Reply With Quote
NYT and WAPO won Pulitzer prizes for reporting the bull . Congrats
NYT and WAPO won Pulitzer prizes for reporting the bull . Congrats
"Intelligence" agents of said bull are now MSM "contributors". Congrats
At least, no one will be held accountable. Congrats
wow 5 straight posts. quite the blender
I didn't understand the high-fiving over this damning report. The lack of accountability?
for Durham whining about coming up empty?
it's all over but the crying.
Nice meltdown.
What part is actually damning, Darrin?
Show us the quotes since you absolutely read the entire thing and are ready to produce your narrative like you did with the Allen shooting.
Hard not to feel sorry for the re s that ate this up...
Trump says Durham probe exposing 'the crime of the century,' predicts it's 'just the beginning'
Trump says Durham 'coming up with things far bigger than anybody thought possible'
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...just-beginning
Trump succeeded in one big way:
he committed treason with our #1 enemy…
did it right in front of our eyes and ears…
the evidence and investigations confirmed this treason…
trump repeated his lie that it was all a hoax- yes- everything we saw with our own eyes and heard w/our own ears
just did not happen and instead- it was a deep state that concocted the whole thing
35 percent morons were firmly brainwashed and are such gigantic snowflake white supremacists - that they assisted trump in the spreading of his ridiculous lie
the other 65 percent were just wore down and stopped caring
and here we are- a traitor gets away with treason because of laziness by the majority of usa citizens
bUt ThE iNvEsTiGaTiOn wAs PrOpErLy pReDiCaTeD.
I thought you of all people would have had the balls after reading the report to at least admit there never should have been an investigation...but no, you are just like the rest of the pathetic hacks here.
Two guys looked at the same things and reached different conclusions. Who was more of partisan actor?
Coming up empty? L O ing L.for Durham whining about coming up empty?
it's all over but the crying.
He just exposed election interference run by our own government against a candidate and then exposed an investigation that had no basis in even being started that was meant to overthrow a duly elected President and was run by our own politically biased FBI.
Coming up empty. You are ing pathetic.
They actually didn't look at the same things as a Special Counsel has the full power and independent authority to exercise all
investigative and prosecutorial functions of any United States Attorney. Inspector Generals are limited when compared to a Special Counsel. But you already know this.
You are no different than the rest of the pathetic hacks here...it's a shame I had you pegged differently.
Damn despite a greater scope to prosecute he came up with no convictions. Meanwhile Horowitz only had power to make what, a criminal referral and that wound up getting a guilty plea.
they didn’t have identical scopes but both reached conclusions about whether the investigation was properly started.
It was a coordinated attack on our democracy orchestrated by our principal federal law enforcement agency and approved by the highest offices in our government.
Yes but slowly, as the internets is nonexistent, people say.
I'm not talking about having a greater scope to prosecute I'm talking about greater access to evidence and ability to compel testimony and why one conclusion holds greater weight over the other.
It's sad watching you try and spin this I thought you were better than this.
so like, where specifically does the Durham Report say this?
Remember when I told you I'd leave the board if you ever found any evidence of me saying this and you shut the up, produced nothing, and folded
Sure, welsher, sure.Remember when I told you I'd leave the board if you ever found any evidence of me saying this and you shut the up, produced nothing, and folded
You proved to everyone you were in Korea.
The only thing he didn't say was that it was meant to overthrow a duly elected President, that was inferred. The rest was all laid out in the report, which it's obvious you haven't read by your comments.
Me being in Korea has nothing to do with quotes you claim were written on this message board. Go find those quotes or fold again .Sure, welsher, sure.
You proved to everyone you were in Korea.
Why the Durham Report Matters to Democracy
It is a damning account of the corruption of the FBI and its accomplices.
Two special counsels, several inspector general reports and six years later, the country finally has a more complete account of the FBI’s Russia collusion probe of the 2016 Donald Trump campaign. Special counsel John Durham’s final report makes clear that a partisan FBI became a funnel for disinformation from the Hillary Clinton campaign through a secret investigation the bureau never should have launched.
The 306-page Durham report released Monday afternoon is far more comprehensive than anything issued by original special counsel Robert Mueller. Mr. Durham had already unfurled some of the narrative with his prosecutions of Russian national Igor Danchenko and Democratic lawyer Michael Sussmann. He lost those cases, though the indictments laid out how the Clinton campaign used foreign nationals, an oppo-research outfit, and political insiders to feed the FBI and the media lies about Trump collusion.
The Durham report gives a fuller picture of the FBI’s complicity under former director James Comey and deputy Andrew McCabe. It scores an FBI that “failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law.” Here are some of the specific findings:
• No basis for investigation. The FBI lacked “any actual evidence of collusion” between the Trump campaign and Russia when it violated its standards and jumped over several steps to initiate a full investigation, including probes into four members of the Trump campaign.
The pretext for the probe—a random conversation between unpaid Trump adviser George Papadopoulos and an Australian diplomat—was so flimsy that FBI agents complained it was “thin” and British intelligence was incredulous. The FBI opened the probe without doing interviews, using any “standard analytical tools,” or conducting intelligence reviews—which would have shown that not a single U.S. agency had evidence of collusion.
• Bias. The Durham report makes clear that partisan hostility played a role in the probe. The report cites a “clear predisposition” to investigate based on a “prejudice against Trump” and “pronounced hostile feelings” by key investigators, including former agent Peter Strzok, and former FBI attorneys Lisa Page and Kevin Clinesmith.
• Double standards. The report lays out several instances in which the FBI was concerned that agents of foreign governments were seeking influence by donating to the Clinton campaign or the Clinton Foundation. Yet in one case in 2014 the FBI dawdled over obtaining a warrant from the secret FISA court because—according to an agent—“[T]hey were pretty ‘tippy-toeing’ around HRC because there was a chance she would be the next President” and the FBI was concerned about interfering with a coming presidential campaign.
The FBI gave a Clinton representative a “defensive briefing” about the risks of foreign actors. Mr. Trump received no such briefing.
• Willful ignorance. The report lays out numerous examples of the FBI ignoring evidence that it was being used by the Clinton campaign to execute a political dirty trick. This included intelligence the government received in July 2016 alleging that Mrs. Clinton had approved “a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security services.”
Former CIA director John Brennan briefed this material to President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Mr. Comey, yet the FBI ignored it. It did the same when it learned that collusion dossier author Christopher Steele was working for the Clinton campaign and that Mr. Steele and oppo-research team Fusion GPS were spreading disinformation to the press. And it ignored exculpatory statements made by Messrs. Page and Papadopoulos in secret FBI recordings.
• Russian disinformation. The report says that two members of Russia’s intelligence service “were aware of Steele’s election investigation in early July 2016”—when the former spook first contacted the FBI with his dossier—and that as a result his sources may have been “compromised.” This means the FBI probe that disrupted American politics for three years may have begun as a Russian intelligence operation.
***
All of this is an indictment of officials who were supposed to supervise the FBI, whose director reports to the Attorney General. Where were Ms. Lynch and her deputy, Sally Yates? The report notes that Deputy Assistant AG Stuart Evans raised concerns with the investigation, but the Comey FBI snubbed him, and higher-ups at the Justice Department ducked their duty.
The press corps was also an all-too-willing accomplice to the collusion con, yet there has been little to no outrage or even self-reflection at having been played for dupes. Most coverage largely dismisses the Durham report because no one new was indicted. The press performance in the collusion story has done untold damage to its credibility, and it’s a major reason that much of the country believes nothing it reads or hears about Donald Trump.
The Durham team deserves credit for not engaging in leaks, innuendo or politicized actions—precisely the FBI behavior it is criticizing. The report notes that if the findings “leave some with the impression that injustices or misconduct have gone unaddressed, it is not because the Office concluded that no such injustices or misconduct occurred,” but rather that “the law does not always make a person’s bad judgment, even horribly bad judgement” a crime.
The FBI responded to the report by claiming it has already “implemented dozens of corrective actions” that, if in place in 2016, would have “prevented” this mess. Mr. Durham appears to have predicted this shabby evasion, and his report provides a powerful retort. Its conclusion notes that it isn’t recommending “wholesale changes” in guidelines or policies, because the FBI ability to fulfill its responsibilities “comes down to the integrity of the people who take an oath . . . As such, the answer is not the creation of new rules but a renewed fidelity to the old,” namely the FBI’s guiding principles of “Fidelity, Bravery and Integrity.”
The Russia collusion fabrication and deceptive sale to the public is a travesty that shouldn’t be forgotten. That Washington’s establishment refuses to acknowledge its role in this deceit is one reason so many Americans don’t trust public ins utions. It will take years for honest public servants to undo the damage, but the Durham accounting is a start.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/john-du...nzp0djm9jss66p
First you prove you were in Korea and not hiding as Korea has great internet.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
