Durham testifies that the FBI ignored Hillary Clinton plan to link Trump to Russia

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/durham-testifies-fbi-ignored-hillary-clinton-plan-link-trump-russia

So the deniers will deny, but the truth is out there for honest, sentient, people who see the problems with government law enforcement hooking up with the ruling political party.
The question is "What do we want to do about it? Is the nation really on board with ending electoral choice?"

 

So the FBI ignored Hillary's plan to tell the truth? How dare they!

 

The FBI ignored Hillary, Obama, Biden and all the intel plan to link Trump to Russia.

 

Your comment needs to sit out there in the bright sun and rot for awhile.

 

sounds like comey and trump were kind of cozy until it was time for comey to get payback.

@19Crib you seem to approve of trump's weaponization of the fbi in 2016. i'm tired of hearing you guys whine about it.

 

No made up story is too silly for the Hillary campaign and the FBI to use against Trump. Too bad it didn't work and Clinton lost anyway. Hookers peeing on Trump's hotel bed in Russia? Lol!

 

Durham: You better believe Obama, Biden, and Comey knew that this was a Hillary dirty trick

It was a pretense by Obama/Biden/Clinton to misuse terrorism powers against a political opponent and rig and election. The Federal Govermment has proven that they cannot be trusted not to use these powers against political opponents rather than foreign threats.

 

CyberNinjas, Ray Epps, etc., etc., etc. Time and time again. Fake media gets Trump's weird worshipers all wee wee'd up, and then

​

Trumpers for years pleasured themselves with their lurid fantasies of John Henry Durham

Durham investigation into origins of 2016 Trump campaign surveillance expands its scope
BREAKING: Durham Criminal Investigation Zeros In On Brennan
Barr says familiar names among those in Durham probe, calls findings 'very troubling'
Special Counsel John Durham expanding team, making 'excellent progress'
Durham Grand Jury Indicts Clinton-Linked Attorney Involved in Russia Probe
Patel predicts Durham probe will lead to indictments 'at the top' in coming months
Durham 'fully understands' what took place, looking to 'hold people accountable'
Durham probe has 'accelerated,' with more people 'cooperating,' coming before grand jury
11 implications of Durham probe threaten to undermine Biden
Durham bombshell: Prosecutor unveils smoking gun FBI text message, 'joint venture' to smear Trump
Former DNI Expects More Indictments From Durham
Durham has proof Fusion GPS coordinated disinformation with liberal media
Durham: Clinton Campaign Fed Mainstream Media 'Unverified Derogatory' Information About Trump
New Durham bombshell: FBI paid Russian accused of lying as a confidential informant against Trump
Durham..Igor Danchenko was paid by FBI as confidential human source..Russian intel
​

Hyper-partisan hysteria aside, the bottom line is that Durham, after a three-and-half year, $40 million year probe, was able to contrive nothing of substance.

Trump's promised 'Crime of the Century' fizzles in the end.


"CRIME OF THE CENTURY!"​

Despite Trump's "crime of the century!" bullshit, the record shows that Durham indicted only three men on minor charges. One was an FBI lawyer who pleaded guilty to altering an email that was included in a June 2017 application for a surveillance warrant on a former Trump campaign aide; he was sentenced to probation.

The other two men were tried and acquitted. In both trials, Durham alleged the defendants had deceived the FBI but did not allege the FBI corruptly targeted Trump.

The mega-flatulence that perfumed the fiasco lingers and permeates Trumpery, but the record of one probation and two acquittals is undeniable.

By contrast, Robert Mueller, another Republican Special Counsel appointed by the Trump Justice Department, indicted, had convicted or gotten guilty pleas from 34 people and three companies, including top advisers to Trump, Russian spies and hackers with ties to the Kremlin.

 

""By contrast, Robert Mueller, another Republican Special Counsel appointed by the Trump Justice Department, indicted, had convicted or gotten guilty pleas from 34 people and three companies, including top advisers to Trump, Russian spies and hackers with ties to the Kremlin.""

And not one conviction for colluding with the Russian GOVERNMENT...


https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/press-release/file/967231/download

 

Russia's interference in the 2016 U.S.presidential election to help Trump and hurt Clinton did not require direct collaboration.

I never suggested that it did.

 

Because it never happened.

 

Yeah, I can see your point of view quite clearly.

 

Durham’s chased a theory for years and came up empty. His report offered nothing of value, rehashed events already known, and made no recommendations. The later an acknowledgment the investigation was a waste of time and resources.

Unfortunately unfounded allegations is all that’s necessary to keep conspiracy theorists heart’s a flutter. A sad state of affairs.

 

From the clips I saw of the hearing, the Democrats tore Durham to shreds. Durham confirmed the truth of Mueller's main finding, that Russia did intervene, for Donald Trump's benefit. Durham admitted, all the convictions that came, due to Mueller's investigation. Durham noted the difference in standard between what was provable in court (as those things for which the DOJ got convictions against senior Trump officials), versus those things that might be indicated, but which there was less than enough evidence to prove in court. So, Rep. Adam Schiff concluded, the only difference between Durham's investigation & Mueller's, was that Durham tried to prosecute those things which lacked sufficient evidence and, in doing so, failed to secure convictions.




It doesn't sound any better for Durham, on FOX:
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6329854004112#

 

Adam Schifff was wrong in world history. The fact of the matter is, whether the Russians thought or attempted to help Trump or not that was never relevant. The relevancy, was the claim of collaboration between the Trump Campaign and the Russians. And that never bore out as factual, no matter how much Schhiff wishes it were so.

 

Ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort admits sharing info with Russians

Mr Manafort has previously denied sharing polling data with suspected Russian spy Konstantin Kilimnik

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ul-manafort-russia-polling-data-b2140727.html

Senate committee concludes Russia used Manafort, WikiLeaks to boost Trump in 2016

Russia used Republican political operative Paul Manafort and the WikiLeaks website to try to help now-U.S. President Donald Trump win the 2016 election, a Republican-led Senate committee said in its final review of the matter on Tuesday.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ikileaks-to-boost-trump-in-2016-idUSKCN25E1US

G.O.P.-Led Senate Panel Details Ties Between 2016 Trump Campaign and Russia

A nearly 1,000-page report confirmed the special counsel’s findings at a moment when President Trump’s allies have sought to undermine that inquiry.

It provided a bipartisan Senate imprimatur for an extraordinary set of facts: The Russian government disrupted an American election to help Mr. Trump become president, Russian intelligence services viewed members of the Trump campaign as easily manipulated, and some of Mr. Trump’s advisers were eager for the help from an American adversary.

...But the report showed extensive evidence of contacts between Trump campaign advisers and people tied to the Kremlin — including a longstanding associate of the onetime Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Konstantin V. Kilimnik, whom the report identified as a “Russian intelligence officer.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/politics/senate-intelligence-russian-interference-report.html

The Russia Meeting at Trump Tower
Was to Discuss Adoption. Then It
Wasn’t. How Accounts Have Shifted.

How the Trump team’s story of
the meeting changed over time:

First, it was to discuss adoption.July 8, 2017


Then, to see someone who ‘might have information helpful to the campaign.’July 9, 2017

After The Times informed Donald Trump Jr. that it was preparing an article that would say the meeting also involved a discussion of potentially compromising material on Mrs. Clinton, he issued another statement flicking at that possibility.

Later, to obtain information about an opponent.July 17, 2017

Mr. Trump defended the meeting in a tweet, saying “Most politicians would have gone to a meeting like the one Don jr attended in order to get info on an opponent. That's politics!” About a week earlier, emails between Donald Trump Jr. and Rob Goldstone, a British music producer and publicist who helped broker the gathering, had come to light. Those emails made it clear that the meeting was to provide the Trump campaign with damaging information on Mrs. Clinton as part of a Russian government effort to support his father.

Now, explicitly to ‘get information on an opponent which is totally legal and done all the time in politics.’ August 5, 2018

In a tweet, Mr. Trump solidified that the primary purpose of the meeting was to obtain political dirt on Mrs. Clinton. He also continued to claim that his son and the campaign did nothing wrong because they did not ultimately receive damaging materials about Mrs. Clinton.


But some legal experts say that by simply taking the meeting, Donald Trump Jr. broke the law: It is illegal for a campaign to accept help from a foreign individual or government.

Also in question is the role Mr. Trump played in writing his son’s initial statement saying that the meeting was focused on adoption. Like the content of the meeting, the official word on the president’s involvement in the response has continued to shift.

How the story of Mr. Trump’s involvement
in the response changed over time:
First, the team said Mr. Trump was not involved.

July 12, 2017


Jay Sekulow, one of the president’s lawyers, said of the initial statement Donald Trump Jr. released about the meeting: “I wasn’t involved in the statement drafting at all, nor was the president.”

Then, it said he weighed in but did not dictate the statement.Aug. 1, 2017

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary: “The president weighed in, as any father would, based on the limited information that he had. He certainly didn’t dictate.”

Then, he dictated it.

Jan. 29, 2018
John M. Dowd and Mr. Sekulow, the president’s lawyers at the time:

“The President dictated a short but accurate response to The New York Times article on behalf of his son, Donald Trump Jr.”

Still, the president maintains he did not know about the meeting.

Aug. 5, 2018

In his Sunday tweet, Trump reiterated that he had no advance knowledge of the meeting.

The shifting accounts are not limited to the president and his son. Several of the other people in the room at Trump Tower have been less than forthright:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/06/us/politics/trump-tower-russia-meeting.html

 

Mueller noted that, just because he could not establish certain facts, did not mean that there wasn't evidence of those facts. There certainly were some connections between the Trump campaign & Russia, as for example the meeting that Donald Trump Jr. held with Representatives of Russia, purporting to have dirt on Hillary Clinton.

But why do you imply that Schiff ever prosecuted Trump for these connections? Are you unaware of the basis for Trump's first impeachment? It was not "Russian collusion." It was Trump's attempted extortion of a foreign leader (Volodymyr Zalenskyy) to force him to open a sham investigation into Trump's political rival, Joe Biden, or face a slow walking of the military aid, approved by Congress.



Here is more of today's show:

 

A plan?
That was never put into action?
So words written or recorded somewhere that never happened?

Is that a crime?
Are thoughts a crime in trumplandia?

 

And still no conspiracy between the Trump Campaign and the Russians. No matter how many 'ties', 'people they know' or meetings they took.

It's REALLY simple. Either there was a conspiracy or there wasn't, and in Mueller's own words he couldn't prove one. Nothing stops the conspiracy believers. It's bigfoot 2.0

 

Nope

“On the facts here, the government would unlikely be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the June 9 meeting participants had general knowledge that their conduct was unlawful," the report reads. "The investigation has not developed evidence that the participants in the meeting were familiar with the foreign-contribution ban or the application of federal law to the relevant factual context. The government does not have strong evidence of surreptitious behavior or efforts at concealment at the time of the June 9 meeting."

Mueller said in his report that investigators did not believe they could prove Trump Jr. acted "willfully"

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...-trump-knew-about-trump-tower-meeting-n995816

 

Again, Trump was a criminal excluding any allegations of Russian collusion. Neither of his impeachments, had anything to do with Russia-- where have you been?

It is those on the Right, who will not surrender their death grip on their fantasy of some criminality on the part of Hillary Clinton, and of those within the government, itself; the so called "deep state." No proof of these things, either. Yet Durham had the full power to go after these people, if he had found any evidence.

 

He couldn't prove that a crime was committed. That's the end of it. That should've been the end of it as early as September '17. For every contact, meeting, planned meeting, etc no criminal activity occurred or could be proven to have occurred.

That's all that needed to be written. We don't need caveats and excuses, just the facts.

 

that may be a "silly made up story," but given trump''s defective mentality and low morals, does it really sound impossible?

 

The order for Special Counsel Mueller were two-fold. 1) To investigate the ties between the Trump Campaign and the Russians. And as identified and confessed by the Mueller report, these ties, to the extent that they might've been criminal were not found so. And only 2)to investigate anything else as it relates to the said case.

#2 was used really for the vast majority of Counsel's work, since #1 was answered in September '17. Mueller was asked to find big foot, and as I've said consistently for six years now, I only care about big foot. I don't care about anything else, we were told the conspiracy of the century. Proving or disproving the conspiracy was essential, bagging Manafort for tax evasion, less so.

And since the conspiracy has been disproven(ties or not withstanding) it is a tremendous intelligence failure. It's a failure that directly resulted in the chaos of the administration, and who knows what would've happened if it didn't exist in the first place.

Not even the Democrats on the panel could contest the intelligence failure, since it was right in their face.

 

The Durham Report = Trump/Ultra MAGA sponsored propaganda = A lame Doge = ETTD.