Durham Congressional testimony live

The groomers' simian pet reaches new lows of stunning ignorance.... :laughing0301:

Image 56.png
 
You read it? Did you miss the part finding that there no factual predicate to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation?

It was started because of Papadopoulos big mouth. You didn't read the Nunes memo?

Not sure how you could miss that. Or the parts where headquarters (Comey, McCabe ...) withheld crucial information from the investigating agents?
What I know is they got some tax fraud and filled out a gun form wrong.

If Comey and mccabe withheld info then where are the obstruction charges?
 
It was started because of Papadopoulos big mouth. You didn't read the Nunes memo?
No it wasn't. You should really read the report if you want to intelligently discuss it.
What I know is they got some tax fraud and filled out a gun form wrong.

If Comey and mccabe withheld info then where are the obstruction charges?

Excellent question. One I also had.
 
No it wasn't. You should really read the report if you want to intelligently discuss it.

Read a 300 plus pages document that ended in no indictments, no criminal activity?

Why would I do that?

Feel free to paste what you are referencing and I certainly will look at it and then likely ask why nobody was charged.

Certainly Amy large FBI investigation can be stripped down over the course of years and discrepancies can be found. That is what we have here unless I see indictments.

Excellent question. One I also had.
The answer is they didn't obstruct.
 
Read a 300 plus pages document that ended in no indictments, no criminal activity?

Why would I do that?

Off the top of my head - so you wouldn't make ignorant statements on a thread discussing Durham's testimony regarding said report. Just saying.
 
Off the top of my head - so you wouldn't make ignorant statements on a thread discussing Durham's testimony regarding said report. Just saying.
Did you read the entire report or are you parroting right wing media talking points and pretending you read it?

If you did read it, you should be able to point out the specific part that supports your contention. I would be curious how whatever you have been spoon fed didn't end up in any indictments yet you insist it was a crime.
 
Did you read the entire report or are you parroting right wing mediatalking points and pretending you read it?
What "right wing media talking points" are you talking about.?

You claimed Crossfire Hurricane was opened because of "Papadopoulos big mouth." It wasn't. You seem upset that I corrected you.

If you did read it, you should be able to point out the specific part that supports your contention. I would be curious how whatever you have been spoon fed didn't end up in any indictments yet you insist it was a crime.

What contention are you talking about? That Comey et al withheld information from the investigating agents?

The Office showed portions of the Clinton Plan intelligence to a number of individuals who were actively involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Most advised they had never seen the intelligence before, and some expressed surprise and dismay upon learning of it. For example, the original Supervisory Special Agent on the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, Supervisory Special Agent-1, reviewed the intelligence during one of his interviews with the Office.428 After reading it, Supervisory Special Agent-I became visibly upset and emotional, left the interview room with his counsel, and subsequently returned to state emphatically that he had never been apprised ofthe Clinton Plan intelligence and had never seen the aforementioned Referral Memo. 429 Supervisory Special Agent-1 expressed a sense of betrayal that no one had informed him ofthe intelligence. When the Office cautioned Supervisory Special Agent-1 that we had not verified or corroborated the accuracy of the intelligence and its assertions regarding the Clinton campaign, Supervisory Special Agent-I responded firmly that regardless of whether its contents were true, he should have been informed of it.

p. 88 of the report.
 
What "right wing media talking points" are you talking about.?

The right wing talking points that make you think a crime happened but Repubs won't indict for it.

You claimed Crossfire Hurricane was opened because of "Papadopoulos big mouth." It wasn't. You seem upset that I corrected you.

What makes you think I was upset?

These guys read the report.

"As the report recounts, “Crossfire Hurricane”—the FBI’s codename for its probe of potential links between Russia’s election interference operation and the 2016 Trump presidential campaign—originated in the summer of 2016 with a tip from the Australian government (a “friendly foreign government” in the report): Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos had been drunkenly repeating an academic acquaintance’s startling assertion that the Russian government had thousands of potentially damaging e-mails related to Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton."


What contention are you talking about? That Comey et al withheld information from the investigating agents?



p. 88 of the report.
If Comey withheld info he should be charged with obstruction. Why is he not?
 
Did Durham forget to put something in his report?

Did he change his mind and is going to recommend charges?

What is the purpose of this?
I'm guessing its sort of like when the Democrats controlled the House and brought Mueller before them to explain why he didn't question much less indict Trump. The GOP is displeased that he didn't indict anyone. So all you can do now is try to rekindle the "fire" that was never that hot to begin with.

The difference in the two men is that the Mueller investigation was brought to a close by Spanky Barr, the new AG and Durham just gave up after 4 years of nothing. Mueller got prison terms and indicted over a dozen people. Barr got one guy I think--whose time being deposed was shorter than Barr's testimony today.
 
I'm guessing its sort of like when the Democrats controlled the House and brought Mueller before them to explain why he didn't question much less indict Trump. The GOP is displeased that he didn't indict anyone. So all you can do now is try to rekindle the "fire" that was never that hot to begin with.

The difference in the two men is that the Mueller investigation was brought to a close by Spanky Barr, the new AG and Durham just gave up after 4 years of nothing. Mueller got prison terms and indicted over a dozen people. Barr got one guy I think--whose time being deposed was shorter than Barr's testimony today.
Yeah. I agree. I lean toward them just rehashing a nothingburger to get the base all riled up. Keeping it in the news cycle as long as possible so Trump humpers can cry and moan but not answer why nobody was indicted.

One thing I will note about your post though; Mueller was a republican investigation.
 
The right wing talking points that make you think a crime happened but Repubs won't indict for it.



What makes you think I was upset?

Because your argument devolved into claiming that I was posting "right wing talking points"
These guys read the report.

I don't know who those "guys" are, and there were certainly loose with their language. The tip about Papadapoluous was justification for opening a preliminary investigation. If you read it, again, which you clearly haven't, Durham outlines in excruciating detail how the FBI failed to follow even the most rudimentary procedures and guidelines during that preliminary investigation which led to the improper opening of Crossfire Hurricane.
"As the report recounts, “Crossfire Hurricane”—the FBI’s codename for its probe of potential links between Russia’s election interference operation and the 2016 Trump presidential campaign—originated in the summer of 2016 with a tip from the Australian government (a “friendly foreign government” in the report): Trump campaign aide George Papadopoulos had been drunkenly repeating an academic acquaintance’s startling assertion that the Russian government had thousands of potentially damaging e-mails related to Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton."



If Comey withheld info he should be charged with obstruction. Why is he not?
Again, that's a question I have, and I was hoping that some Congresscritter was going to ask Durham. In some parts of the report he outlines that everyone in FBI conveniently forgot what was going on at that time, so he couldn't build a case beyond a reasonable doubt against one sing;e individual.
 

Forum List

Back
Top