Durham report faults FBI..

[JohnJohnson]

Again, it’s my opinion that Trump had every constitutional right to cooperate with Russian intelligence to further his election chances. Which he clearly did.

Mueller and Durham found this statement a lie. The best "evidence" you've mustered yet to run contrary to 2 special counsel investigations that went on for years was a campaign rally joke. Look at your pathetic self.

 

[EatTheRich]

Trump had no idea what Russia was going to to do or not to do. It was a joke at a campaign rally over the 30,000 subpoenaed emails that Hillary obliterated.

And Trump jokes all the time. Like I said, if a campaign rally about the recovery of Hillary's criminal 30,000 emails is all the "evidence" you've got then you are proving the Durham report justified. Keep going.

Does the truth make you uncomfortable? She turned over every email under subpoena.

 

[EatTheRich]

Mueller and Durham found this statement a lie. The best "evidence" you've mustered yet to run contrary to 2 special counsel investigations that went on for years was a campaign rally joke. Look at your pathetic self.

The Mueller report actually said that the Trump campaign knew Russian intelligence was helping them and worked to boost the efforts of that Russian intelligence campaign.

 

[JohnJohnson]

The Mueller report actually said that the Trump campaign knew Russian intelligence was helping them and worked to boost the efforts of that Russian intelligence campaign.

Mueller report said they identified no evidence of the Trump campaign working with Russian intelligence. He was explicit in this point. Durham went even further and said not only did it not happen (agreeing with Mueller) but that they never had any evidence of the negative. In fact, they looked the other way when exculpatory information came in.

There is no point posting to you. You just post lies and long-debunked conspiracies.

 

[EatTheRich]

Mueller report said they identified no evidence of the Trump campaign working with Russian intelligence. He was explicit in this point. Durham went even further and said not only did it not happen (agreeing with Mueller) but that they never had any evidence of the negative. In fact, they looked the other way when exculpatory information came in.

There is no point posting to you. You just post lies and long-debunked conspiracies.

No. They said the evidence of coordination they did identify was insufficient to prove coordination, but that might have been because the documented pattern of obstruction. But, even if they didn’t coordinate with the Russians, they knew the Russians wanted Trump to win and they took deliberate actions to smooth the way for Russia’s interference campaign.

 

[Dawg]

Does the truth make you uncomfortable? She turned over every email under subpoena.

How'd she do that after 'washing' them?

 

[Dawg]

The Mueller report actually said that the Trump campaign knew Russian intelligence was helping them and worked to boost the efforts of that Russian intelligence campaign.

So why NO indictments?

 

[Dawg]

Since the left wants "Liar" be the top OPs this morning lets see what they say about their top liar:
In a town teeming with corruption and liars, Adam Schiff ranks first (msn.com)

 

[Jack4freedom]

Why were all those people fired by the FBI for their role in it and why did the FBI take dozens of corrective measures (admitted themselves they did it) if it was "bullshit"? Why did Obama's IG call the FISA warrants on Carter Page unlawfully obtained?

Politically motivated firings ordered by Trump through Barr.

 

[Jack4freedom]

Flynn case was dead. The Andrew Weissman-directed prosecutor fled the case after he got exposed by the DOJ for swinging a deal with Flynn to plead guility in exchange for not prosecuting Flynn's son (fact is they never had an evidence against Flynn's son) and for purposely hiding exculpatory information from the defense. The FBI agents went in there with the sole purpose of trying to get him to make a misstatement and knew their questions had no value to any investigation. Flynn paid Trump nothing. He almost lost entire life savings trying to defend himself from Weissmann lies.




McCabe was fired due to that recommendation from career officials at the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility. Period. He was corrupt.




Regardless of anything else Strzok did he shouldn't have been sending politically charged statements over work phones. and bragging that they had nothing against Trump but would stop Trump's election. He's rightfully unemployed. He destroyed his own career.

Bullshit on all three counts. These were petty political hatchet jobs. Strzok for sending personal texts on FBI phone after decades as our leading counterespionage agent??? Come on Johnny. Flynn was a loose cannon and a nut. Look what he is doing now. He is parading around the country with a bunch of assorted Nazis and other Trumpist religious nut jobs on his awaken America Tour. Obama warned Trump about Flynn who was seen as a Russian tool long before Trump fired him for lying to Pence about his contact with Russians during the transition period. McCabe was not corrupt, he was fired for no good reason and that was confirmed when he sued for and received all back pay, retirement benefits and legal fees for his “wrongful termination”…

 

[Addy]

No. They said the evidence of coordination they did identify was insufficient to prove coordination, but that might have been because the documented pattern of obstruction. But, even if they didn’t coordinate with the Russians, they knew the Russians wanted Trump to win and they took deliberate actions to smooth the way for Russia’s interference campaign.

Trump wasn't exonerated despite the mantra by repubs he was.
________________________________
Click here for a PDF version of this fact sheet

1. Whether the President Is Exonerated on Obstruction of Justice

Special Counsel Report: The report makes the statement: “f we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment.” It further states, “The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” (Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Election, Vol. 2, page 2 (March 2019) (“Special Counsel Report”))

 

[EatTheRich]

How'd she do that after 'washing' them?

The subpoenad emails were turned over before the server was wiped.

 

[EatTheRich]

So why NO indictments?

There were many indictments and convictions.

 

[middleview]

Trump had no idea what Russia was going to to do or not to do. It was a joke at a campaign rally over the 30,000 subpoenaed emails that Hillary obliterated.

And Trump jokes all the time....especially at rallies. Like I said, if a campaign rally about the recovery of Hillary's criminal 30,000 emails is all the "evidence" you've got then you are proving the Durham report justified. Keep going.

Trump is a joke...

“Shocked at the stupidity”: Prosecutors obtain lawyer notes that blow up Trump’s Mar-a-Lago defense
“Shocked at the stupidity”: Prosecutors obtain lawyer notes that blow up Trump’s Mar-a-Lago defense (msn.com)

 

[middleview]

Trump had nothing to "account" for with regard to Russian collusion. That was a hoax. Several left-wing FBI officials and agents lost their careers because of it, though.

Comey was fired after refusing to pledge loyalty to Trump and not agreeing to kill the investigation into Flynn. Trump should have been indicted for obstruction...
McCabe was fired a few days short of his planned retirement. Pure revenge by Trump. He sued for wrongful termination and was re-instated.
Strzok was fired for actually expressing his dislike for Trump...

Barr and Krebbs were fired for disagreeing with Trump about the "stolen" election.
Bolton was fired for disagreeing with Trump about his negotiations with the Taliban.

Trump has a history of firing anyone who doesn't kiss his ass.

 

[middleview]

So why NO indictments?

Timeline: All the Mueller Indictments and Plea Deals So Far

https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=08910d370e86535cJmltdHM9MTY4NDcxMzYwMCZpZ3VpZD0xOTk1ZjcwZC0wZTQ5LTY3ZDItMGUzYS1lNTBiMGY3MzY2OGUmaW5zaWQ9NTUzNQ&ptn=3&hsh=3&fclid=1995f70d-0e49-67d2-0e3a-e50b0f73668e&psq=mueller+indictments&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cucm9sbGluZ3N0b25lLmNvbS9wb2xpdGljcy9wb2xpdGljcy1uZXdzL2xpc3Qtb2YtbXVlbGxlci1pbmRpY3RtZW50cy03ODM0MDUv&ntb=1

 

[Zam-Zam]

I don't have to read it to know it is simply 320 pages of "plausible deniability." As long as the conspirators didn't take notes when they discussed their moivations, it comes across as merely shoddy police work...medals all around!

The Durham Report doesn't really tell us a lot that is new...That the FBI had an agenda, that the investigation into Trump was politically motivated, and that it was specious at best.

I don't doubt that Trump is guilty of a lot of things, but so are many of those who were behind the investigation into him. Which would explain why they fell flat on their face.

It's all rather comical.

 

[middleview]

The Durham Report doesn't really tell us a lot that is new...That the FBI had an agenda, that the investigation into Trump was politically motivated, and that it was specious at best.

I don't doubt that Trump is guilty of a lot of things, but so are many of those who were behind the investigation into him. Which would explain why they fell flat on their face.

It's all rather comical.

1. The IG already reported that the Crossfire investigation was well justified. Durham disagrees. So what?
2. Not only did Durham fail to find anything new...he failed to find facts to back up his opinions.
3. So Trump is guilty of a lot of things, but so what...cuz others did the same things? Wow...the logic is impressive.
Who else held up a congressional appropriation to an ally in violation of the legislation that required he notify Congress two weeks in advance of doing it?
Who else has admitted taking boxes of government documents and claimed they were his to keep or that he could declassify documents by thinking it was so?
When has an elected politician called his supporters to stop an electoral process?

Trump is in a category all by himself. His bribe to keep a porn star quiet or having his pal at the National Enquirer buy another scandalous story to keep it quiet is pretty unique. His tax problems and his loss of a rape defamation trial are in a class alone.

No...you cannot excuse his lack of a moral compass by saying that others don't have one either.

 

[Zam-Zam]

1. The IG already reported that the Crossfire investigation was well justified. Durham disagrees. So what?
2. Not only did Durham fail to find anything new...he failed to find facts to back up his opinions.
3. So Trump is guilty of a lot of things, but so what...cuz others did the same things? Wow...the logic is impressive.
Who else held up a congressional appropriation to an ally in violation of the legislation that required he notify Congress two weeks in advance of doing it?
Who else has admitted taking boxes of government documents and claimed they were his to keep or that he could declassify documents by thinking it was so?
When has an elected politician called his supporters to stop an electoral process?

Trump is in a category all by himself. His bribe to keep a porn star quiet or having his pal at the National Enquirer buy another scandalous story to keep it quiet is pretty unique. His tax problems and his loss of a rape defamation trial are in a class alone.

No...you cannot excuse his lack of a moral compass by saying that others don't have one either.

I think we've established that you are unlikely to discuss this subject rationally because you are too emotionally invested in it. You can have your opinion, I'm fine with that.

I see things a little differently. You can either be fine with that or not, it doesn't matter.

It's all good.

 

[middleview]

I think we've established that you are unlikely to discuss this subject rationally because you are too emotionally invested in it. You can have your opinion, I'm fine with that.

I see things a little differently. You can either be fine with that or not, it doesn't matter.

It's all good.

What we've established is that you think anyone who disagrees with you is irrational.

I understand you see things differently. You don't seem to accept that I do.

You say you are fine with my having a different opinion, but in the same paragraph say that I can't discuss the report rationally.