Administration officials also yielded no collusion evidence. Mr. Schiff had access to these transcripts even as he claimed he had “ample” proof of collusion and wrote his false report.

He’s still making it up. Last week he said the transcripts contain “evidence of the Trump campaign’s efforts to invite, make use of, and cover up Russia’s help in the 2016 presidential election.”

The question we’d ask our friends in the media is when are they going to stop playing the fool by putting him on the air? Mr. Schiff is a powerful figure with access to secrets that the rest of us don’t have and can’t check. He misled the country repeatedly on an issue that consumed American politics.

President Trump often spreads falsehoods and invents facts, but at least he’s paid a price for it in media criticism and public mistrust. An industry of media fact checkers is dedicated to parsing his every word.

AS FOR MR SCHIFF, NO ONE SHOULD EVER BELIEVE ANOTHER WORD HE SAYS.

Okay, Schiff was a true believer.  I remember that.  I remember Democrats getting excited about it. 

Has nothing to do with my post. 

[DKW 86 7,426]

46 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

Okay, Schiff was a true believer.  I remember that.  I remember Democrats getting excited about it. 

Has nothing to do with my post. 

Schiff was just another brick in the wall. He was just the one with a paper trail.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

9 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Schiff was just another brick in the wall. He was just the one with a paper trail.

Yep.  That is really my point.  The real investigations are the ones that matter.  Partisan congressional investigations are okay but,,, the primary purpose is to exploit any/all  political implications of the real investigation (even if they are purely speculative).  That really is the theater.  It is what is popular.  It is what the entertainment news pushes.

I think we generally agree.  I just don't see comparing Schiff to Trump at all.  I would compare him to Trey Gowdy.  Congressmen (who love attention) being political without regard for the best interests of the country.

[homersapien 11,385]

5 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

You do realize that the investigation that mattered was done by Republicans?  You do realize that outside of the narratives of the entertainment news, Russian interference was at the heart of the investigation and, was absolutely necessary?  You do see how so many contacts within a presidential campaign with Russians (not to mention lying about them) was a concern to national security?

The only "hoax" is believing the political cheerleading is all of reality.

Now now, don't interrupt the political narrative with actual facts.

[AUFAN78 3,911]

53 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Now now, don't interrupt the political narrative with actual facts.

No fact offered, but great point Homey. 

[AU9377 4,960]

Years of "investigating" and 1 person indicted for allegedly giving false information to an FBI agent.  That tells the story.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

To this point, the most interesting thing about the Durham investigation is Durham.  He enjoyed a good reputation.  He doesn't seem to care about undermining that reputation.  After being scolded in court last week, it will be interesting to see if he will double down.

Will he protect his reputation as a serious lawyer or, will he take the Ken Starr path?

[DKW 86 7,426]

3 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

To this point, the most interesting thing about the Durham investigation is Durham.  He enjoyed a good reputation.  He doesn't seem to care about undermining that reputation.  After being scolded in court last week, it will be interesting to see if he will double down.

Will he protect his reputation as a serious lawyer or, will he take the Ken Starr path?

Facts be damned....

[icanthearyou 4,463]

52 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Facts be damned....

What do you mean?

[jj3jordan 2,053]

On 3/13/2022 at 11:36 PM, AU9377 said:

Years of "investigating" and 1 person indicted for allegedly giving false information to an FBI agent.  That tells the story.

Yes. The story of corruption at the highest levels. Protecting a corrupt politician who thinks she is above the law, to prevent, heaven forbid, a Republican in the white house.

[DKW 86 7,426]

On 3/13/2022 at 11:36 PM, AU9377 said:

Years of "investigating" and 1 person indicted for allegedly giving false information to an FBI agent.  That tells the story.

And one FBI Agent sacked for lying to the FISA Courts for warrants... That alone should have half the FBI resigned and possibly prosecuted, 

As Strzok said, everything in the FBI is done in full view of everyone on the investigation. 

 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

3 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

And one FBI Agent sacked for lying to the FISA Courts for warrants... That alone should have half the FBI resigned and possibly prosecuted, 

As Strzok said, everything in the FBI is done in full view of everyone on the investigation. 

 

Do you really believe the FBI is corrupt? 

[AU9377 4,960]

9 hours ago, jj3jordan said:

Yes. The story of corruption at the highest levels. Protecting a corrupt politician who thinks she is above the law, to prevent, heaven forbid, a Republican in the white house.

Why can't he find evidence of corruption if there is so much out there?

[DKW 86 7,426]

On 3/15/2022 at 9:17 AM, icanthearyou said:

Do you really believe the FBI is corrupt? 

I don’t know, let’s just sit back and let Durham do his thing. I am not the one asking for anything nor wanting the investigation stopped. 

On 3/15/2022 at 9:18 AM, AU9377 said:

Why can't he find evidence of corruption if there is so much out there?

We looked for years and found pretty much nothing. 

Edited March 17, 2022 by DKW 86

[DKW 86 7,426]

On 3/11/2022 at 11:51 AM, AU9377 said:

He has already surpassed the time that Mueller took investigating the original matter by over a year.

And?. Mueller was by no means the only one screaming RUSSIANS!!!! For four years. 

[AU9377 4,960]

27 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

I don’t know, let’s just sit back and let Durham do his thing. I am not the one asking for anything nor wanting the investigation stopped. 

We looked for rmfoutmr years and found pretty much nothing. 

His thing is clearly doing nothing but generating billable hours.  He is a joke at this point.

[AU9377 4,960]

26 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

And?. Mueller was by no means the only one screaming RUSSIANS!!!! For four years. 

 

26 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

And?. Mueller was by no means the only one screaming RUSSIANS!!!! For four years. 

Is that a crime?

[icanthearyou 4,463]

52 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

I don’t know, let’s just sit back and let Durham do his thing. I am not the one asking for anything nor wanting the investigation stopped. 

We looked for rmfoutmr years and found pretty much nothing. 

I never asked for the Durham investigation to end.  I am only suggesting that to this point, the "smoking guns" have turned out to be fantasy.  Please be more careful.

[icanthearyou 4,463]

53 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

And?. Mueller was by no means the only one screaming RUSSIANS!!!! For four years. 

But the Russians DID attempt to influence the election.  They are a real threat to national security.

Just because you got emotional over the political, rhetorical, entertainment news, doesn't mean we all did.  Your narrative is personal, it is not real.

I would still contend that, if there were anything nefarious going on here, the FBI's Russia investigation would have been what was publicized and, the Clinton investigation buried.  Considering that is the opposite of what happened, I doubt there is anything here but politics.  We will see. 

[jj3jordan 2,053]

3 hours ago, AU9377 said:

Why can't he find evidence of corruption if there is so much out there?

Paying for a fake dossier, sending it public, spying on the campaign, tampering with emails, defrauding the fisa court are all corruption. Not to mention destroying subpoenaed emails bleach bit servers hammering mobile devices, improper safeguarding of classified materials to name a few. All corruption and/or crimes. You people seem to think that because a corrupt fbi director desiring to keep his job decided not to prosecute her ( make no mistake he would have thrown the book at us) that there is no crime or no evidence “found”. The evidence is there. Comey made a decision to risk his integrity because he wanted to keep his job when Hillary was elected.  It was a bad call that backfired on him.  Do you really think Hillary lover Peter Strzok interviewing her for a criminal investigation alone with her and Sheryl mills NOT under oath with no recording and no transcript was legit? I doubt you would accept Mueller and Trump alone in a room not under oath with no recording or transcript as a legit interview. 

 

[icanthearyou 4,463]

8 minutes ago, jj3jordan said:

Paying for a fake dossier, sending it public, spying on the campaign, tampering with emails, defrauding the fisa court are all corruption. Not to mention destroying subpoenaed emails bleach bit servers hammering mobile devices, improper safeguarding of classified materials to name a few. All corruption and/or crimes. You people seem to think that because a corrupt fbi director desiring to keep his job decided not to prosecute her ( make no mistake he would have thrown the book at us) that there is no crime or no evidence “found”. The evidence is there. Comey made a decision to risk his integrity because he wanted to keep his job when Hillary was elected.  It was a bad call that backfired on him.  Do you really think Hillary lover Peter Strzok interviewing her for a criminal investigation alone with her and Sheryl mills NOT under oath with no recording and no transcript was legit? I doubt you would accept Mueller and Trump alone in a room not under oath with no recording or transcript as a legit interview. 

 

This is the critical information Durham needs. 

I really love this one: "Comey made a decision to risk his integrity because he wanted to keep his job when Hillary was elected."

Sure, which is why he publicized the Clinton investigation and, kept the Russian investigation under wraps.  She loves Comey.

[jj3jordan 2,053]

36 minutes ago, icanthearyou said:

This is the critical information Durham needs. 

I really love this one: "Comey made a decision to risk his integrity because he wanted to keep his job when Hillary was elected."

Sure, which is why he publicized the Clinton investigation and, kept the Russian investigation under wraps.  She loves Comey.

He got caught when there were additional emails found at the last minute on somebody else’s laptop. Yes he had to make another choice but it was too late. He had already exonerated here in spite of the evidence. If more came out he would have been exposed big time. So he made his reopen statement followed quickly by closed again. This possibly did more significant damage to Hillary than any Facebook ads purchased by Russians. She did love Comey until then. Then he became just another person to blame for her poorly run campaign.  If he had done the right thing and recommended charges, dropped it in Lynch’s lap, he would have been Scott free and kept his job. But he just couldn’t do it. Another career ruined by fealty to the Clintons.

Make fun if you wish but this is very easy to see.