Special Counsel JOHN DURHAM Concludes the DOJ-FBI is Out To Get Donald Trump.

a reply to: carewemust. In a House hearing today John Durham showed unequivocally that he didn't know about multiple examples of cooperation or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia. That or lied when answering questions.

Durham seemed to be unaware of the major factual elements of the alliance between the Trump campaign and Russia. This ignorance came through in several awkward exchanges with Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee panel.

Eric Swalwell asked Durham about how Trump “tried and concealed from the public a real-estate deal he was seeking in Moscow.” This was a deal, described in the Mueller report, in which the Russian government promised Trump several hundreds of millions of dollars in profit at no risk to himself to license a tower in Moscow. The proposed payoff, and Trump’s public lies at the time about it, gave Russia enormous leverage over his campaign. Durham replied, “I don’t know anything about that.”

When Adam Schiff asked Durham if the Russians released stolen information through cutouts, he replied, “I’m not sure.”
Schiff responded, “The answer is yes,” to which Durham reported, “In your mind, it’s yes.”

When Schiff asked Durham if he knew that, hours after Trump publicly asked Russia to find Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails and release them, Russian hackers made an attempt to hack Clinton emails, Durham replied, “If that happened, I’m not aware of that.”

When asked if Trump referred to those stolen emails more than 100 times on the campaign trail, Durham answered, “I don’t really read the newspapers and listen to the news.”

And when Schiff asked Durham if he was aware that Trump’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, passed on polling data to Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian intelligence agent, at the time Russia was conducting both a social-media campaign and the release of stolen documents to help Trump, Durham replied, “You may be getting beyond the depth of my knowledge.”

David Corn reacted incredulously to the last profession of ignorance. “The Manafort-Kilimnik connection — which the Senate Intelligence Committee report characterized as a ‘grave counterintelligence threat’ — is one of the most serious and still not fully explained components of the Trump-Russia scandal,” he writes. “It is inconceivable that Durham is unaware of this troubling link.”

John Durham Admits He Knows Little About Russia Scandal


Matt Gaetz was not impressed by Durham's accomplishments either, criticizing him for losing the two cases he took to trial on account of the investigation.

BODY LANGUAGE - JOHN DURHAM PRESENT, JUSTICE ABSENT

In this analysis of how Durham went at congress, was not worried and more irritated by some of the questions. He done what he could.

The FBI stonewalled him, could not find one key suspect to events. A couple of arrests with no convictions. On the legal front don't see any ground made with this investigation.

As for the political front, it has opened up more of the FBI can of worms and some of its systemic problems. It is good to see the pressure mounting on Schiff and getting him out of the national intelligence loop. Nadler is also a problem, hopefully he is out of a job soon too.

Overall sounds like a lot more work to go to make any progress on these issues.

a reply to: kwakakev


From what I saw of the questioning, Durham stammered and was clearly off balance at times. When one stammers and such, one is worried. The video in the article you linked to is only a short portion from a much longer session.

Don't see how justice places into the matter of Durhan's testimony, as per your source's headline. It was a congressional fact-finding hearing, not a court of law.

those DOJ & FBI persons that took upon themselves to alter/weaponize their activities within their departments need to be punished and terminated by the 'boss.... the donald must sue them after bounced out

a reply to: MrInquisitive

That is called being interrupted . He was not stammering at all. He was getting annoyed at having a question asked and then when trying to answer having someone answer for him. On both sides TBH.

This guy told everyone what we all knew all along. The Obama DOJ at the request of the former SecState and POTUS and FLOTUS said get Trump I need to win. Nothing else to say. It is there. It is in the open. Too many people coming forward but if it is to say Trump is ok than they must be lying.

sad...

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: MrInquisitive

That is called being interrupted . He was not stammering at all. He was getting annoyed at having a question asked and then when trying to answer having someone answer for him. On both sides TBH.

This guy told everyone what we all knew all along. The Obama DOJ at the request of the former SecState and POTUS and FLOTUS said get Trump I need to win. Nothing else to say. It is there. It is in the open. Too many people coming forward but if it is to say Trump is ok than they must be lying.

sad...

I'm not talking about the segment of video in the article you linked. Let everyone decide for themselves (look at 3:55 onwards in the below video for an example of stammering while not being interrupted).



and at 1:20 onwards here:



Looks and sounds like stammering and nervousness to me.

As for making false claims, you show me where Durham or any other government official says something to the effect of,

The Obama DOJ at the request of the former SecState and POTUS and FLOTUS said get Trump I need to win.

I'm particularly dying to see any evidence whatsoever that FLOTUS made this request.

And witnesses are coming forward to say that what Trump did was ok? Again, provide some sources for your claims. I'm not talking pundits or politicians, but people who actually witnessed what he did and/or said.

You stated in your reply:

originally posted by: MrInquisitive

Not sure which question of mine your answering with the HRC, Uranium One response.

so I will clarify that.

I was responding to this paragraph:

How you can claim the seven sets of ties between the Trump campaign and Russia has no bearing? Did you look at all the charts? Are you aware that Jeff Sessions lied to the Senate when he said he never spoke about the campaign to the Russian foreign minister? Show me the ties the Clinton or Biden administrations had to Russia, as you claim the case can be made against any president or presidential candidate. And keep in mind, Trump was not president, he was only a candidate.

Made here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

I could see how you might have trouble discerning what I was responding to, as your posts tend to be very lengthy and wordy.

August 11, 2023

REMEMBER what happened before the CRIMINALS at the DOJ/FBI muzzled the "GOOD GUYS" at the DOJ/FBI?

The FBI Investigation of the January 6, 2021 "riot" found they were not ORGANIZED attacks...

WASHINGTON, Aug 20 (Reuters) - The FBI has found scant evidence that the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol was the result of an organized plot to overturn the presidential election result, according to four current and former law enforcement officials.

Though federal officials have arrested more than 570 alleged participants, the FBI at this point believes the violence was not centrally coordinated by far-right groups or prominent supporters of then-President Donald Trump, according to the sources, who have been either directly involved in or briefed regularly on the wide-ranging investigations.

"Ninety to ninety-five percent of these are one-off cases," said a former senior law enforcement official with knowledge of the investigation. "Then you have five percent, maybe, of these militia groups that were more closely organized. But there was no grand scheme with Roger Stone and Alex Jones and all of these people to storm the Capitol and take hostages."

Source: www.reuters.com...

An impeachment inquiry of Garland and Wray would give Congress the authority to find the CRIMINAL group(s) within the FBI and have them terminated....or even better brought up on charges.

Kevin McCarthy needs to (right now) set a date-certain for the impeachment inquiries to start, after Congress returns from vacation on September 12, 2023.

a reply to: carewemust

Considering this thread is about Durham, do you consider his report to be null and void because he was employed by the government when he was appointed special counsel?