Durham report finds FBI probe into Trump-Russia ties was flawed

SunnyinBangrak · May 16, 2023

11 hours ago, Walker88 said:

I suspect this post will be deleted, too, despite the fact it is directly related to Durham.

I know several people who were drilled by Durham and his people. Incidentally they all had to hire lawyers, though most have personal liability insurance because of the positions they hold/held. None are FBI, all are agency. To a person they said Durham was goal seeking. He had zero interest in the evidence of actual collusion, but merely went searching for un-dotted "i"s and uncrossed "t"s, so that he could hang his hat and expense on something or anything.

When actual evidence was revealed in intel reports (such as manafort's meeting with kilimnik, or stone and Wikileaks), the response was "That's manafort...or stone, not trump", as if trump didn't know.

"Hey, I just hired paul as my Campaign Manager...anybody know where he is?" Nonsense.

Note that Durham found nothing untoward in the agency, and even praised Brennan's handling of the matter.

Perhaps in time these interview subjects will come out and expose the facts about Durham. Maybe there will be an investigation of the investigators of the investigators, kind of a 3rd derivative.

There was a time when inflammatory statements presented as fact without credible supporting evidence was a conspiracy theory.

This bit is my favourite - "Note that Durham found nothing untoward in the agency, and even praised Brennan's handling of the matter." ????

Chomper Higgot · May 17, 2023

16 hours ago, riclag said:

I grew up fearing nuclear attacks .In the 50’s and 60’s we had air raid drills in school!

I was visiting Fla at the time of the Cuban / Russian missile crisis , we had to cut our holiday short and drive back to our home a thousand miles away.

My point is Trump was the first person that I can ever recall saying ,Cant we get along with Russia !

It made sense than and it makes sense now! No wars and getting along to get along is my preference!

Did you experience fear of a nuke attack in your country?

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/president-donald-trump-says-getting-along-with-russia-is-a-good-thing.html

https://www.britannica.com/topic/duck-and-cover

You clearly have not been paying attention:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49198565

SunnyinBangrak · May 17, 2023

I see posters repeatedly claiming that there has never been a case of a conspiracy theory becoming fact.

Seeing as it is on topic let's have a quick look at one of the Trump Russia collusion conspiracies that became established fact.

How it started

"So, claims like this one — “Hillary Clinton was behind the entire Russian collusion hoax all along” — made by Republican Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, along with a call to “#LockHerUp,” are unfounded."

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/10/partisan-claims-of-russia-hoax-revived-ahead-of-2020-election/

How it's going.

"The Russia-Trump collusion narrative of 2016 and beyond was a dirty trick for the ages, and now we know it came from the top—candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. That was the testimony Friday by 2016 Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook in federal court, and while this news is hardly a surprise, it’s still bracing to find her fingerprints on the political weapon."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-did-it-robby-mook-michael-sussmann-donald-trump-russia-collusion-alfa-bank-11653084709

The only surprise is that some on the left are still falsely claiming that the Durham investigation was a failure. I wonder how it feels seeing Trumps victory lap?

"It's a great vindication and it feels good, and the report has been widely praised,' Trump told Newsmax in a phone interview on Tuesday night, his first televised interview since Durham issued his report on Monday.

'All of these people are -- I guess you could call it treason. You could call it a lot of different things. But this should never be allowed to happen in our country again,' added Trump."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12091885/Donald-Trump-hails-John-Durham-report-slamming-FBI-Russian-collusion-probe.html

placeholder · May 17, 2023

16 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I see posters repeatedly claiming that there has never been a case of a conspiracy theory becoming fact.

Seeing as it is on topic let's have a quick look at one of the Trump Russia collusion conspiracies that became established fact.

How it started

"So, claims like this one — “Hillary Clinton was behind the entire Russian collusion hoax all along” — made by Republican Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, along with a call to “#LockHerUp,” are unfounded."

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/10/partisan-claims-of-russia-hoax-revived-ahead-of-2020-election/

How it's going.

"The Russia-Trump collusion narrative of 2016 and beyond was a dirty trick for the ages, and now we know it came from the top—candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. That was the testimony Friday by 2016 Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook in federal court, and while this news is hardly a surprise, it’s still bracing to find her fingerprints on the political weapon."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-did-it-robby-mook-michael-sussmann-donald-trump-russia-collusion-alfa-bank-11653084709

The only surprise is that some on the left are still falsely claiming that the Durham investigation was a failure. I wonder how it feels seeing Trumps victory lap?

"It's a great vindication and it feels good, and the report has been widely praised,' Trump told Newsmax in a phone interview on Tuesday night, his first televised interview since Durham issued his report on Monday.

'All of these people are -- I guess you could call it treason. You could call it a lot of different things. But this should never be allowed to happen in our country again,' added Trump."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12091885/Donald-Trump-hails-John-Durham-report-slamming-FBI-Russian-collusion-probe.html

As was found by both the Justice Dept Inspector general and conceded by Durham, the Justice Dept investigation of the Trump Russian connection was not predicated on the Steele Report. As has repeatedly been pointed out, there is nothing significantly different in Durham's conclusion from those arrived at by the Justice Dept. IG.

placeholder · May 17, 2023

1 hour ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

There was a time when inflammatory statements presented as fact without credible supporting evidence was a conspiracy theory.

This bit is my favourite - "Note that Durham found nothing untoward in the agency, and even praised Brennan's handling of the matter." ????

You really need to get out your dictionary and look up the definition of inflammatory. You would have to be pre-inflamed to find that statement inflammatory.

(especially of speech or writing) arousing or intended to arouse angry or violent feelings.

"inflammatory slogans"

placeholder · May 17, 2023

2 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

There was a time when inflammatory statements presented as fact without credible supporting evidence was a conspiracy theory.

This bit is my favourite - "Note that Durham found nothing untoward in the agency, and even praised Brennan's handling of the matter." ????

If you found the above statement inflammatory, wait until you read this:

Steve Bannon Slams Durham's 'Epic Failure' in Trump Probe

ongtime Trump ally Steve Bannon harshly criticized the Durham report for not recommending criminal charges after his investigation into the FBI's Trump-Russia probe, blasting the special counsel's conclusions as an "epic failure."

On a Tuesday episode of his podcast Bannon's War Room, Bannon said Special Counsel Robert Durham's report was an "epic failure" because Durham failed to bring convictions after a three-and-a-half-year investigation.

https://www.newsweek.com/steve-bannon-slams-durhams-epic-failure-trump-probe-1800711

SunnyinBangrak · May 17, 2023

29 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You really need to get out your dictionary and look up the definition of inflammatory. You would have to be pre-inflamed to find that statement inflammatory.

(especially of speech or writing) arousing or intended to arouse angry or violent feelings.

"inflammatory slogans"

I believe conspiracy theories are inflammatory by their very nature. Walker88's post claiming without evidence to have inside information in this case certainly fits the bill.

placeholder · May 17, 2023

13 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I believe conspiracy theories are inflammatory by their very nature. Walker88's post claiming without evidence to have inside information in this case certainly fits the bill.

Do you understand what a conspiracy theory is?

"a belief that some secret but influential organization is responsible for an event or phenomenon.

"they sought to account for the attacks in terms of a conspiracy theory"

For instance, believing that the Deep State, whatever that is, was responsible for the Russia investigation. Now that is a conspiracy theory.

bamnutsak · May 17, 2023

Some Durham True Believers still hanging on. Amazing.

Have a good cry, move on. As Dr. McCoy would say, "Damn it Jim, he's dead."

riclag · May 17, 2023

4 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I see posters repeatedly claiming that there has never been a case of a conspiracy theory becoming fact.

Seeing as it is on topic let's have a quick look at one of the Trump Russia collusion conspiracies that became established fact.

How it started

"So, claims like this one — “Hillary Clinton was behind the entire Russian collusion hoax all along” — made by Republican Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, along with a call to “#LockHerUp,” are unfounded."

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/10/partisan-claims-of-russia-hoax-revived-ahead-of-2020-election/

How it's going.

"The Russia-Trump collusion narrative of 2016 and beyond was a dirty trick for the ages, and now we know it came from the top—candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. That was the testimony Friday by 2016 Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook in federal court, and while this news is hardly a surprise, it’s still bracing to find her fingerprints on the political weapon."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-did-it-robby-mook-michael-sussmann-donald-trump-russia-collusion-alfa-bank-11653084709

The only surprise is that some on the left are still falsely claiming that the Durham investigation was a failure. I wonder how it feels seeing Trumps victory lap?

"It's a great vindication and it feels good, and the report has been widely praised,' Trump told Newsmax in a phone interview on Tuesday night, his first televised interview since Durham issued his report on Monday.

'All of these people are -- I guess you could call it treason. You could call it a lot of different things. But this should never be allowed to happen in our country again,' added Trump."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12091885/Donald-Trump-hails-John-Durham-report-slamming-FBI-Russian-collusion-probe.html

There’s a opinion piece put out recently by a expert/ professor in Constitutional law J Turley. He writes,

‘Russia case’ against Trump was a shocking conspiracy that continues today.

“The government:

Of course, this conspiracy could not occur without the assistance of the FBI, which Durham found played an eager role due to a “predisposition” of key players against Trump”.

“The most essential player in this conspiracy was the media, which pumped up the dossier as gospel”.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/16/russia-case-against-trump-was-a-shocking-conspiracy-that-continues-today/

Bkk Brian · May 17, 2023

44 minutes ago, riclag said:

There’s a opinion piece put out recently by a expert/ professor in Constitutional law J Turley. He writes,

‘Russia case’ against Trump was a shocking conspiracy that continues today.

“The government:

Of course, this conspiracy could not occur without the assistance of the FBI, which Durham found played an eager role due to a “predisposition” of key players against Trump”.

“The most essential player in this conspiracy was the media, which pumped up the dossier as gospel”.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/16/russia-case-against-trump-was-a-shocking-conspiracy-that-continues-today/

Oh the irony.....lol. I'd be careful with those opinion pieces from J Turley, he's been known to spread conspiracy theories himself. Think Dominion...................

placeholder · May 17, 2023

53 minutes ago, riclag said:

There’s a opinion piece put out recently by a expert/ professor in Constitutional law J Turley. He writes,

‘Russia case’ against Trump was a shocking conspiracy that continues today.

“The government:

Of course, this conspiracy could not occur without the assistance of the FBI, which Durham found played an eager role due to a “predisposition” of key players against Trump”.

“The most essential player in this conspiracy was the media, which pumped up the dossier as gospel”.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/16/russia-case-against-trump-was-a-shocking-conspiracy-that-continues-today/

This is the same Jonathan Turley who supported Judge Aileen Cannon's appointment of a special master in the Mar a Lago case. You know, the case where very conservatives judges tossed out her decision. And who believed that Durham had strong case against the 2 major defendants. You know, the cases where 2 members of Durham's team quit because they thought Durham didn't have the evidence to back up what he contended.

And Durham and Barr were looking for an actual criminal conspiracy among members of the Justice Dept. They found nothing.

Turley clearly is misusing the word "conspiracy".

candide · May 17, 2023

7 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I see posters repeatedly claiming that there has never been a case of a conspiracy theory becoming fact.

Seeing as it is on topic let's have a quick look at one of the Trump Russia collusion conspiracies that became established fact.

How it started

"So, claims like this one — “Hillary Clinton was behind the entire Russian collusion hoax all along” — made by Republican Rep. Doug Collins of Georgia, along with a call to “#LockHerUp,” are unfounded."

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/10/partisan-claims-of-russia-hoax-revived-ahead-of-2020-election/

How it's going.

"The Russia-Trump collusion narrative of 2016 and beyond was a dirty trick for the ages, and now we know it came from the top—candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton. That was the testimony Friday by 2016 Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook in federal court, and while this news is hardly a surprise, it’s still bracing to find her fingerprints on the political weapon."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-did-it-robby-mook-michael-sussmann-donald-trump-russia-collusion-alfa-bank-11653084709

The only surprise is that some on the left are still falsely claiming that the Durham investigation was a failure. I wonder how it feels seeing Trumps victory lap?

"It's a great vindication and it feels good, and the report has been widely praised,' Trump told Newsmax in a phone interview on Tuesday night, his first televised interview since Durham issued his report on Monday.

'All of these people are -- I guess you could call it treason. You could call it a lot of different things. But this should never be allowed to happen in our country again,' added Trump."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12091885/Donald-Trump-hails-John-Durham-report-slamming-FBI-Russian-collusion-probe.html

As usual, you omitted essential information

It seems you haven't followed well the Sussman trial.

During this trial, it was also confirmed:

- that the FBI did not use the information brought by Sussman, as it wasn't perceived as reliable,

- that the FBI investigation started before Sussman gave them this information anyway.

According to what was disclosed during the trial, Hillary allowed this information to be leaked to the media. It's not nice, but it was made clear it wasn't at the origin of the Russia probe (nor was the Steele dossier).

Edited May 17, 2023 by candide

placeholder · May 17, 2023

3 minutes ago, candide said:

As usual, you omitted essential information

It seems you haven't followed well the Sussman trial.

During this trial, it was also confirmed:

- that the FBI did not use the information brought by Sussman, as it wasn't perceived as reliable,

- that the FBI investigation started before Sussman gave them this information anyway.

According to what was disclosed during the trial, Hillary allowed this information to be leaked to the media. It's not nice, but it was made clear it wasn't at the origin of the Russia probe (nor was the Steele dossier).

And what makes the charge of conspiracy against the FBI particularly ridiculous is that during the 2016 elections there was a special team of FBI agents investigating these charges. And yet it was never leaked that there was an ongoing investigation. Some conspiracy!

candide · May 17, 2023

58 minutes ago, placeholder said:

And what makes the charge of conspiracy against the FBI particularly ridiculous is that during the 2016 elections there was a special team of FBI agents investigating these charges. And yet it was never leaked that there was an ongoing investigation. Some conspiracy!

Shhhh! That was the beauty of the FBI conspiracy. They did not leak it before the 2016 elections so that the conspiracy would remain unnoticed. ????

ozimoron · May 17, 2023

4 hours ago, riclag said:

There’s a opinion piece put out recently by a expert/ professor in Constitutional law J Turley. He writes,

‘Russia case’ against Trump was a shocking conspiracy that continues today.

“The government:

Of course, this conspiracy could not occur without the assistance of the FBI, which Durham found played an eager role due to a “predisposition” of key players against Trump”.

“The most essential player in this conspiracy was the media, which pumped up the dossier as gospel”.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/16/russia-case-against-trump-was-a-shocking-conspiracy-that-continues-today/

Is he alleging a conspiracy between the FBI and the media to push the Trump Russia connection? That would be a conspiracy theory.

placeholder · May 17, 2023

16 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Is he alleging a conspiracy between the FBI and the media to push the Trump Russia connection? That would be a conspiracy theory.

Actually, I read the piece and it's mostly about the Steele report. But even Durham acknowledged the investigation was not predicated on the Steele report. Anyway, it's a ridiculous piece since it posits some kind of mass conspiracy without offering any hard evidence.

Edited May 17, 2023 by placeholder

ozimoron · May 17, 2023

Just now, placeholder said:

Actually, I read the piece and it's mostly about the Steele report. But even as Durham acknowledged the investigation was not predicated on the Steele report. Anyway, it's a ridiculous piece since it posits some kind of mass conspiracy without offering any hard evidence.

They don't need hard evidence. They come with a challenge that it's self evident if one only thinks about it.

placeholder · May 17, 2023

One thing Durham didn't mention in his report was the fact that when he and Barr were pressuring the Italian intellgence agencies to come up with dirt on the Russia investigation, all they offered was a tip tying Trump to corruption. Although it wasn't within Durham's remit to investigate Trump, he took it upon himself to investigate. Word did get out that Italian intelligence did offer some sort of evidence about corruption but it didn't say who was implicated. Naturally, the right wing media ran with it and assumed it was about the usual suspects. Durham and Barr never said anything to discourage such speculation even though they knew better. Durham has never disclosed any specifics about that investigation.

bendejo · May 17, 2023

17 hours ago, placeholder said:

For instance, believing that the Deep State, whatever that is, was responsible for the Russia investigation. Now that is a conspiracy theory.

Evidence of the Deep State? Look at the Supreme Court and the three Federalist Society picks that occupy it, and the sudden revelations regarding the actions of SCOTUS wives.

riclag · May 19, 2023

Didnt need any new arrests or indictments by Durham the scandal is in the bias and lack of transparency of all involved ( fbi , doj )

who participated in the Russia Russia investigation.

“[P]rior to the submission of the initial Page FISA application, the FBI in fact knew Steele had told Handling Agent-I that Fusion GPS had been hired by a law firm and that his ultimate client was ‘senior Democrats’ supporting Clinton,” the report said. “Moreover, it knew that Handling Agent-I’s notes of this meeting reflect that, according to Steele, ‘HC’ (Hillary Clinton) was aware of his (Steele’s) reporting.”

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court wasn’t told, however, that it was being asked to surveil one political campaign based on the say-so of a rival.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/15/fbi-doj-failed-to-observe-fidelity-to-the-law-in-trump-russia-investigation-durham/

Edited May 19, 2023 by riclag

Tug · May 19, 2023

51 minutes ago, riclag said:

Didnt need any new arrests or indictments by Durham the scandal is in the bias and lack of transparency of all involved ( fbi , doj )

who participated in the Russia Russia investigation.

“[P]rior to the submission of the initial Page FISA application, the FBI in fact knew Steele had told Handling Agent-I that Fusion GPS had been hired by a law firm and that his ultimate client was ‘senior Democrats’ supporting Clinton,” the report said. “Moreover, it knew that Handling Agent-I’s notes of this meeting reflect that, according to Steele, ‘HC’ (Hillary Clinton) was aware of his (Steele’s) reporting.”

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court wasn’t told, however, that it was being asked to surveil one political campaign based on the say-so of a rival.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/15/fbi-doj-failed-to-observe-fidelity-to-the-law-in-trump-russia-investigation-durham/

It flopped face it and move on the straw many Trump supporters have been grasping has slipped away move on

placeholder · May 19, 2023

1 hour ago, riclag said:

Didnt need any new arrests or indictments by Durham the scandal is in the bias and lack of transparency of all involved ( fbi , doj )

who participated in the Russia Russia investigation.

“[P]rior to the submission of the initial Page FISA application, the FBI in fact knew Steele had told Handling Agent-I that Fusion GPS had been hired by a law firm and that his ultimate client was ‘senior Democrats’ supporting Clinton,” the report said. “Moreover, it knew that Handling Agent-I’s notes of this meeting reflect that, according to Steele, ‘HC’ (Hillary Clinton) was aware of his (Steele’s) reporting.”

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court wasn’t told, however, that it was being asked to surveil one political campaign based on the say-so of a rival.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/15/fbi-doj-failed-to-observe-fidelity-to-the-law-in-trump-russia-investigation-durham/

More nonsense. As even Durham acknowledged the investigation was not predicated on the Steele report.

Durham has also violated prosecutorial norms by continuing to maintain that the 2 people he unsuccessfully prosecuted made false statement. He didn't even qualify that by writing "alleged" before "false statements". Durham fails to find fault with the 2 parties who most disgraced themselves in the course of this investigation: William Barr and himself.

ozimoron · May 21, 2023

The final report issued by special counsel John Durham after seven years of investigating accusations that FBI wasted its time investigating the connection between Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and the Kremlin was issued this week and landed with a thud.

With millions spent on the Durham investigation that resulted in no major revelations and contained no prosecutorial referrals, one attorney claimed the end result reflected just as badly on former Attorney General Bill Barr, who appointed Durham, as it does on the special counsel who came up empty.

Writing for Salon, attorney Joshua Raff suggested Barr's sudden desire to appear on cable TV and in legal forums to offer up his opinions about what happened during the Trump years and where to go next with investigations concerning the ex-president need not be taken seriously.

https://www.rawstory.com/bill-barr-john-durham/

nauseus · May 21, 2023

On 5/16/2023 at 10:26 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

It tells us there was no ‘Deep-State’ plot against Trump.

So yes, let’s hope Trump does get a copy.

What Durham says in his report is:

That the FBI probe was “seriously flawed” with no grounding evidence and that FBI officials “discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia.”

And that:

“(Hillary) Clinton allegedly approved a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to tie Trump to Russia as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server,”.

In other words it was a hoax, likely instigated by Clinton and the DNC, which had far-reaching detrimental effects for Trump, and was, having begun in mid 2016, an attempt at election interference.

Edited May 21, 2023 by nauseus

placeholder · May 21, 2023

18 minutes ago, nauseus said:

What Durham says in his report is:

That the FBI probe was “seriously flawed” with no grounding evidence and that FBI officials “discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia.”

And that:

“(Hillary) Clinton allegedly approved a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to tie Trump to Russia as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server,”.

In other words it was a hoax, instigated by Clinton and the DNC, which had far-reaching detrimental effects for Trump, and was, having begun in mod 2016, an attempt at election interference.

First off, Durham's report about the FBI differs in no significant way from the Inspector General's report which went into considerable detail about the flaws in the Justiice Dept investigation. The thing is, before that report was released, Durham actually asked the IG not to release it. And when it was released, he issued a public statement that he disagreed with its finding. So did Barr. And then he and Barr embarked on a long journety to try and prove that there was a conspiracy within the Justice Dept to get Trump.

They even traveled to Italy together to put pressure on the Italian govt to supply them with intelligence to back up their belief. They got nothing. Well, not quite. Italian intelligence did offer them a bit of information that Trump might possibly be involved in a corrupt dealings. Naturally, Durham assigned this info to a separate team since investigating Trump wasn't in his remit. Just kidding. He investigated it himself and absolved Trump.

And at the end of this, Durham gathered up information to put 2 people on trial not for colluding with the FBI but rather for lying to them. So far from being a perpetrator, his cases depended on the FBI being a victim. He lost both cases. He did win one case. But that case was developed by the Instpector General and only handed off to Durham because it was within his remit of investigating the investigation.

Had there not been the investigation, the case would have been handled in the standard way. He got a conviction there for which the perpetrator, a low-level lawyer, spent not one day in prison.

As for the Steele report, as Durham himself has acknowledged, it wasn't the basis for the investigation.

Durham's report was about investigating the investigation. If you want to look at possible ties between Trump and the Russians, that's what the Mueller investigation was about. Mueller found 10 possible counts that Trump could have been charged with were he not President.. Some of those counts were about obstruction of Justice. As in the case of Paul Manafort who had ties to the Russians. William Barr publicly played down the significance of the Mueller report and was castigated by a Federal judge form misrepresenting its contents.

Edited May 21, 2023 by placeholder

Chomper Higgot · May 21, 2023

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

What Durham says in his report is:

That the FBI probe was “seriously flawed” with no grounding evidence and that FBI officials “discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia.”

And that:

“(Hillary) Clinton allegedly approved a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to tie Trump to Russia as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server,”.

In other words it was a hoax, likely instigated by Clinton and the DNC, which had far-reaching detrimental effects for Trump, and was, having begun in mid 2016, an attempt at election interference.

What Durham says is all the same stuff Trump was saying before Durham was sent in his wild goose chase.

But when it comes to evidence of a ‘deep state plot’, criminality on behalf of the FBI or political direction of the FBI, Durham has zilch.

candide · May 21, 2023

3 hours ago, nauseus said:

What Durham says in his report is:

That the FBI probe was “seriously flawed” with no grounding evidence and that FBI officials “discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia.”

And that:

“(Hillary) Clinton allegedly approved a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisors to tie Trump to Russia as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server,”.

In other words it was a hoax, likely instigated by Clinton and the DNC, which had far-reaching detrimental effects for Trump, and was, having begun in mid 2016, an attempt at election interference.

Yet, the Durham report also confirms that the so-called Clinton's attempt was not used by the FBI. In short, it did not influence the FBI.

Moreover, according to Durham:

“In sum, the government's handling of the Clinton Plan intelligence may have amounted to a significant intelligence failure and a troubling instance in which confirmation bias and a tunnel-vision pursuit of investigative ends may have caused government personnel to fail to appreciate the extent to which uncorroborated reporting funded by an opposing political campaign was intended to influence rather than inform the FBI,” Durham said. “It did not, all things considered, however, amount to a provable criminal offense.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/joe-biden-briefed-clinton-plan-tie-trump-russia-durham-report-concludes

nauseus · May 21, 2023

3 minutes ago, candide said:

Yet, the Durham report also confirms that the so-called Clinton's attempt was not used by the FBI. In short, it did not influence the FBI.

Moreover, according to Durham:

“In sum, the government's handling of the Clinton Plan intelligence may have amounted to a significant intelligence failure and a troubling instance in which confirmation bias and a tunnel-vision pursuit of investigative ends may have caused government personnel to fail to appreciate the extent to which uncorroborated reporting funded by an opposing political campaign was intended to influence rather than inform the FBI,” Durham said. “It did not, all things considered, however, amount to a provable criminal offense.”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/joe-biden-briefed-clinton-plan-tie-trump-russia-durham-report-concludes

Yet, something seems to have influenced the FBI enough too act unusually hastily on "raw and unconfirmed intelligence" when it started the Russia-Trump investigation(s).

Cover-ups will be hard to prove if elements of the FBI itself are possibly involved.

candide · May 21, 2023

16 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Yet, something seems to have influenced the FBI enough too act unusually hastily on "raw and unconfirmed intelligence" when it started the Russia-Trump investigation(s).

Cover-ups will be hard to prove if elements of the FBI itself are possibly involved.

I guess the FBI wanted to hastily make a public announcement in order to hastily influence elections..

Oh wait!

July 5, 2016

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System

https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Sign In

Durham report finds FBI probe into Trump-Russia ties was flawed

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Tug

Hanaguma

placeholder

Posted Images

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Recently Browsing 0 members

Announcements

Topics

Latest posts...

Popular in The Pub

ASEANNOW

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US