For those interested in the truth about the Russian collusion investigation, the Durham Report has hundreds of pages of details of the alliance of political, government and media figures behind arguably the greatest hoax in U.S. history. The only thing it does not have is an actual indictment or true accountability for the critical players in an effort to derail an American presidency. Indeed, some witnesses associated with the Clinton campaign appear to have refused to cooperate with the investigation. Congress could change that.
Buried in the detailed account is a little noticed footnote stating that Clinton General Counsel Marc Elias “declined to be voluntarily interviewed by the Office.” Likewise, Durham noted that “no one at Fusion GPS … would agree to voluntarily speak with the Office” while both the DNC and Clinton campaign invoked privileges to refuse to answer certain questions.
It is not clear whether Durham was able to get a full account from these sources, but he was still able to establish the details on how this unprecedented political hit job succeeded despite a lack of evidence. In the course of that account, Durham demolished the prior claims of Democratic members like Adam Schiff and many in the media. Durham concludes that the investigation should never have been launched and that the whole effort was based on “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated” information.
It turns out that the “pee-tape” was the creation of a Clinton operative without any factual basis despite years of the media (and former FBI Director James Comey) referencing the false salacious claim.
It turns out that Trump was correct that the FBI did spy on his campaign despite years of mocking denials in the media.
Indeed, Trump was right that this was a manufactured hoax engineered by the Clinton campaign, weaponized by the FBI, and then promulgated by the media.
As expected, the media has imposed another virtual blackout on coverage of the report other than to deny that there is anything new for the public to see. For those of us concerned about the rise of a type of state media in the United States, the report and its coverage has only magnified those concerns.
So is that it? Just a shrug and spin?
Not necessarily.
In a recent Fox interview, former Attorney General Bill Barr indicated that he always viewed Durham’s primary mandate as establishing what occurred in the Russian collusion investigation and making that information public.
Congress can now use that foundation to compel cooperation from key figures in this scandal, if necessary, under a grant of immunity. The witnesses could still be prosecuted if they lie or mislead congressional investigators or commit perjury.
They could start with Marc Elias, who features prominently in the Durham Report. It was Elias who managed the legal budget for the campaign. We now know that the campaign hid the funding of the Steele dossier as a legal expense. (The Clinton campaign was later sanctioned by the FEC over its hiding of the funding).
New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said that Elias denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”
Elias was also seated next to John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, when he was asked about the role of the campaign, he denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Even assuming that Podesta was kept in the dark, the Durham Report clearly shows that Elias knew and played an active role in pushing this effort.
Elias is now ironically advising Democratic campaigns on election ethics and running a group to “defend democracy.” He is still counsel to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) headed by Rep. Suzan Kay DelBene, D-Wash. Elias was recently severed by the Democratic National Committee from further representation and has been previously sanctioned in federal court in other litigation.
Elias testified at the criminal trial of his former partner Michael Sussmann, but the scope of that examination was strictly limited by the court in the Alfa Bank matter. Congress could compel his testimony on the full range of conduct leading to the scandal.
Likewise, other figures from Steele to Comey could be compelled to give full accounts in light of this Report. Congress has an interest in hearing from these witnesses as it explores how to make real reforms at the Justice Department and the FBI.
The need for congressional action was made clear by the FBI itself in its immediate response to the Report. It insisted that it has reformed itself after what it described as “missteps identified in the report.”
There are many ways to describe an investigation into false allegations raised by an opposing political party to derail a presidency. Calling that a “misstep” is like calling the explosion of the Hindenburg a “mislanding.” The FBI has now gone through regular cycles of scandals followed by assurances of self-reform.
Even if one is willing to suspend disbelief over the latest “trust us we’re the government” press release, it ignores that fact that the FBI was accused again in 2020 of playing a role in burying the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.
If Congress wants to reform this system, Durham has given it a blueprint for how to do it. After the Report, there is now an undeniable right of Congress to seek this testimony as part of its legislative and oversight functions under Article I. While figures like Elias may “decline to be voluntarily interviewed,” this does not have to be a voluntary exercise.
In speaking with many witnesses, Durham was dealing with some potential crimes with expired statutes of limitation. If witnesses lie to Congress, they could also face charges under a new statute of limitations.
If history is any measure, nothing concentrates the mind as much as a subpoena and immunity grant . . . and it may be time to concentrate some minds in Washington.
Can American Patriots finally see DemonKKKratic-style home and office SWAT raids, arrests, jailing’s without bail, revocation of security clearances, suspensions pending termination, terminations, and perp walks in the presence of the entire MSM of all those traitors, coup plotters, seditious conspiracy law enforcement leaders of the DOJ, FBI, NSA, legislative and executive branches that BROKE THE RULE OF LAW for profit and political gain?
This lady is good.
Jonathan, a Congressional Panel much in fashion as the January 6th Panel, would be a sideshow and as to be expected the Media would not cover it, just as they had not covered Rep. James Comer’s recent Committee Press Conference.
Your point is a brilliant ‘suggestion’ but as Advice it will be dismissed. At this point in time there is nothing further to examine, the issue is Dead-in-the-Water for a number of reasons, but namely the WAR. Save the Prosecution Effort for when the Republicans take back the Presidency (Post 2024 Election). Keep your powder dry, don’t fire all your guns, and wait till you see the whites of Hillary’s eyes.
If there is any resolve left in the DOJ, then I feel It should just get directly to the Point(s).
Obama’s 2nd Cabinet, Hillary’s Orchestration (Abuse of the Sec. of State position), Her directives over the FBI, CIA, DHS, DNC, Etc…
The Clinton Campaign, The DNC, The Media Cabal, and Think Tanks. [Yes – The Think Tanks, their not so bright! but they are very complicit]
Bobby Woodward knew that the seditious act “a Hoax” was much the same as Watergate, It involved the entire U.S. Intelligence Community.
With the Goal of turning a National Election and seating the Military Industrial Complex in a Coup (As it has done so successfully).
However the atmosphere at this time was No-One wanted an on-going “Watergate” Conspiracy Trial(s), No one more than Bob Woodward,
Watergate is his Crown Jewel. He knew that it was His ~ cross-to-bear or lay-it-bare ~ He chose the former over the later, Bob was complicit.
(Watergate=Russiagate | Hillary=Nixon)
Actually that’s true for a great many of these Individuals involved in this Conspiracy. Perhaps because it was so widespread They felt that their part in it would just blend into the atmosphere or disappear, or that they were compelled with impunity and duty to participate. However, They were cognoscente of Their Acts ~ They knew It, They chose to be Complicit (An accessory to the Facts).
We have a WAR on our hands now. WE are responsible for it, just as much as the Russians are responsible for it. This situation needs to be resolved.
WAR will not ‘fix’ the problems WE have.
WE must do that.
-30-
BTW: Bobby, Ball’s still in your Court.
FLASHBACK:
As the World Turns [The Cover-Up Continues]
John Durham
Charge: Clinton and DNC break pledge to stop lying about Trump dossier
by Paul Bedard, Washington Secrets Columnist | June 16, 2022
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/charge-clinton-dnc-break-pledge-to-stop-lying-about-trump-dossier
Will The Court Allow The Special Counsel To See Clinton Documents
https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/07/will-the-court-allow-special-counsel-john-durham-to-see-clinton-campaign-documents/
FLASH FORWARD:
As the World Turns [The Cover-Up Continues]
Durham’s Much-Needed Record Of Deep-State And Dem Corruption Proves Conservatives Were Spot-On
https://thefederalist.com/2023/05/16/durhams-much-needed-record-of-deep-state-and-dem-corruption-proves-conservatives-were-spot-on/
Don’t Miss The Most Damning Durham Finding
https://thefederalist.com/2023/05/17/dont-miss-the-most-damning-durham-finding/
Trump And Lawyers Hit With $938,000 Penalty For “Frivolous” Suit Against Clinton
By Tyler Durden – Sunday, Jan 22, 2023
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/trump-and-lawyers-hit-938000-penalty-frivolous-suit-against-clinton
Only a complete outsider like Trump, can clean this up. This is WHY they fear him. Robert Kennedy is still an ‘elite insider’, even if he doesn’t want to be. Don’t think he would fight against the Globalists as hard as Trump will.
Finally Representative Harriet Hageman has articulated what was long overdue. It appears that the women in the GOP are doing what the men in the GOP fail to do, perhaps due to a lack of testicular fortitude. Representative Harriet Hageman, an experienced trial attorney, is the woman who replaced Liz Cheney. Bravo for Rep Hageman.
To be blunt, the leadership of the FBI and the DOJ are corrupt. I will name names: Christopher Wray and Marrick Garland are corrupt. They know it, we know it, and the American people know it
Estovier – truth. Garland is the most corrupt AG in American history. More so even than Eric Holder and Janet Reno, who has the distinction of having kidnapped Elian Gonzalez to send him back to Cuba and having killed 27 kids in Waco, TX.
What has Garland done that’s corrupt?
Answer:
Impose the Gestapo on America, oh, and arrest a gaggle of appropriately protective, red-blooded, American, PTA mothers as terrorists, etc.
Obergruppenführer Garland would have executed a pre-dawn raid, detained and prosecuted George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, John Jay, Ben Franklin, John Adams, George Mason et al. for insurrection.
lol….there is vapid and low info…..and then there is you.
Anon. You are too stupid, or too biased if you don’t know the answer to that. Ignorant is a better word than stupid. Sorry.
Here here! Spot on!
weaponized the FBI and DOJ to spy on congress, spy on Trump.. told them to go after soccer mom’s as ” domestic terrorists”
The tyrants are also sitting next to you. The FBI and the DOJ chose sides years ago, they are fully sided with the left, the left that controls every agency, government institution, media, social media, academia and law enforcement. The chess pieces are in place, Senator McCarthy was so right all those years ago.
FBI Investigation Was NOT Triggered By Steele Dossier
As Mr. Horowitz uncovered and criticized, the F.B.I. later cited the Steele dossier in wiretap applications, despite learning a reason to doubt its credibility. But Trump supporters often go further, falsely claiming that the F.B.I. opened the entire Russia investigation based on the dossier.
Mr. Durham’s report appeared to nod to that false claim, saying that “information received from politically affiliated persons and entities” in part had “triggered” the inquiry. Yet elsewhere, his report acknowledged that the officials who opened the investigation in July 2016 had not yet seen the dossier, and it was prompted by the Australian diplomat’s tip. He also conceded that there was “no question the F.B.I. had an affirmative obligation to closely examine” that lead.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/17/us/politics/durham-report-trump-russia.html
Popadopolis was reversed engineered to ‘trigger’ an investigation, knowing the Steele fabrication was not going to be enough.
So Halper (paid US spy) approached Popadopolis to present a paper in London. Generously paid, plus all expenses. Then he was taken to the night spot to meet up with a group that, by coincidence included the Aussie Diplomat. Now we have no idea what Popadoplis actual said, but he was led into the conversation by all the people the US intel people invited. We also know, another spy, Mifsud, is the one that told Popadopolis about the email thing. That means the US Govt told Popodopolis about the emails
We also know, there is no evidence the DNC emails were “hacked” as in, a person gained access to DNC server through an internet connection, and down loaded across that internet connection, a tranche of emails. That means it is unlikely Russia is responsible and Assange says Russia is not where he got them.
As a start, Papadopoulos spoke to two Australian diplomats about this, not one. Nor did they say that he was “led” to tell them what he said.
The Intelligence Community concluded that the DNC servers were hacked by Russia, and the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee agreed, but you think you know better than they do.
The Intelligence Community concluded that the DNC servers were hacked by Russia, and the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee agreed, but you think you know better than they do.
Crowd Strike testified in front of Congress, they had no evidence the emails were hacked. The IC and the Senate intel committee have both been caught in lies.
The Aussies were recruited by US IC to take down Popadopoulos. Did you read the part where US spy Halper, is the one to get Popadopoulos to London in the first place? The motive? The IC is not supposed opperate on US soil. But get US citizens on foreign soil, and its all free game.
What I know, i this whole thing is created by the very people you use as your source, and all of them have willfully lied.
Many quasi legitimate news outlets, like the WAPO and NYTimes refused to run the story. But Hillary’s cartel was able to get one Buzzfeed to run it and the rest is history.
it is impossible to differentiate Cuba’s Communist Leaders and the FBI when it comes to the latter silencing, ruining and threatening an FBI agent who reports on their corrupt practices.
Witness the testimony before the House Weaponization of the Federal Government Committee by the 3 FBI Whistleblowers and the closing remarks by Tristan Leavitt, the President of Empower Oversight, a nonprofit, nonpartisan educational organization dedicated to strengthening public integrity through research, education, and the help of whistleblowers. It appears that the FBI will literally cripple any FBI agent Whistleblower for reporting on the inner machinations of the bureau. This is outrageous. This is not the America I came to love as an immigrant fleeing Communist Cuba
The Durham Report
The Warren Report
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
– William Casey, CIA Director 1981-1987
Liars gonna lie!
This is from Liz Dye of “Above the Law”–someone who is NOT paid to spin the “Durham Report”:
For years the right has predicted that this was the thing which would finally take down Hillary Clinton and the Deep State for colluding to frame poor Donald Trump.
The theory was that Clinton and her allies in the Obama administration only made it look like Trump was playing footsie with Russia to distract from her email woes. Except the Trump investigation wasn’t made public before the election because FBI Director James Comey was too busy giving press conferences about Clinton’s dastardly email server and saying how sad he was that he wasn’t going to be able to put her in jail for it.
To speak the thing is to refute it — even before you take into account Don Jr meeting with a Kremlin lawyer promising dirt on Clinton. Or campaign manager Paul Manafort’s meetings with a Russian spy. Or Trump’s call for “Russia if you’re listening” to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails. Or campaign “coffee boy” George Papadopoulos’s boast to a couple of Australian diplomats that Russia would be releasing information to help defeat Hillary Clinton. Or the fact that Russia did indeed hack the DNC and Clinton’s campaign manager and begin releasing those emails through Wikileaks just a few weeks later. Or the Kremlin allies who ran a social media influence operation to sow discord and boost Trump. Or the many, many other connections between the Trump campaign and Russia.
And so Durham had to get a little creative, exactly as the New York Times said he would back in January when it wrote that the prosecutor had “developed an indirect method to impute political bias to law enforcement officials: comparing the Justice Department’s aggressive response to suspicions of links between Mr. Trump and Russia with its more cautious and skeptical reaction to various Clinton-related suspicions.”
This task was made even more difficult by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s 2019 report finding that the investigation of the Trump campaign, dubbed Crossfire Hurricane, was appropriately predicated on Papadopoulos’s prediction, which came true in short order. But Durham suggests that this was somehow done with improper alacrity, before speaking to the Aussies and the “coffee boy” — something investigators did within days. Durham implies darkly that this was because deputy counterintelligence head Pete Strzok “at a minimum, had pronounced hostile feelings toward Trump.” In fact, the entire FBI leadership was in agreement with this decision, but still Durham suggests that it was somehow inappropriate due to the “reputational risk” to the candidate. He does not say how the candidate’s reputation might be harmed by an investigation which was not disclosed until after the election.
Among other clanging howlers, Durham professes shock that “No defensive briefing was provided to Trump or anyone in the campaign concerning the information received from Australia that suggested there might be some type of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians” while “FBI Headquarters and Department officials required defensive briefings to be provided to Clinton and other officials or candidates who appeared to be the targets of foreign interference.” The FBI tipped off the victim of the crime but not the suspect — UNFAIR!
This is anyway false, according to multiple reports that Trump was briefed on the possibility of Russian influence directed at his campaign in August of 2016.
Durham also makes much of a bit of Russian intelligence describing a “Clinton Plan” supposedly announced at a staff meeting on July 26, 2020 which involved distracting from her email scandal by falsely promoting the Trump-Russia story. This rumor had Clinton allies feeding lies to the media and also the FBI in an attempt to spark an investigation of their opponent, and will sound familiar to anyone who followed Durham’s speaking indictments of DNC lawyer Michael Sussmann and intelligence source Igor Danchenko, both of which led to immediate jury acquittals. Perhaps the jurors noticed that the FBI opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation in July, and so Sussmann was too late to nefariously predicate it when he wandered into the building in September.
In its loonier incarnation, this supposed plot was the basis of Trump’s RICO LOLsuit against Clinton, Sussman, Danchenko, Comey and half of DC. That case got Trump and his lawyer Alina Habba a million dollars in sanctions, but Durham will have a lifetime of shame and the permanent reek of failure, so he’s not walking away empty handed.
Over at the New York Post and Wall Street Journal, Murdoch’s minions are trying to spin this one as moral vindication, while the Federalist is shooting for the stars, calling it a peerless victory.
But in the War Room, Steve Bannon is calling out the naked and smelly king.
Ah, well, better luck next time, Mustache Man.”
Turley has officially jumped the shark.
NUTCHACHACHA, you lie about your name.
You live the lie as a recipient of governmental assistance and affirmative action.
Do you really think anyone is going to believe anything you say?
Ms. Dye effectively deconstructed all of Durham’s baseless attacks on the FBI and Turley’s purchased spin (the headline goes so far as to call it a “scandal”), but you have no counter-facts, logic or reasoning to offer to defend Durham’s waste of over $6 million of our tax dollars trying to create a nonexistent “Russia hoax” perpetrated by the FBI. So, like your hero, you resort to name-calling and accusations, like saying I am on welfare and the recipient of “affirmative action”. I’m not, but even if I were, how does that make what I write wrong? Durham and the House’s phony “investigations”, like the made-for-TV “weaponization” investigation, exist solely to create a counter-narrative toTrump’s crimes, which is exactly the reason Fox media came into existence–because the WaPo had the goods on Nixon and no one around to attack the WaPo and Woodward and Bernstein so as to raise doubts about Nixon’s guilt. The FBI is under attack because it investigated Trump, who didn’t, and still doesn’t, understand that government agencies work for the American people, not the President. If the pig somehow comes up with a means to cheat his way into office (which is the only way he could get in), this country would founder. Not only would he again destroy our economy, because he doesn’t understand micro or macro economics and cannot handle money,–even his own–It would be one vengeance mission after another against various branches of government, anyone who opposes him, and with no prospect of re-election, Trump would be even more out of control than he was the first time, asserting power for the sake of his massive ego. We can only guess how bad it would be, but it would definitely be bad. Our relations with the EU and NATO would be shredded. He would stop support for Ukraine, and Russia would start WWIII.by going after Poland, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania after he takes over Ukraine and kills millions of people. THAT’S what’s at stake here, at minimum, and if you cannot see the role this “Durham Report” and the fake “House investigations” play in this scenario, you are blind.
On a tare, she is.
I’ll just do the easy one
There is no evidence the DNC emails were hacked. That leaves the reality, someone down loaded them onto a a portable drive.
Don jr. didn’t meet with Russian lawyer for dirt on Hillary- he was tricked into a meeting with the lawyer under false pretenses (orphan Russian children) and did not stay for the full meeting. I stopped reading your comment after you got this fact wrong. Change is coming and you are on the wrong side.
Congress’ role is not to punish any of these psyops-infowarriors, but rather to fashion changes to the law that deter similar con-jobs waged in future election campaigns — with serious consequences and zero loopholes — irrespective of which side runs the con — irrespective of which Party controls the Administrative state.
It seems the best approach is to define Public Frauds mounted for political gain to be civil torts, where the Public is the only allowable plaintiff, and where Rapid-Response Public Frauds Courts handle the cases with dispatch, juries settling issues of fact vs. fabrication, and deciding liability for actors committing the latter.
Both parties have a greater interest in keeping the opponent honest during campaigns than coveting the right to deceive the public. This gives hope for bipartisan Public Frauds Deterrence legislation.
We’ve see Defamation Law used effectively recently to confront brazen public frauds, and we need to expand this exception to the 1st Amendment to cover whoppers that intentionally mislead without defaming.
It is possible that Merrick Garland is following a strategic plan published in China, Cuba, Venezuela or Nicaragua, since he clearly doesnt give a frack about the DOJ published Strategic Plan
DOJ Strategic Plan at a Glance
Goal 1: Uphold the Rule of Law
1.1 Protect Our Democratic Institutions
Strategy 1: Reaffirm and Strengthen Policies Foundational to the Rule of Law
Strategy 2: Protect the Justice Department from Improper Influence
Strategy 3: Protect Public Servants from Violence and Threats of Violence
Strategy 4: Protect the Public Fisc from Fraud on Government Programs
Strategy 5: Combat Foreign Interference in Democratic Processes
Strategy 6: Ensure Effective Oversight and Public Accountability
https://www.justice.gov/doj/doj-strategic-plan/doj-strategic-plan-glance
OTOH, maybe Merrick Garland is Saul Alinsky
Since I am not a lawyer, I found interesting what Durham stated was his guiding principle, citing in his report the Principles of Federal Prosecution. No doubt the lawyers on here know about it. I found it instructive as well that Durham quoted from U.S. Department of Justice, FYs 2022-2026 Strategic Plan at 15
So the Federal Prosecutors are supposed to follow agreed upon Principles and the DOJ has a strategic plan! Who knew???
https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-27000-principles-federal-prosecution
https://www.justice.gov/doj/doj-strategic-plan-2022-2026
Jonathan: Why do you keep promoting the Durham report? Legal experts have concluded the 306 page tome contains little new information. Much of Durham’s criticism of the FBI was already addressed in a Dec. 2019 report by DOJ’s Inspector General Michael Horowitz. He concluded the flaws in the FBI investigation were not politically motivated and the FBI had sufficient information to launch the “Russiagate” probe. As former US Attorney Harry Litman has pointed out: “Mueller’s long report explained precisely his reasons for his prosecutorial decisions [Mueller obtained over 30 successful prosecutions]. Durham just recycles old cavils about launching the Russia investigation that have zero connection to any alleged crime. It’s bogus”.
And what did Durham deliver? No grand conspiracy by the Clinton campaign. After 4 years of an intense investigation Durham could only come with two guys he alleged lied to the FBI. Their trials ended in acquittals. A big nada. Despite the consensus of the legal experts you cling to the fiction that “Trump was right that this was a manufactured hoax engineered by the Clinton campaign, weaponized by the FBI, and then promulgated by the media”. Funny, I didn’t find any of that in the Durham report.
In an attempt to salvage your and Trump’s false claims you now want the GOP controlled House to to do what neither you, Trump nor Durham could prove. You now want GOP congressional committees to call people like Marc Elias, Steele and Comey and others to testify, after granting them immunity. Bizarre! Do you really think either Jim Jordan or Comer could find what Durham could not? Comer can’t even find the whistle blower or the informants he promised would blow the lid off the Biden alleged “family scandal”. They have all gone missing–if they even exist! The Durham report is no “blueprint” for what the House should do. It would just be another fishing expedition that would cost taxpayers more money on a fruitless endeavor. Let the Durham report die a natural death and gather dust in the DOJ archives! That’s where it belongs!
FOXNEWS is cutting to the bone, and Turley is showing he should renew his contract.
[Mueller obtained over 30 successful prosecutions]
None of those prosecutions tied Trump or the campaign to Russia or any foreign interests. All were process crimes or matters unrelated to Trump or the campaign. Like the prosecution concerning taxi medallions, something that was investigated and dropped because it wasn’t worth the effort. But it was worth it to Wiesemann, to add a scalp to his empty belt.
Wrong. Not going away. 😎
This website is placing my replies in the wrong places-making my comments unclear-sorry
McIntyre;
” Legal experts have concluded”
That statement is effectively a huge blanket covering massive excuses, with no opportunity to determine veracity.
The trolls and are lazy and, very tired of getting there lies exposed in real time.
If I were more like the people on the left I would be saying that they should be banned from all public discourse because they proliferated the RussiaGate disinformation. However, I do not call for the prohibition of their disinformation. Better to have what they do in the light than that it be hidden in the shadows. Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men. The Democratic shadow do. We should not be surprised when what they do in the shadows comes to the light of day and they squeal as they stab Piggy (Trump) in the remake of The Lord Of The Flies. They will never admit what they did on the island they created where civility no longer exists. Now they continue too tell us that It didn’t happen and if it did it is just no big deal. History will not be kind to them. That is, if you don’t let them rewrite history which is also part of their plan.
TiT,
I agree.
I would say as the good professor does on a regular basis, to combat bad speech is more free speech.
And, as you aptly point out, they show their true colors. I have learned more about the woke leftist mindset from the good professor’s blog than anywhere else.
As grotesque as some of their comments are, they are informational and entertaining in a twisted juvenile way.
@TiT,
You have a couple of things to unpack…
Yes, banning them from public discourse violates their 1st A rights.
However, lets consider that there are those who are lawyers and they should be disbarred for their part in it.
Disbarment isn’t a question of 1st A rights. To be clear, they do have the right to say it. However there could be repercussions to what they said.
Marc Elias is a good example of where he’s crossed the ethical line numerous times and should be disciplined.
Same goes for others.
-G
Durham brought dubious charges against individuals for lying to investigators who voluntarily spoke with investigators. These people were not convicted, but they had to go through a trial to clear their names.
Now Turley thinks other people should voluntarily speak with investigators. Why would they do that? They would have to be kind of insane to do so, with an irresponsible prosecutor like Durham.
Lpoo
No, the charges were valid. They went in front of a partisan jury.
They should have been found guilty, lost their law licenses at a minimum and faced either some jail time or probation.
As it is… Carter Page has a pretty solid lawsuit against these individuals and the US Government.
-G
Sadly the Democrats are correct. The Durham Report is a rehash. Why is this so? Because we on the right and those on the left have known for a long time that the RussiaGate investigation by the FBI was not based on any factual information. Even Peter Strzok said that the evidence was thin. The difference in the approach by the left and the right is that those on the right soon knew it was a hoax and those on the left soon knew it was a hoax but knowing that it was a hoax continued the deception based on what they knew was a lie. The Democrats are correct in saying that the Durham Report is rehashing all the ways that the left lied to us. They must tell us that it’s just old news because they don’t want any further confirmation of how they hurt the nation by spreading the hoax. It’s their feeble attempt to just make it all go away. My hope is that Congress will drag them over the broken glass that they left on the highway by a heather part of their anatomy.
You did not read the Durham Report which is to say you did not think it through
Thinkitthrough wants it fed to him, in bullet points, preferably less than 3, in monosyllabic words, and clearly drawn arrows so that he does not have to think
it throughThe Durham Report is a short read of 316 pages in the pdf document available online. I learned a lot. I learned, not surprisingly, that the Left are lying, including about the OIG Report, the Mueller Report, and about George Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Paul Manafort, and Michael Flynn.
Durham did Americans a great service by documenting all of the facts. People should read the report before inserting foot in mouth.
Adam Schiff did far worse than George Santos, and both should be expelled from Congress as high maintenance, lying queens
💃🏽💃🏽
Estovir, great post!
Im passionate about many things, but if there is one thing that gets me boiling is communism. I see America slouching towards communism, and it makes me burn with anger. Today’s Democrats = Communists, and this from a former Democrat now Independent
Turley is suggesting congress entice people who exercised their right to remain silent or not answer any questions by offering immunity? Wow. They chose not to cooperate because they are not required to. Jim Jordan showed us how not cooperating is done.
It seems that Turley’s idea of congress offering immunity betrays the fact that Durham’s report clearly has no real evidence of what it claims. He’s already whining about the media “blackout” that he thinks is a deliberate attempt to ignore the “truth”. Likely its the opposite. They know that Durham’s report is nothing more than a rehash of previous claims and nothing new has been revealed.
This whole issue will be forgotten by the end of next week. Turley is just trying to salvage what is left of Durhams sloppy report and demands it gets the credibility it deserves. What a laugh. He’s shown us how big of a political hack he is.
“ It is not clear whether Durham was able to get a full account from these sources, but he was still able to establish the details on how this unprecedented political hit job succeeded despite a lack of evidence.”
Turley is sure working hard to make this report seem credible when it is not. The reason why there is a lack of evidence is because the majority of Durham’s findings are based on his own conspiracy theories about the issue.
As usual Turley is being disingenuous with the facts. For example he states,
“ Durham concludes that the investigation should never have been launched and that the whole effort was based on “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated” information.”
This is a false statement. Durham did agree that there was good reason to investigate the collusion story. He’s relying on his lazy readers not to look it up in the nearly 300 page report.
One reason I think the report IS 300 pages long is because he needed so much space to try to justify the failure to prove anything. As Turley obliviously admits there was a lack of evidence.
Who cares about the rubbish which was said seven years ago?
“Congress can now use that foundation to compel cooperation from key figures in this scandal, if necessary, under a grant of immunity. The witnesses could still be prosecuted if they lie or mislead congressional investigators or commit perjury.”
Special Counsel Durham will know why he didn’t spoke to Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, Bruce & Nellie Ohr, Bill Priestap, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Kevin Clinesmith, Rodney Joffe, Marc Elias, Glenn Simpson…
As FBI is “broken”, “Congress” has other priorities to deal with [1]:
“The FBI, under Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland, is broken. The leadership at the FBI and Justice Department have weaponized federal law enforcement against everyday Americans, seeking to silence those who dare to have a different viewpoint. […] The Committee’s and Select Subcommittee’s investigation into the weaponization of the federal law enforcement apparatus continues” (p 78)
[1] https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2023/05/Weaponization-report.pdf