17 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

This sounds very much like the autocratic moves the Biden administration made when they tried to set up a ministry of truth to check people were following official narratives. Of course, as we know, this ministry of disinformation fell apart because the boss was famously shown to have spread disinformation herself on several occasions. 

 

"House Democrats on Wednesday rejected a Republican attempt to investigate the establishment of the controversial "Disinformation Governance Board" at the Department of Homeland Security.

The board was created to fight online disinformation that DHS said could affect the 2022 midterm elections. Backlash against the idea grew more intense after it was learned that DHS hired Nina Jankowicz as the board’s executive director. 

Jankowicz supported the now-debunked theory that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the White House in 2016 and called the Hunter Biden laptop story "disinformation."

https://www.foxnews.com/us/democrats-reject-gop-inquiry-into-dhs-disinformation-board

 

I am wondering if you yourself Larry have ever been the victim of misinformation? 

“I am wondering if you yourself Larry have ever been the victim of misinformation? ”

 

He says, immediately after linking to to FOX ‘News’.

17 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

This sounds very much like the autocratic moves the Biden administration made when they tried to set up a ministry of truth to check people were following official narratives. Of course, as we know, this ministry of disinformation fell apart because the boss was famously shown to have spread disinformation herself on several occasions. 

 

"House Democrats on Wednesday rejected a Republican attempt to investigate the establishment of the controversial "Disinformation Governance Board" at the Department of Homeland Security.

The board was created to fight online disinformation that DHS said could affect the 2022 midterm elections. Backlash against the idea grew more intense after it was learned that DHS hired Nina Jankowicz as the board’s executive director. 

Jankowicz supported the now-debunked theory that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the White House in 2016 and called the Hunter Biden laptop story "disinformation."

https://www.foxnews.com/us/democrats-reject-gop-inquiry-into-dhs-disinformation-board

 

I am wondering if you yourself Larry have ever been the victim of misinformation? 

Why is the word 'Durhan' or anything else related to the topic not mentioned in your post?

Btw, it has been proven amongst others by a republican investigation the Trump campaign colluded with Russians.

As for Russia, it might be informative to read the unredacted Mueller Report.

https://archive.org/details/MuellerReportVolume1Searchable/Mueller Report Volume 1 Searchable/

 

 

Edited September 16, 20223 yr by bendejo

On 9/15/2022 at 7:01 PM, SunnyinBangrak said:

This sounds very much like the autocratic moves the Biden administration made when they tried to set up a ministry of truth to check people were following official narratives. Of course, as we know, this ministry of disinformation fell apart because the boss was famously shown to have spread disinformation herself on several occasions. 

 

"House Democrats on Wednesday rejected a Republican attempt to investigate the establishment of the controversial "Disinformation Governance Board" at the Department of Homeland Security.

The board was created to fight online disinformation that DHS said could affect the 2022 midterm elections. Backlash against the idea grew more intense after it was learned that DHS hired Nina Jankowicz as the board’s executive director. 

Jankowicz supported the now-debunked theory that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to win the White House in 2016 and called the Hunter Biden laptop story "disinformation."

https://www.foxnews.com/us/democrats-reject-gop-inquiry-into-dhs-disinformation-board

 

I am wondering if you yourself Larry have ever been the victim of misinformation? 

Yes quite often after reading your posts

A post with a video from an unapproved YouTube source has been removed:

 

18. Social media content is acceptable in most forums. However in factual areas such as but not limited to news, current affairs and health topics, social media cannot be used unless it is from a credible news media source or a government agency, and must include a link to the original source. In some circumstances a moderator may relax this rule and this will be determined on a case by case basis. If this rule is relaxed a moderator will post a public notice explaining the limit and scope of the relaxation.

On 9/15/2022 at 4:51 AM, candide said:

What a waste of time and money for nothing. 3 years and $4 million spent for a lame conspiracy theory.

Are you talking about the Russia investigation on Trump? That was IMO a complete waste of millions and didn't get rid of him, LOL.

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Are you talking about the Russia investigation on Trump? That was IMO a complete waste of millions and didn't get rid of him, LOL.

The Russia investigation was not particularly targeting Trump. The Russian interference has been comfirmed and some people have been convicted (and pardoned by Trump for some of them).

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/breakdown-indictments-cases-muellers-probe/story?id=61219489

 

A cost–benefit analysis of the investigation shows a net benefit for the government, with far more income than expenses.

By December 2018, the investigation had cost approximately $32 million[149] but gained approximately $48 million. More than half of the cost of the investigation was for personnel compensation and benefits. The gains were accrued primarily by uncovering unpaid taxes by targets in the investigation, seizing assets, and collecting fines

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017–2019)#:~:text=Paul Manafort%2C former Trump campaign,former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich.

Edited September 18, 20223 yr by candide

So, how strong is the government's case against Danchenko, the third and final defendant? Maybe not very:

 

Durham target heading to trial as probe winds down

A federal judge on Thursday rejected Trump-Russia dossier source Igor Danchenko’s motion to dismiss the charges that Durham indicted him on in November 2021, which include five counts of lying to the FBI...

Judge Anthony Trenga for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia said that while the decision was an “extremely close call,” he would not wipe out the charges against Danchenko because the government overcame the motion to dismiss. It will now be up to a jury to decide whether a crime was committed beyond a reasonable doubt when Danchenko’s trial begins on Oct. 11.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/29/durham-trial-probe-trump-00059552

What a waste of time and money for nothing. (3 years and $4 million spent). A witch hunt launched to please Trump.

And the blows against Durham keep on coming

Judge says Durham can't use Danchenko's alleged Russian intelligence links at trial

The judge overseeing the case against Igor Danchenko dealt a series of blows to special counsel John Durham, including ruling he could not use as evidence details from the FBI’s prior counterintelligence investigation into the main source for British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s discredited dossier.

The Tuesday evening ruling by Judge Anthony Trenga followed a lengthy effort by Durham to use a pile of evidence about the Russian-born lawyer, including his alleged links to Russian intelligence, during the trial set to begin next Tuesday.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/judge-durham-cant-use-danchenko-russian-intel-links-trial

 

It's clear that when a prosecutor uses a kitchen-sink approach he's got a weak case. He tried the same thing with Sussman and his case was extremely unpersuasive to that jury.

I am still of the opinion that all this stuff associated with the Mueller Report is buried away,  like Godzilla at the bottom of the sea, and at some point will re-emerge, much to the chagrin of Bill Barr and the rest of the orange cadre.  Of all the legal charges piling up against the former president, this could emerge as the gasoline on the embers.

Do bear in mind that the two impeachments offered no vindication, merely that his party did not punish him.  The DOJ could still bring cases for those things.

 

 

Trial is still not going so well....

 

Durham rebukes his own witness and slams FBI’s Russia probe after trial setbacks

 

"The final expected trial of special counsel John Durham’s probe took an unexpected turn Wednesday, with Durham grilling and rebuking his own witness after the witness seemed to bolster the defense of Igor Danchenko, a key Steele dossier source."

 

After trial setbacks, Durham rebukes his own witness and slams FBI's Russia probe | CNN Politics

 

Durham says Steele dossier source lied. But the FBI long valued him. - The Washington Post (googleusercontent.com)

“Had the bureau looked more critically at Christopher Steele’s information to begin with, there would have been no investigation of the Trump campaign. Had Mr. Mueller, during his turn as special counsel, examined the source of the allegations, his inquiry would have ended there. According to the grand jury’s indictment of Mr. Danchenko, the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team realized early on that he was Mr. Steele’s “primary subsource” for the dossier”.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-fbi-lets-its-informants-mislead-it-mueller-durham-russia-chs-joffe-server-dossier-11665581433

 

Had many Trump hating human sources at the doj/fbi that never confirmed allegations   before they got a fisa ! They even offered the trump hater once foreign agent Steele 1 million dollars to substantiate info , he couldn’t. 
Looking back on this and HC team feeding into the frenzy with Russia disinformation that Trump was compromised by vlad ,i like to see the integrity taken out of their slogan  Fidelity bravery…

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/igor-danchenko-trial-durham-hammers-fbi-over-lack-corroboration-steele-dossier-used-fisa-warrant 

 

Nov 8 cant cone fast enough.Patiently waiting.

37 minutes ago, riclag said:

“Had the bureau looked more critically at Christopher Steele’s information to begin with, there would have been no investigation of the Trump campaign. Had Mr. Mueller, during his turn as special counsel, examined the source of the allegations, his inquiry would have ended there. According to the grand jury’s indictment of Mr. Danchenko, the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team realized early on that he was Mr. Steele’s “primary subsource” for the dossier”.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-fbi-lets-its-informants-mislead-it-mueller-durham-russia-chs-joffe-server-dossier-11665581433

 

Had many Trump hating human sources at the doj/fbi that never confirmed allegations   before they got a fisa ! They even offered the trump hater once foreign agent Steele 1 million dollars to substantiate info , he couldn’t. 
Looking back on this and HC team feeding into the frenzy with Russia disinformation that Trump was compromised by vlad ,i like to see the integrity taken out of their slogan  Fidelity bravery…

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/igor-danchenko-trial-durham-hammers-fbi-over-lack-corroboration-steele-dossier-used-fisa-warrant 

 

Nov 8 cant cone fast enough.Patiently waiting.

Why wait? Nothing prevents Durham to further investigate it.

1 hour ago, riclag said:

“Had the bureau looked more critically at Christopher Steele’s information to begin with, there would have been no investigation of the Trump campaign. Had Mr. Mueller, during his turn as special counsel, examined the source of the allegations, his inquiry would have ended there. According to the grand jury’s indictment of Mr. Danchenko, the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team realized early on that he was Mr. Steele’s “primary subsource” for the dossier”.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-fbi-lets-its-informants-mislead-it-mueller-durham-russia-chs-joffe-server-dossier-11665581433

 

Had many Trump hating human sources at the doj/fbi that never confirmed allegations   before they got a fisa ! They even offered the trump hater once foreign agent Steele 1 million dollars to substantiate info , he couldn’t. 
Looking back on this and HC team feeding into the frenzy with Russia disinformation that Trump was compromised by vlad ,i like to see the integrity taken out of their slogan  Fidelity bravery…

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/igor-danchenko-trial-durham-hammers-fbi-over-lack-corroboration-steele-dossier-used-fisa-warrant 

 

Nov 8 cant cone fast enough.Patiently waiting.

These passages are based on a lie. As the Inspector General of the Justice Dept confirmed, the investigation was not initiated or based on the Steele Dossier. 

As for the investigation being based on Trump hating human sources, that is again a falsehood.

As for offering Steele 1 million dollars, Steele explicitly noted that in his his report that it contained unconfirmed rumors and chatter. 

And finally, on the matter of whether Trump collaborated with the Russians, Mueller in his report listed 10 possible counts of obstruction of justice violations including witness tampering in the case of Manafort, a massive tax dodger whom Trump pardoned after giving out hints that he would do just that. There has never been a President who pardoned so many persons who might have been potential witnesses against him. The power of the pardon was granted to Presidents in order for them to undo injustices, not to create them.

And it looks like Durham's case against Danchenko isn't going well at all as LosLobo's post with links shows..

Keep in mind that when Barr launched the Durham investigation, after a previous one went nowhere, he and Durham were both insinuating that the Justice Dept had maliciously investigated Trump. So far one very low level line lawyer was convicted on a minor charge based on evidence brought by IG Horowitz. Durham's first prosecution failed big time. So far, it doesn't like good for the current one either.

And it's just weird that you think a House and/or Senate committee are going to find out things that Durham couldn't.

 

Edited October 14, 20223 yr by placeholder

2 hours ago, placeholder said:

These passages are based on a lie. As the Inspector General of the Justice Dept confirmed, the investigation was not initiated or based on the Steele Dossier. 

As for the investigation being based on Trump hating human sources, that is again a falsehood.

As for offering Steele 1 million dollars, Steele explicitly noted that in his his report that it contained unconfirmed rumors and chatter. 

And finally, on the matter of whether Trump collaborated with the Russians, Mueller in his report listed 10 possible counts of obstruction of justice violations including witness tampering in the case of Manafort, a massive tax dodger whom Trump pardoned after giving out hints that he would do just that. There has never been a President who pardoned so many persons who might have been potential witnesses against him. The power of the pardon was granted to Presidents in order for them to undo injustices, not to create them.

And it looks like Durham's case against Danchenko isn't going well at all as LosLobo's post with links shows..

Keep in mind that when Barr launched the Durham investigation, after a previous one went nowhere, he and Durham were both insinuating that the Justice Dept had maliciously investigated Trump. So far one very low level line lawyer was convicted on a minor charge based on evidence brought by IG Horowitz. Durham's first prosecution failed big time. So far, it doesn't like good for the current one either.

And it's just weird that you think a House and/or Senate committee are going to find out things that Durham couldn't.

 

Let's not forget Trump's bumbling buffoons gave the FBI reasons for suspicions. Campaign manager Paul Manafort was notoriously tied to the Kremlin and passed information to a suspected Russian agent; member of Trump family met with the Russians at Trump Tower in an attempt to get "dirt"on Hillary; one low-level aide boasted to an Australian diplomat that Russia was aiding the Trump campaign; and the longtime Trump associate Roger Stone seems to have helped broker a leak of Clinton campaign emails hacked by Russians. 

3 hours ago, riclag said:

“Had the bureau looked more critically at Christopher Steele’s information to begin with, there would have been no investigation of the Trump campaign. Had Mr. Mueller, during his turn as special counsel, examined the source of the allegations, his inquiry would have ended there. According to the grand jury’s indictment of Mr. Danchenko, the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team realized early on that he was Mr. Steele’s “primary subsource” for the dossier”.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-fbi-lets-its-informants-mislead-it-mueller-durham-russia-chs-joffe-server-dossier-11665581433

 

Had many Trump hating human sources at the doj/fbi that never confirmed allegations   before they got a fisa ! They even offered the trump hater once foreign agent Steele 1 million dollars to substantiate info , he couldn’t. 
Looking back on this and HC team feeding into the frenzy with Russia disinformation that Trump was compromised by vlad ,i like to see the integrity taken out of their slogan  Fidelity bravery…

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/igor-danchenko-trial-durham-hammers-fbi-over-lack-corroboration-steele-dossier-used-fisa-warrant 

 

Nov 8 cant cone fast enough.Patiently waiting.

Both Fox and WSJ are both Murdoch enterprises.

 

Murdoch is infamous for his minions being purveyors of misinformation.

 

Fox even used the defence, that the average intelligent viewer would not take some of its programming as factual against a recent past defamation case.

 

Fox is currently in a 1.6 Billion defamation case for pushing misinformation about the 2020 elections.

 

Do you really consider your supporting evidence is from a reliable source?
 

Edited October 14, 20223 yr by LosLobo

9 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Both Fox and WSJ are both Murdoch enterprises.

 

Murdoch is infamous for his minions being purveyors of misinformation.

 

Fox even used the defence, that the average intelligent viewer would not take some of its programming as factual against a recent past defamation case.

 

Fox is currently in a 1.6 Billion defamation case for pushing misinformation about the 2020 elections.

 

Do you really consider your supporting evidence is from a reliable source?
 

The wsj is usually rather reliable, but the link is only an "opinion" article.

Trump again seems to have a lot to say about the now factually proven, so-called Russia Russia hoax.

 

Shame he was not so verbose when he recently pleaded the 5th 440 times under oath.

 

With a good opportunity on prime-time TV for him approaching with the Jan 6th Committee, he will now be able to get all his perceived grievances off his chest.

 

Here he attempts to divert attention, from pending jeopardy, with another one of his frivolous threats of legal action......

 

Pulitzer Board rejects Trump bid to yank New York Times and Washington Post Awards

 

'Former President Donald Trump slammed the Pulitzer Prize Board for not retracting the awards given in 2018 for reporting on the Russia investigation, the same day the House Jan. 6 committee voted to subpoena him.

 

Trump, in a release from his Save America PAC, called the reporting by the New York Times and Washington Post "inaccurate, inept, and corrupt." '

 

Appetite for distraction: Trump rails against Pulitzer committee after Jan. 6 subpoena | Washington Examiner

Edited October 14, 20223 yr by LosLobo

Post moved to more suitable topic i.e. House January 6 committee votes to subpoena Trump during Thursday’s hearing

Edited October 14, 20223 yr by LosLobo

13 hours ago, riclag said:

“Had the bureau looked more critically at Christopher Steele’s information to begin with, there would have been no investigation of the Trump campaign. Had Mr. Mueller, during his turn as special counsel, examined the source of the allegations, his inquiry would have ended there. According to the grand jury’s indictment of Mr. Danchenko, the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane team realized early on that he was Mr. Steele’s “primary subsource” for the dossier”.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-the-fbi-lets-its-informants-mislead-it-mueller-durham-russia-chs-joffe-server-dossier-11665581433

 

Had many Trump hating human sources at the doj/fbi that never confirmed allegations   before they got a fisa ! They even offered the trump hater once foreign agent Steele 1 million dollars to substantiate info , he couldn’t. 
Looking back on this and HC team feeding into the frenzy with Russia disinformation that Trump was compromised by vlad ,i like to see the integrity taken out of their slogan  Fidelity bravery…

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/igor-danchenko-trial-durham-hammers-fbi-over-lack-corroboration-steele-dossier-used-fisa-warrant 

 

Nov 8 cant cone fast enough.Patiently waiting.

Opinion pieces from WSJ and Fox News.  ????

14 hours ago, placeholder said:

These passages are based on a lie. As the Inspector General of the Justice Dept confirmed, the investigation was not initiated or based on the Steele Dossier. 

As for the investigation being based on Trump hating human sources, that is again a falsehood.

As for offering Steele 1 million dollars, Steele explicitly noted that in his his report that it contained unconfirmed rumors and chatter. 

And finally, on the matter of whether Trump collaborated with the Russians, Mueller in his report listed 10 possible counts of obstruction of justice violations including witness tampering in the case of Manafort, a massive tax dodger whom Trump pardoned after giving out hints that he would do just that. There has never been a President who pardoned so many persons who might have been potential witnesses against him. The power of the pardon was granted to Presidents in order for them to undo injustices, not to create them.

And it looks like Durham's case against Danchenko isn't going well at all as LosLobo's post with links shows..

Keep in mind that when Barr launched the Durham investigation, after a previous one went nowhere, he and Durham were both insinuating that the Justice Dept had maliciously investigated Trump. So far one very low level line lawyer was convicted on a minor charge based on evidence brought by IG Horowitz. Durham's first prosecution failed big time. So far, it doesn't like good for the current one either.

And it's just weird that you think a House and/or Senate committee are going to find out things that Durham couldn't.

 

Just so much nonsense here hard to know where to start. You might consider putting in some links to back up your fanciful and false claims?

 

You state "As for the investigation being based on Trump hating human sources, that is again a falsehood."

 

I lazily refute this with ”[Trump is] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page, who also worked on Mueller’s staff, responded.

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok texted back.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/fbi-agents-text-reportedly-disclosed-by-justice-watchdog-well-stop-trump-from-becoming-president.html

 

It's our old friend again, irrational hatred for Trump.

2 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Just so much nonsense here hard to know where to start. You might consider putting in some links to back up your fanciful and false claims?

 

You state "As for the investigation being based on Trump hating human sources, that is again a falsehood."

 

I lazily refute this with ”[Trump is] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page, who also worked on Mueller’s staff, responded.

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok texted back.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/fbi-agents-text-reportedly-disclosed-by-justice-watchdog-well-stop-trump-from-becoming-president.html

 

It's our old friend again, irrational hatred for Trump.

First off, it was Barr and Durham who disagreed with Horowitz about the motivation of the FBI in conducting this case. Durham quite explicitly disagreed with Horowitz finding after he had been apppointed. Which was unprecedented? So what has Durham come up with? That a few people misled the FBI. The opposite of what Barr had hoped to prove in appointing Durham. And one of the defendants has already been acquitted and it doesn't look good for the case against the other. 

And Peter Strzok was on the special team that was investigating Trump during the campagin leading up to the election. Yet, somehow, news of the investigation never leaked to the media. Got a plausible explanation for that? Because it's really difficult to leak info in D.C.?

3 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok texted back.

The Justice Department inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz has found no evidence that Strzok’s political views affected the inquiry. Concluded that there were no political bias in the investigation.. Next. 

 

16 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The Justice Department inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz has found no evidence that Strzok’s political views affected the inquiry. Concluded that there were no political bias in the investigation.. Next. 

 

And Durham's probe was created to question Horowitz's conclusion. It came up empty.

WSJ <--> Fox News <--> NY Post

same same

Perhaps the two (virtually) printed ones aim for the same crowd but at different levels of intellect.

 

 

10 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Just so much nonsense here hard to know where to start. You might consider putting in some links to back up your fanciful and false claims?

 

You state "As for the investigation being based on Trump hating human sources, that is again a falsehood."

 

I lazily refute this with ”[Trump is] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page, who also worked on Mueller’s staff, responded.

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok texted back.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/fbi-agents-text-reportedly-disclosed-by-justice-watchdog-well-stop-trump-from-becoming-president.html

 

It's our old friend again, irrational hatred for Trump.

Here are the links you requested. Living in a metaphorical cage much? You really don't know about the conclusion of Horowitz' report? Or the fact that Barr and Durham openly disagreed with it?

 

FBI wiretap of Trump campaign aide was riddled with errors, but Russia probe was legally justified, IG report finds

The voluminous report, released Monday by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz, identified 17 separate inaccuracies across three surveillance applications, effectively inflating the justification for monitoring former foreign policy adviser Carter Page starting in the fall of 2016.

Horowitz, however, concluded the FBI was legally justified in launching its inquiry into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election. There was no "documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI’s decision to conduct these operations," the report said.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/09/ig-report-review-fbis-fisa-warrant-russia-probe-released/1499906001/

The article goes on to relay that the report goes on to say that the decision to open the investigation had nothing to do with the Steele report.

 

Durham rejects ‘some conclusions’ of Horowitz report

Washington – Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham on Monday said he disagreed with some of the conclusions of a Justice Department inspector general who determined the FBI had an “authorized purpose” and did not act out of political bias when it initiated its investigation into Trump campaign ties with Russia.

Durham, who has been tasked by U.S. Attorney General William Barr to conduct his own investigation, is now the president’s best hope of proving the FBI and former special counsel Robert Mueller conducted  “witch hunts” when they probed Russian meddling into the 2016 election.''

Durham said that, based on the evidence his team has “collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing,” he told Horowitz last month “that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened.”

https://ctmirror.org/2019/12/09/durham-rejects-some-conclusions-of-horowitz-report/

 

Horowitz pushes back at Barr over basis for Trump-Russia probe
The Justice Department inspector general testified: “We stand by our finding.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/horowitz-barr-trump-russia-probe-082448

 

7 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Just so much nonsense here hard to know where to start. You might consider putting in some links to back up your fanciful and false claims?

 

You state "As for the investigation being based on Trump hating human sources, that is again a falsehood."

 

I lazily refute this with ”[Trump is] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!” Page, who also worked on Mueller’s staff, responded.

“No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it,” Strzok texted back.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/fbi-agents-text-reportedly-disclosed-by-justice-watchdog-well-stop-trump-from-becoming-president.html

 

It's our old friend again, irrational hatred for Trump.

The Strzok affair is just a conservative rabbit-hole and did not predicate and is now not relevant to the case.

 

Did the Trump Campaign collude with Russia? Yes

 

Did Trump obstruct the Mueller Investigation? Yes

 

All the salient points of the Russia Collusion are:

 

May 2016 Australian Downer first alerts FBI of Trump's Russian Collusion.

 

Mar 2019  Mueller Investigation ends.

 

April 2019 Trump/Barr Declares Trump exonerated by lying about Mueller's findings.

 

Aug 2022 Manafort finally admits that the Trump Campaign did collude with Russia.

 

Sept 2022 Barr's lies uncovered.

In the Mueller report, there is evidence that he did collude and there's evidence to support a legal case for Trump's obstruction.

 

Oct 2022 Durham Report is still pending, though Durham found little and what he did find looks it will be thrown out of court soon.

 

Ongoing   No decision yet whether to charge Trump with obstruction, though he had no privilege then or has any now.

 

QED
 

Edited October 15, 20223 yr by LosLobo

An image post with no weblink to the original source content has been removed.

 

16 minutes ago, LosLobo said:

Did the Trump Campaign collude with Russia? Yes

 

Did Trump obstruct the Mueller Investigation? Yes

https://nypost.com/cover/3-25-covers/