The Durham Investigation Thread

Wow, if you think what the DNC and Clinton campaign did was nothing, just don’t ever vote again. I’m sure they got your back.

Nah, nothing to see here:

Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch obtained evidence that a computer contractor working under the direction of Hillary Clinton’s legal team destroyed subpoenaed records that the former secretary of state stored on a private email server she originally kept at her New York home, and then lied to investigators about it. Yet no charges were brought against Clinton, her lawyers, or her paid consultant.

1 Like

The Durham investigation didn’t uncover ny major crimes or lay any charges other than two minor ones. He promised to, he had the absolute power to lay charges, but he didn’t. Why? Coz he ain’t got nothin’.

That’s not it, recently filed in the case where the DOJ-NSD is fighting a special master to oversee the documents seized by the DOJ-NSD was this gem.

So in case you missed the moving of the posts, it went from classified information to information marked as classified and now formally classified but declassified by Trump but might still reveal sources and methods.

Which as Durham is concerned relates to Danchenko who is currently being charged with lying to the FBI. But if you had beeen following, which I guess you haven’t you would know after the FBI found out Danchenko’s information for the Steele dossier was crap, they hired him for the next 3 years, presumably to keep a lid on him.

They can’t go after the inside people at FBI and DOJ despite being obviously guilty of very serious crimes without opening a Pandoras box. Sorry if this is news to you.

I’m not even sure they will secure a conviction of Danchenko because it’s clear the FBI knew he was lying just like the lawyer Sussman, they knew, but Durham can’t go after anyone on the inside.

I was reading and wondering why they are trying so hard to suppress what a special Master can see, because I thought everyone already has it figured out, then @MikeN1 posted.

1 Like

It’s the same bs they do when they egg on morons to rouse some rabble.

Another good write up

Trump was a political neophyte and the grizzly old witch took him to task. Doesn’t make it cool or legal. And certainly not a nothing burger. It’s high level fuckery .

Isn’t undermining competitors what 99.9% of campaigns explicitly try to do? Not sure how that’s particularly undemocratic.

Proximity.

Undermining them how?

That’s what the defense of the DOJ is coming down to, it isn’t about nuclear codes like we were first led to believe (and knowing the nuclear status of countries like Iran doesn’t fit under the category of must-be-always-top-secret)…it’s not nuclear codes…so that’s where all the obfuscation entered in deliberately by Democrats and other Deep State operatives, by obfuscating these categories.

But now that’s been cleared up, we’re left with this…all they got now, the single thread their whole defense is hanging on now is that Trumps documents must remain Top Secret because it reveals sources and means. That’s bogus…it’s becoming more and more clear they want stuff classified to save face, to keep their faces free of egg. And Trump doesn’t work that way. He loves putting eggs on faces that are meant to have eggs on them.

What do you mean they can’t go after someone on the inside? You mean Durham or FBI? You don’t think the FBI can investigate someone on the inside? That’s what’s so weird about this whole thing. The FBI knew he was an informant for Russian intelligence back in 2011, but then later they go on to hire him to help out their scheme of spying/accusing Trump of collusion. (But I don’t know if he’s actually on the “inside,” it’s not like he has an office or desk there…he’s just hired as an informant). They knew it was false and they knew Danchenko was giving them false information…but it was all political, they aren’t looking for the truth in this whole sordid affair…it was all about getting Trump from the get-go. Durham certainly went after him and he was indicted and arrested in 2021 for lying to the FBI. But he wasn’t misleading them, the FBI was itself trying to mislead. It’s all about get Trump.

The reason they hired Danchenko after having known that Danchenko was a liar and that the Steele dossier was false and they had to get rid of Steele as an informant…was because they needed a source. That way, they can tell people that they have a source but that’s top secret, we can’t go there, we can’t reveal sources or methods, thereby keeping their narrative going and not admitting they totally messed up. That’s how corrupt Democrats abuse and misuse confidentiality in order to save their arse. That’s what this whole Pandora’s box and uproar is about. We’ve discovered, we get to see just exactly how corruption works with these Democrats…they got caught red-handed and they can’t defend what they’ve done. They knowingly hired a liar, someone you can’t trust so they don’t have to reveal their own embarrassment and having been implicit. But now we know.

1 Like

I read that William Barr appointed John Durham special counsel in October 2020, and that the appointment was made public in December of that year:

Here, as far as I can tell, are the results of almost two years’ investigative work:

Or have I missed something? I mean that question sincerely, because I haven’t been doing a good job of keeping up with Mr. Durham’s investigation.

But I hope no one will be cross with me for being a smart aleck by expressing a sense that, at least so far, the investigation has been rewarding attention and inattention about equally.

I’m personally stumped. I keep thinking, “So, you can just DO that?” And the answer keeps being, yup. No harm, no foul. Don’t make waves.

1 Like

It’s hard to convict someone of lying. Here’s the thing:

Prosecutors argued that Sussmann intentionally lied to Baker by saying he came only as a concerned citizen, and not on behalf of any clients, saying Sussmann hid his ties to Democrats to “manipulate the FBI” and gin up an “October surprise” to help Clinton win.
In Sussmann’s telling, at the peak of Russia’s attack on the 2016 election, he went to the FBI with a good-faith tip, which originated from reputable cyber experts that he represented. He separately worked on Clinton’s behalf to peddle that unverified tip to the press, generating some coverage. He didn’t try to dupe Baker or hide his political ties, which were well-known at the FBI.

Do you believe he really was doing this in good faith and not on behalf of the Clinton campaign? I don’t.

Also, the FBI obviously knew he worked for the Clintons, so how could they act as if it were a good-faith tip? Interestingly, I’ve never seen it stated openly that they knew about his ties, but they obviously would have anyway.

It turned out to be concocted bullshit. Do you believe Sussman and his bosses were unaware of that? Otherwise you have to believe that it was just a good faith tip about concocted bullshit that just happened to implicate the Clinton’s election opponent by incorrectly tying him to the Russians. And this was not the only such effort Sussman was involved in.

3 Likes

I don’t think you missed anything except people watching closely drew the conclusion a year or two back that Durham wasn’t going to hold anybody in the inside to account, by that I mean the DOJ and FBI as well as others.

We can speculate on all kind of reasons why, but no one expected great things from Durham for a long time other than to give the impression of the DOJ/FBI doing their job, mistakes were made that sort of thing people like Sussman and Danchenko duped them (they didn’t).

2 Likes

The DC bar? They’re no doubt as full of democrats as the whole population of the district is. So here you have someone who is guilty as sin and the DC bar usually debars such persons with felonies, but in this case, it was for a good cause, to get rid of Trump and to help the Democrats. This is hardly a litmus test of not finding corruption.

As for Sussman, the FBI is itself complicit in corruption, so they are knowingly hiring corrupt people like Danchenko and Sussman. So it is revealing that the FBI already knew that Sussman was tied to the Democrats and Hillary (and didn’t really need to be “hid”). Under normal circumstances that would be a tainting allegation, but to use that to let Sussman off the hook just taints the FBI all the more, making them look even worse. Again, hardly evidence that clears the FBI, but rather implicates them more.

2 Likes

I’d like to correct an error in a post I made earlier, with apologies:

This is apparently from a letter dated December 1, 2020, from then-Attorney General William Barr to Senators Lindsey Graham and Dianne Feinstein, and to Representatives Jerrold Nadler and Jim Jordan:

So my earlier post should have read:

This is from more than four years ago:

Kimberly A. Strassel, “About That FBI ‘Source’: Did the bureau engage in outright spying against the 2016 Trump campaign?” Wall Street Journal, May 10, 2018

These folks don’t seem to mind it too much if they look bad, because, as has been said, to their thinking it is apparently for a good cause.

Nonetheless, I try not to have a passion for, or take pleasure in, the idea of someone being locked up in a cage for a long time, because I don’t think that sort of passion or pleasure is good for my psyche, and also because I’m no saint myself.

I don’t know what should be done about all this, but I’m going to try very hard not to get too excited about it.

Edited to add: I think Mr. Durham has a difficult job.

Well, it took Trump to help us discover the existence of the Deep State. But now it’s the Deep State discovering itself by it’s incorrigible impulse to get Trump before Trump gets them. It’s their self-survival instincts kicking in, but not so sure they are worth surviving.

Wake me up in December when they make their Dramatic! Revealing! report. (I don’t say when they lay any indictments, because that will roughly be about never.)