Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Why would I lie like Fox News? You (still) need to catch up on reality.
No, he isn't. This is a response to the motion of the defense to strike his "background information" from the filing because it created such a stir amongst right-wing media outlets.
He's saying to the judge that he isn't responsible for how it was interpreted and went on to say that he would file under seal if he filed another motion that had these kinds of remarks.
The exact opposite from stating the right-wing media is correct.
forkup said:
Maybe I can be of assistance.
Durham says 'no basis' to strike 'factual background' from filing, denies intent to 'politicize' Sussmann case
Special Counsel John Durham, responding to Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann’s motion to have the court “strike” the “factual background” section from his latest filing. Durham denied that he “intentionally sought to politicize” the case, but instead, included “additional factual detail” that he...
www.foxnews.com
Durham added: "If third parties or members of the media have overstated, understated, or otherwise misinterpreted facts contained in the Government’s Motion, that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the Government’s inclusion of this information."
Seems Durham is disavowing the coverage.
Click to expand...
Now you talk to yourself. Get a grip.What is gratifying about this poster is that he, stereotypically, cannot conceive of the death blow the Democrats just got from Durham.....and they sense the encroaching darkness.
I bet their predecssor felt the same way in that bunker in Berlin just before he ended the Reich.
I don't care that he denied that the motion wasn't material. I care that he did by disavowing the actual mediaJust the opposite.
You should read more carefully.
Sussman's lawyers tried to claim the lie was immaterial.
"... remember that the law on materiality is clear that the falsehood need not actually influence the agency’s decision-making process, but merely needs to be “capable” of doing so."
Durham said....WRONG.
As you are.....WRONG.
I don't care that he denied that the motion wasn't material. I care that he did by disavowing the actual media
coverage by the right.
Of course, he'll deny he filed the motion for political reasons.
I see no mention of Fox in there moron. That little word IF is in there though. That means there may not have been any misinterpretations. Also means that your precious CNN and MSNBCCP may be the ones spouting lies about this.Here is a quote from Durham...
“If third parties or members of the media have overstated, understated or otherwise misinterpreted facts contained in the government’s motion, that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the government’s inclusion of this information,” he wrote.
In other words he says that some media outlets (like Fox News) are full of crap.
I see no mention of Fox in there moron. That little word IF is in there though. That means there may not have been any misinterpretations. Also means that your precious CNN and MSNBCCP may be the ones spouting lies about this.
Great response!!! A picture of a newspaper. However will I respond to such an insightful counter-argument???
That is correct. And it is RW media who can't be honest, and for that matter, trusted.No, he isn't. This is a response to the motion of the defense to strike his "background information" from the filing because it created such a stir amongst right-wing media outlets.
He's saying to the judge that he isn't responsible for how it was interpreted and went on to say that he would file under seal if he filed another motion that had these kinds of remarks.
The exact opposite from stating the right-wing media is correct.
Great response!!! A picture of a newspaper. However will I respond to such an insightful counter-argument???
Wait, I think I know............ You're a political hack without a grain of intellectual honesty.
I never said it was in the statement, Master Moron. Was Fox adding to their interpretation of said statement? Yes.I see no mention of Fox in there moron. That little word IF is in there though. That means there may not have been any misinterpretations. Also means that your precious CNN and MSNBCCP may be the ones spouting lies about this.
thefederalist.com
Talking on Durham... Did you know he's not answering questions about RW media's mis-representation of his statement?
You should read up on it. Maybe your propaganda will dissipate. Maybe.
She is a cut and paste fuck up to the 9th degree.Great response!!! A picture of a newspaper. However will I respond to such an insightful counter-argument???
Wait, I think I know............ You're a political hack without a grain of intellectual honesty.
Worried? About what exactly?Wow.....Durham's really got you worried.
You should wipe the sweat off your forehead....
......and the drool off your chin.
Progs have successfully divided this nation. They control the airwaves, most of the print and a lot of social media. Repubs have theirs but it is miniscule compared to Progs. And yet they know common sense more than Progs will ever. Tell us about Democracy again.Durham himslef just tossed his own followers under the bus. And so another Trumptard conspiracy scam dies with a whimper.
It won't matter. Trumptards never learn. They'll fall just as hard for the next scam.
Yea I know that's why I hardly ever respond to her. It was just tempting this time. I've never seen anybody, even on this board both this condescending and this wrong at the same time. And she's totally shameless about it.She is a cut and paste fuck up to the 9th degree.
You, again, take it as something else. Did Fox News give you a degree in something?"5 Media Lies About The Latest Special Counsel Revelations
1. It’s Just Those Crazy Right-Wingers
In his opening salvo in the Sussmann counter-offensive, Savage began his New York Times column by noting that Durham’s Friday night filing “set off a furor among right-wing outlets about purported spying on former President Donald J. Trump.”
Framing the “furor” as right-wing proves a ready go-to for a corrupt media seeking to discount the substance of the reporting. Stelter likewise hit this talking point repeatedly over at CNN, in his article “Right-wing media said it was exposing a scandal. What it really revealed is how bad information spreads in MAGA world.”
Hillary Clinton likewise pushed the right-wingers angle, tweeting that “Trump & Fox are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from his real ones.”
5 Media Lies About The Latest Special Counsel Revelations
The Durham deniers’ talking points remain gibberish. They are furiously attempting to hand-wave away the facts the special counsel has found.
Same here. She needs a spanking on this OP and deserves it.Yea I know that's why I hardly ever respond to her. It was just tempting this time. I've never seen anybody, even on this board both this condescending and this wrong at the same time. And she's totally shameless about it.
thefederalist.com
