Darth Omar
Russian asset
CNN Chief Zucker has been flat-out exposed, instructing his people to go after Trump.
How is that NOT the worst kind of media bias?
Barr’s Hatchet Job
- Thread starter Phantasmal
- Start date
CNN Chief Zucker has been flat-out exposed, instructing his people to go after Trump.
How is that NOT the worst kind of media bias?
Darth Omar
Russian asset
There are crime theories and conspiracy theories.
Currently, Durham is investigating a crime theory. If and when, it turns out to be a dry hole, only then can it be properly labeled a conspiracy theory. IOW, after Mullet found no conspiracy between Trump and the Russians, it’s fair to call the Trump/Russian theory—a conspiracy theory.
And since the country was put through two years of Russian related histrionics by Trump-haters in the IC, DOJ and the media, it’s only fitting that ‘how did it all begin’ becomes a subject of a perfectly *legitimate* investigation.
After Durham reports we will know if it was a crime theory or a conspiracy theory.
Trumpet
Verified User
What you're referring to, are Trump's demented talking points.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello Darth,
I am not familiar with that pundit, but as I say, "We will always have conservative and liberal voices. But those viewpoints change over time. I'd like to see that change be a positive one for both sides."
If we have a pundit who is well informed and he believes there is wrong doing in our government, and has identified an individual who is not serving the public interest, but instead his own, I would want that pundit to speak up about what he knows, and yes to warn us if he feels the public should take action. Even if the individual in question is the President. The people should be well educated enough to decide for themselves if they respond to that message or not.
I am not familiar with that pundit, but as I say, "We will always have conservative and liberal voices. But those viewpoints change over time. I'd like to see that change be a positive one for both sides."
If we have a pundit who is well informed and he believes there is wrong doing in our government, and has identified an individual who is not serving the public interest, but instead his own, I would want that pundit to speak up about what he knows, and yes to warn us if he feels the public should take action. Even if the individual in question is the President. The people should be well educated enough to decide for themselves if they respond to that message or not.
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
It wasn't that Muller found no conspiracy between Trump and Russians. It was that he couldn't prove it. Proving conspiracy is a high bar. Just because there is evidence which indicates it that doesn't mean it's proved. Mueller had such evidence. And if Trump knew he was innocent he would not have tried to obstruct justice but he did on at least ten identified instances. Nothing Barr uncovers is going to undo that.
Last edited:
christiefan915
Catalyst
I wouldn't say Barr is well-regarded by many liberals, especially after his summary of the Mueller report.
The way Durham handled the torture of detainees investigations wasn't some of his best work.
Meet John Durham
https://time.com/5693083/john-durham-justice-department-investigation/
Blumenthal and the other Democratic Senator from Connecticut Chris Murphy have both praised Durham as a “fierce and fair prosecutor.”
Durham’s own reputation for thorough, nonpartisan work has remained intact over decades as a federal prosecutor targeting corruption. And people who know him expect him to handle this investigation honestly, despite the heated political environment.
“He is not naïve,” says Robinson. “He understands the political implications of the work that he’s been asked to do and the potential impact it could have. He’s not going to wilt under that.”
https://time.com/5693083/john-durham-justice-department-investigation/
Blumenthal and the other Democratic Senator from Connecticut Chris Murphy have both praised Durham as a “fierce and fair prosecutor.”
Durham’s own reputation for thorough, nonpartisan work has remained intact over decades as a federal prosecutor targeting corruption. And people who know him expect him to handle this investigation honestly, despite the heated political environment.
“He is not naïve,” says Robinson. “He understands the political implications of the work that he’s been asked to do and the potential impact it could have. He’s not going to wilt under that.”
Darth Omar
Russian asset
An unproven conspiracy is no conspiracy lol.
Conspiracy theories are *conspiracy theories* precisely because they have some tantalizing evidence to confirm preconceived notions—but they can’t be proven. That’s what’s so dangerous [for lack of a better word] about conspiracy theories.
There are any number of facts that contradict the alleged relationship between Trump and Putin and they come out all the time. The most recent one is where Trump sent troops to guard the Syrian oil fields, much to the chagrin of his supposed buddy Putin.
If Putin ‘helped Trump win the election’ that’s a slap in the face.
Last edited:
PoliTalker
Diversity Makes Greatness
Hello dukkha,
The problem for Trump is that Durham may be a little too fair and impartial. It may not be wise to expect Durham to confirm Trump's wild conspiracy theories. He has a history of investigations which produced no hoped-for results:
"Durham spent two years on the tapes investigation, closing it in 2010 without recommending any criminal charges. His final report remains classified. He closed the torture investigation in 2012, also without filing any criminal charges."
Here's a good assessment of Durham:
"“This investigation of the investigators is a politically motivated distraction,” Democratic Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal said in a statement on May 14 about Durham’s assignment. “And it threatens to degrade the career professionals — like John Durham — who devote their lives to law enforcement. This is an example of another very professional public servant tasked with a very unprofessional and unbecoming job.”"
The problem for Trump is that Durham may be a little too fair and impartial. It may not be wise to expect Durham to confirm Trump's wild conspiracy theories. He has a history of investigations which produced no hoped-for results:
"Durham spent two years on the tapes investigation, closing it in 2010 without recommending any criminal charges. His final report remains classified. He closed the torture investigation in 2012, also without filing any criminal charges."
Here's a good assessment of Durham:
"“This investigation of the investigators is a politically motivated distraction,” Democratic Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal said in a statement on May 14 about Durham’s assignment. “And it threatens to degrade the career professionals — like John Durham — who devote their lives to law enforcement. This is an example of another very professional public servant tasked with a very unprofessional and unbecoming job.”"
Yes, definitely 2017. By August, Steele didn't know who to trust. As far as the Senate Intelligence Committee goes, they weren't investigating, they have always been part of the Trump takedown.
In January of '17, Feinstein gave up her vice-chair seat to Warner, after she stepped down her top staffer, Daniel Jones became the point man between SSCI and Fusion-GPS. Jones began heading up The Democracy Integrity Project and continued to pay Fusion GPS for anti-Trump work with a plausible degree of separation between Fusion-GPS and the democrat members of the SSCI.
By 2017 the role of Fusion-GPS shifted, and was now focused on feeding specific narratives to the media that would aid the impeachment agenda. Fusion-GPS was the go-between for coordinated leaks to media partners from the various "small groups". The DOJ/FBI “small group” leaks go to the New York Times and NBC. CIA/ODNI go to the the Washington Post and ABC; and the State Dept and various members of Congress use CNN and CBS.
Warner was and still is dirty as hell, texts were exposed between Warner and Steele's attorney Adam Waldman, attempting to set-up a "no paper trail" relationship with Steele. Waldman also represented Russian oligarch and Steele’s employer, Oleg Deripaska. Warner desperately wanted his own inside track to Steele, Perhaps we will find out from Barr if that ever happened.
.
If all he has is the abuse of FISA 702(16)(17) that's enough to get a shit-ton of FBI players and Powers, Rice and Rhodes in the White House.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
How about we let the man finish his task before making any assessments on ‘politically motivated distractions’.
As if anyone would expect a prominent democrat to say ‘holy shyte, Durham!!!’ Lol
I’m one of the Trump supporters that hasn’t climbed out on the limb with Durham. Some days I’m thinking ‘no way he could NOT find something’ and other days skepticism creeps up on me. I will say this much: there is *definitely* reason for Democrats to be concerned about Durham.
In fact, his investigation is the Wild Card going into 2020.
Getin the ring
Verified User
you expose corruption wherever you find it, isn't that the Democrat marching orders? after all
Getin the ring
Verified User
you're coming around
signalmankenneth
Verified User
Getin the ring
Verified User
Bill Barr is about to rain down some pain on the Democrat party and it's corrupt ways
soon there will be justice, The hate and non-sense from the left needs to be met with scorn thru truth
soon there will be justice, The hate and non-sense from the left needs to be met with scorn thru truth
Nope, the GOP is now a Russian aide organization (traitors) and you are their slimy little puppet. Fuck you, Dukkha and the other con traitors. Why do you hate America?