Saturday's news on the Durham investigation releasesd

[Tennesseer]

Meanwhile, back at Mar-a-lago...

Trump's longtime accounting firm cut him off and said 10 years of his financial statements 'should no longer be relied upon' amid fraud allegations

Former President Donald Trump's longtime accounting firm recently informed the Trump Organization that 10 years worth of Trump's statements on his financial worth "should no longer be relied upon."

The determination comes after New York Attorney General Tish James' office said last month that these "Statements of Financial Condition" repeatedly "misstated objective facts" including the size of his Trump Tower penthouse; overstated his liquidity; deviated from general accounting principles to reach property valuations; "failed to use fundamental techniques of valuation"; and did not disclose that some of those valuations were artificially inflated to help Trump's brand.

Mazars said that it reached its conclusion based on James' revelations, its own internal investigation into the matter, and information it received from "internal and external sources."

"While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material discrepancies, based upon the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to you to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate," the firm said in its letter to the Trump Organization.

Mazars went on to say that because of its decision regarding Trump's statements as well as "the totality of the circumstances," it will no longer be able to "provide any new work product to the Trump Organization."

It also advised the company to "inform any recipients thereof who are currently relying upon one or more of those documents that those documents should not be relied upon."

Insider has reached out to the company for comment.

The Trump Organization is the focus of multiple civil and criminal investigations into if the company inflated or deflated the value of its assets for loan and tax purposes, respectively.

James' office is conducting a wide-ranging civil investigation looking into whether rampant fraud "permeated the Trump Organization" and wants several members of the Trump family, including the former president and his two eldest children, to sit for depositions.

The Manhattan district attorney's office, meanwhile, is conducting a criminal investigation into the company and last year brought 15 felony counts against the Trump Organization and its longtime CFO Allen Weisselberg, including including tax fraud, grand larceny, and conspiracy.

In addition to its own civil inquiry, James' office is also collaborating with the DA's office on the criminal probe, which has since shifted from a tax-related focus to scrutinizing how the Trump Organization valued its assets.

Complete article here: Trump's longtime accounting firm cut him off and said 10 years of his financial statements 'should no longer be relied upon' amid fraud allegations

[Tennesseer]

Feb 13, 2022 11:33:38 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

When you are in the backdoor of Presidential servers gathering information you are on thin ice.
Try doing that to a sitting democrat President.

[Tennesseer]

[azucena]

Hilarious.  It's not like we couldn't see this coming, but it's crazy that it is actually happening.

[billisonboard]

Right-wing media said it was exposing a scandal. What it really revealed is how bad information spreads in MAGA world

[Tennesseer]

In a surprising twist, Trump uses inaccurate Durham reporting to boost his election claims

It’s been less than a week, but the inaccurate summary of a court filing by special counsel John Durham promulgated on the right has become canon. Here, for example, is Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) articulating it on Fox News on Wednesday night (shortly before taking a moment to plug campaign merchandise glamorizing his encouragement of protesters on Jan. 6).

It’s clear now there was collusion, after all, in the 2016 campaign,” Hawley said, before flipping the script: “and the collusion was between Hillary Clinton and some tech executives who did in fact spy on Donald Trump, who did access his email servers. And worse than that, who went on, according to special counsel, went on to try and infiltrate that is spy on the Executive Office of the President of the United States.”

Naturally he concluded that someone should “go to jail for this.”

Except, of course, that the “this” to which he refers didn’t happen. As rapidly as Fox News and Hawley and the gang have arrived at this wildly misleading distillation, I’ve grown fatigued with having to explain that it’s wrong. The line from Clinton’s campaign to research looking at a limited set of data about Internet domain names is not brightly drawn by Durham or elsewhere. There was no accessing of email servers alleged anywhere. And while Durham is careful to point out that 1) the research evaluating possible connections to Russia included (legally acquired) data from the executive office and that 2) this led to a February 2017 meeting about the research, he does not allege that the data included in that research was collected from the Trump White House.

In fact, lawyers for the research team itself told the New York Times that, to the best of their knowledge, it considered only executive-office data from 2016, before Trump was president. Even looking just at Durham’s timeline, it’s clear that even if it had included post-2016 data, it couldn’t have included much. The meeting at issue was on Feb. 9, 2017, less than three weeks into Trump’s presidency.

But, precisely because it lets people like Hawley make wild claims about Clinton and about how Trump was so oppressed by his opponents, the Hawley narrative is the default one on the right.

It is important to continue to point out how inaccurate and unfounded this is for a few reasons. One is that it is generally preferable to spend one’s time promulgating accurate information rather than inaccurate information. Another is that establishing a false assertion as widely believed is the rhetorical equivalent of dividing-by-zero: base a claim on something false and you can extend it outward in any direction you wish.

Bringing us, inexorably, to the former president of the United States.

On Thursday evening, Trump released a statement through his secondary business, the deep-pocketed political action committee that’s been vacuuming up contributions for more than a year now. It took the false story line above and pushed it forward precisely as you’d expect. It read, in part:

“Much of the now-uncovered espionage campaign of the Democrats breaking into the White House and my New York City apartment, took place after the 2016 Election as yet another way to undermine the upcoming 2020 Election. This spying into the Oval Office continued for a long period of time and further served to undermine and discredit the 2020 Election, along with massive ballot harvesting, phantom voters, and so many other things that made the Election a sham.”

So, again, there was no “breaking into the White House” or his apartment at Trump Tower, despite his very boomerian effort to conflate what happened to him with the burglary that triggered Watergate. There was no demonstrated “spying into the Oval Office” and, as far as has been reported, no examination of legally collected data from the executive office after 2016. It’s probable that the data at issue — log files of domain requests gathered to track possible infiltration attempts — was still collected after Trump was president, since its collection related to normal cybersecurity activity. It’s possible that the data then continued to be shared with external research organizations. But it’s not clear that it was or that it was used for any reason other than normal tracking of potential threats. It’s also not clear that the research conducted on the 2016 data was necessarily outside the scope of that same outcome.

What is very clear is that none of this had anything to do with the 2020 election. Trump’s ploy here is so clumsy and so ham-handed that it seems like kicking him while he’s down to point it out, but he’s simply trying to extend “I was spied on” to “as part of a broad effort to steal the election from me.” This latter point is of far more interest to him than anything else; he will rail against the reality of his 2020 loss until his last breath, given what it says about his long-standing insistences about his popularity and invincibility.

This Durham story, molded and shaped in a way sure to have curried his favor in 2019 — Clinton bad! Trump treated unfairly! — simply no longer addresses his most urgent needs. He still cares about those perceptions, sure, but any contrived narrative that isn’t singularly focused on proving that he wuz robbed is not a narrative he’s interested in at the moment.

And why not? Why not take an untrue assertion about the Durham filing and claim that it goes even further? What are Fox News and Hawley going to do, interject to say that, no, we’re only pretending it continued until early in your administration? Trump gets away with this stuff anyway because it’s easier and less politically risky to agree with him than it is to disagree. (Hence the Houston Chronicle’s determination that only 13 of Texas’s 143 Republican House candidates were willing to say that President Biden was legitimately elected.) So who’s going to pop up on Sean Hannity’s show and say, actually, Trump has it wrong. Certainly not Sean Hannity.

The problem with abandoning any anchor to reality is that you float into dangerous and unintended waters. Then, apparently, you just do your best not to get yelled at.

In a surprising twist, Trump uses inaccurate Durham reporting to boost his election claims

[pulmonarymd]

Seems like Durham does not agree with Fox News' interpretation of his findings

[Tennesseer]

Durham Distances Himself From Furor in Right-Wing Media Over Filing

The special counsel implicitly acknowledged that White House internet data he discussed, which conservative outlets have portrayed as proof of spying on the Trump White House, came from the Obama era.

WASHINGTON — John H. Durham, the Trump-era special counsel scrutinizing the investigation into Russia’s 2016 election interference, distanced himself on Thursday from false reports by right-wing news outlets that a motion he recently filed said Hillary Clinton’s campaign had paid to spy on Trump White House servers.

Citing a barrage of such reports on Fox News and elsewhere based on the prosecutor’s Feb. 11 filing, defense lawyers for a Democratic-linked cybersecurity lawyer, Michael Sussmann, have accused the special counsel of including unnecessary and misleading information in filings “plainly intended to politicize this case, inflame media coverage and taint the jury pool.”

In a filing on Thursday, Mr. Durham defended himself, saying those accusations about his intentions were “simply not true.” He said he had “valid and straightforward reasons” for including the information in the Feb. 11 filing that set off the firestorm, while disavowing responsibility for how certain news outlets had interpreted and portrayed it.

“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.

Rest of article here: Durham Distances Himself From Furor in Right-Wing Media Over Filing

[Tennesseer]

Feb 13, 2022 10:10:07 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

Posters may find trouble finding this news right now because Durham did not publicly release this info to the national media. It is part of his Friday request to the Court and was buried in his request to the Court. 

Details involve not naming names other than person #1
And tech company #1
but it involves illegally tapping into then candidate Trump's servers of the campaign and continued on into the Computer servers in the White House as he was President.
Dismiss this if you want, but it bleeds into the DOJ who was made aware of the situation and did not investigate into the spying on a sitting President. 


www.foxnews.com/politics/clinton-campaign-paid-infiltrate-trump-tower-white-house-servers

Fox News Stops Covering Hillary Spying on Trump Story After Spending All Week Attacking Media For Ignoring It

Anyone watching Fox News this week was told that Hillary Clinton’s campaign had been caught spying on former President Donald Trump. This was reported across many Fox News programs as fact, with some hosts adding exotic frills to the story. More reputable news outlets were quick to pour cold water on the assertion. Some even called out Fox News for being either stupid or willfully misinforming their viewers.

The evidence for Fox News’s breathless and repeated “worse than Watergate” claim was a late Friday filing from Special Counsel John Durham that focused on one-time Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman.

A good example of Fox’s sensationalized coverage were these comments from Jesse Watters, made on Monday:

Durham’s documents show that Hillary Clinton hired people who hacked into Trump’s home and office computers before and during his presidency, and planted evidence that he colluded with Russia.

Yeah. You heard that right. Hillary broke into a presidential candidate’s computer server and a sitting president’s computer server, spying on them. There, her hackers planted evidence, fabricated evidence connecting Trump to Russia, then fed that doctored material to the feds and the media.

Durham’s filing did not show this – at all. What’s more, as New York Times reporter Charlie Savage pointed out, the right-wing media narrative surrounding the filing was “mostly wrong or old news.” Indeed, the Times had reported on it last year.

This didn’t keep Fox News from continuing to insist a scandal was afoot. The network even had the temerity to call out the rest of the media for ignoring this alleged bombshell: Fox News media report Howard Kurtz called out his competitors for not covering the story, though it was never made clear what exactly the story was. Oops.

But late Thursday, the story took another turn, as Durham responded to Sussman’s filing to dismiss the case, and added some clarity to the misreporting.

Savage wrote that in Durham’s new filing, saying he “distanced himself on Thursday from false reports by right-wing news outlets that a motion he recently filed said Hillary Clinton’s campaign had paid to spy on Trump White House servers.

The key statement from Durham’s most recent filing reads:

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.

That statement was read in full by Bret Baier on Special Report Thursday night in advance of a remarkably muted panel discussion. Since then, the Fox News insistence that Clinton had been caught spying on Trump has nearly completely abated. That’s a rather stunning turn from the obsessive, nearly wall-to-wall coverage this non-story received over the past week.

In the past six days, John Durham was mentioned 219 times on Fox News, according to TVEyes. But as of 11 a.m. today. his name was mentioned only once by Steve Doocy on Fox & Friends, and it was in the context of Hillary Clinton being asked a question by a reporter.

So what happened? Mediaite reached out to Fox News to ask if the network no longer felt the bombshell that Hillary Clinton spied on Trump was newsworthy, or if they no longer believe that it’s true. Fox News has not replied.

In a column published earlier this week, I asked how real journalists could compete with a network such as Fox News that was so comfortable reporting falsehoods. The fact that the network has apparently ceased covering a story that they got so unbelievably wrong, without any public statement acknowledging it, just proves the point I made in that column.

What an incredibly embarrassing moment for Fox News.

Fox News Stops Covering Hillary Spying on Trump Story After Spending All Week Attacking Media For Ignoring It

[pulmonarymd]

Wonder how Fox News feels about the plain verdict?

[tbop77]

You have to admit one thing, Durham has a nice gig at the expense of the taxpayer.  Would surely think Hillary, Obama, Comey, and all would have been frog marched off to prison by now.  

[kadee79]

Feb 19, 2022 8:16:12 GMT -5 tbop77 said:

 Would surely think Hillary, Obama, Comey, and all would have been frog marched off to prison by now.  

Wasn't that a prediction about 5-6 yrs. ago by a former poster?  

[djAdvocate]

i am trying to not be filled with hope reading post 38.  

[Tennesseer]

Judge restricts Durham evidence on Clinton campaign 'joint venture' in Sussmann trial

A federal judge placed limits on special counsel John Durham’s evidence in court meant to demonstrate a “joint venture” involving Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign to discredit rival Donald Trump with Russia collusion claims.

A ruling Saturday evening included wins and losses for both the prosecution and defense in the case against Democratic cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann, who was indicted for allegedly concealing his clients — Clinton's campaign and “Tech Executive-1” Rodney Joffe — from FBI general counsel James Baker in September 2016 when he presented internet data that suggested a now-discredited back channel link between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa-Bank. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.

“The government contends that the Alfa Bank data was gathered as part of a concerted effort to collect and disseminate derogatory opposition research about Donald Trump,” U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, appointed by former President Barack Obama, wrote in the 24-page ruling, adding that participants in the “purported joint undertaking” included Sussmann, the Clinton campaign, Clinton campaign general counsel and Perkins Coie partner Marc Elias, the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, Joffe, and several computer researchers working at Joffe’s direction.

“The Court will exercise its discretion not to engage in the kind of extensive evidentiary analysis that would be required to find that such a joint venture existed, and who may have joined it, in order to admit these emails,” the judge ruled, “For starters, Mr. Sussmann is not charged with a conspiracy.”

Rest of article here:  Judge restricts Durham evidence on Clinton campaign 'joint venture' in Sussmann trial

Also: Durham probe suffers set-back as judge limits evidence prosecutors can offer in trial: report

[djAdvocate]

i am having trouble interpreting that article, Tenn.
thoughts?

[Value Buy]

May 9, 2022 12:31:45 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i am having trouble interpreting that article, Tenn.
thoughts?

Short version 
Durham starts the trial tomorrow and the lawyer he has charged is toast.

[tbop77]

May 16, 2022 22:11:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

May 9, 2022 12:31:45 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i am having trouble interpreting that article, Tenn.
thoughts?

Short version 
Durham starts the trial tomorrow and the lawyer he has charged is toast.

Whooo---hooooo, after 2 1/2 years and how much taxpayer money....he is the man!  

But wait what?  No frog marching for Hillary, Obama, Comey off to prison?  

Maybe another decade or so, he'll get there!  Keep at 'em!

[Tennesseer]

I wonder what the quid pro quo is this time between trump and Putin.

McConnell tries to stamp out Trump dissension on Ukraine

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is stamping out former President Trump’s efforts to sow dissension in the Republican Party over whether to send tens of billions of dollars in new assistance to Ukraine.

McConnell is framing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a clear threat to U.S. national security interests, espousing the muscular foreign policy worldview that Republicans were known for before Trump took office in 2017.

He traveled to the country over the weekend as part of an all-Republican Senate delegation to personally assure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that there’s strong Republican support for Kyiv, despite criticism of the latest Ukraine aid package from Trump and his allies, including Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.).

McConnell has feuded with Trump since he excoriated the former president on the Senate floor for inciting the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, but he has mostly played defense, dodging repeated questions about Trump and ignoring the former president’s scathing mockery and attack.

Now McConnell has a chance to go on offense by pushing his party to embrace the strong national security and foreign policy vision that it was known for under former Presidents Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, a worldview that Trump stepped away from.

“Hopefully not many members of my party will choose to politicize this issue. I thought it was significant in the House that the House leadership voted for the package and the vast majority of House Republicans voted for the package,” McConnell told reporters after meeting with Zelensky, noting the House passed the $40 billion Ukraine package last week by a vote of 368-57.

McConnell is arguing that standing up to Russian aggression is vital to U.S. interests and that failure to stop Russian President Vladimir Putin now could put European allies at risk, echoing the domino theory of communist expansion that was preeminent during the Cold War.

Complete article here: McConnell tries to stamp out Trump dissension on Ukraine

[Tennesseer]

Michael Sussmann Is Acquitted in Case Brought by Trump-Era Prosecutor
The Democratic-linked lawyer was accused of lying to the F.B.I. about his clients when he passed on a tip about possible connections between Donald J. Trump and Russia.

WASHINGTON — Michael Sussmann, a prominent cybersecurity lawyer with ties to Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, was acquitted on Tuesday of lying to the F.B.I. in 2016 when he shared a tip about possible connections between Donald J. Trump and Russia.

The verdict was a significant blow to the special counsel, John H. Durham, who was appointed by the Trump administration three years ago to scour the Trump-Russia investigation for any wrongdoing.

But Mr. Durham has yet to fulfill expectations from Mr. Trump and his supporters that he would uncover and prosecute a “deep state” conspiracy against the former president. Instead, he has developed only two cases that led to charges: the one against Mr. Sussmann and another against a researcher for the so-called Steele dossier, whose trial is set for later this year.

Both consist of simple charges of making false statements, rather than a more sweeping charge like conspiracy to defraud the government. And both involve thin or dubious allegations about Mr. Trump’s purported ties to Russia that were put forward not by government officials, but by outside investigators.

Michael Sussmann Is Acquitted in Case Brought by Trump-Era Prosecutor

[dondub]

May 16, 2022 22:11:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

May 9, 2022 12:31:45 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i am having trouble interpreting that article, Tenn.
thoughts?

Short version 
Durham starts the trial tomorrow and the lawyer he has charged is toast.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....toast. 🤡😳🤪🤡😳🤪🤡😳🤪🐂💩

[billisonboard]

SPOILER: Click to show

There will soon be a post about how the jury was stacked against conviction 

[tbop77]

On a post through Truth Social, Trump wrote:



"Our Legal System is CORRUPT, our Judges (and Justices!) are highly partisan, compromised or just plain scared, our Borders are OPEN, our Elections are Rigged, Inflation is RAMPANT, gas prices and food costs are 'through the roof,' our Military 'Leadership' is Woke, our Country is going to HELL, and Michael Sussmann is not guilty. How's everything else doing? Enjoy your day!!!"


www.newsmax.com/politics/donald-trump-michael-sussmann-trial-durham/2022/05/31/id/1072322/

Not just the jury, all his whining in one sentence!     Like a two year old throwing a fit.  

Trump 2024, right?  

[happyhoix]

May 31, 2022 23:45:15 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

SPOILER: Click to show

There will soon be a post about how the jury was stacked against conviction 

I think I already saw one somewhere. It was in DC, which is full of Dems, etc etc. 

[Tennesseer]

May 16, 2022 22:11:24 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

May 9, 2022 12:31:45 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i am having trouble interpreting that article, Tenn.
thoughts?

Short version 
Durham starts the trial tomorrow and the lawyer he has charged is toast.

'A perverted view of justice': How Bill Barr exposed himself after the Durham investigation flop

In a biting column for the Washington Post, political analyst Dana Milbank claimed an interview given by former attorney general Bill Barr after the John Durham case against an attorney associated with Hillary Clinton flopped with jurors, is a sign that Donald Trump's former AG is not a man who should be trusted or taken seriously.

The case that Durham pursued for three years against campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann went down nin flames in just six hours, yet Barr asserted afterward that it was stiil an important pursuit.

As Milbank wrote, Barr pursued the case based on "innuendo" despite members of his own DOJ telling him there was no there there.

"The day after these twin repudiations of Barr’s fantasies, the hoaxster explained himself on Fox News — by arguing that Durham’s failure in court was in fact a triumph. 'While he did not succeed in getting a conviction from the D.C. jury,' Barr said, 'I think he accomplished something far more important,'" Milbank wrote before sarcastically adding, "This is about as convincing as the Washington Nationals saying, 'While we did not succeed in scoring a run for 27 innings, we think we accomplished something far more important.' In a courtroom, a prosecutor either wins or loses."

"Durham didn’t 'crystallize' or 'expose' anything. He packed his court filings with innuendo, and the jury decided he hadn’t made his case," he wrote. "But Barr’s argument, that the innuendo Durham spread is 'far more important' than proving actual wrongdoing, unmasks Barr’s perverted view of justice."

"Running Trump’s DOJ, Barr was all about telling stories rather than prosecuting wrongdoing. He sat on the Mueller report of the original Russia investigation, instead releasing his own purported summary that gave a misleading impression of Mueller’s findings," Milbank accused before adding, "Barr was giving Justice cover to the reckless allegations being made by Trump and his allies. Barr made sure the lies had a lengthy head start to leave lasting impressions before any corrective could be issued."

Writing that Barr has "unmasked" himself with his latest Durham comments, Millbank concluded, "now, Barr is trying to discredit the centuries-old American jury system. It’s just one more 'story' he tells to replace the rule of law with the reign of innuendo."

'A perverted view of justice': How Bill Barr exposed himself after the Durham investigation flop

[Tennesseer]

The John Durham Probe Gave Trump What He Wanted
Trump’s vindication can never be failed; it can only be delayed.

John Durham, the U.S. attorney whom former Attorney General Bill Barr appointed to investigate the origins of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, is reportedly near to wrapping up his work.

The grand jury he was using to hear evidence is expiring; there’s no indication he will convene another, and members of his team are leaving, having produced a rather thin record. Since his appointment in May 2019, Durham has obtained the conviction of an FBI lawyer for what a federal judge deemed a mere “inappropriate shortcut” in a warrant application, swiftly lost a case against a lawyer for the Hillary Clinton campaign, and charged a Russia analyst in a case that has not yet gone to trial.

One reasonable reaction to this development would be surprise that Durham was still going at all, some three and a half years on. Another would be to shake one’s head and declare the probe a waste of time and money.

These are correct, but they miss the point. Even if Durham approached the probe with earnest sincerity, the real reason he was appointed is that Donald Trump’s political con requires the promise of total vindication right around the corner. For a time, Durham provided that hope for Trump backers. But now, as Trump moves on to other ploys, the Durham probe has served its purpose, even though it has produced no major convictions or epiphanies.

From the start, the probe was a red herring. The public already knew that the FBI had investigated the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russian agents, and the reasons for suspicion were not mysterious. Campaign manager Paul Manafort was notoriously tied to the Kremlin and passed information to a suspected Russian agent; members of the Trump family met with Russians at Trump Tower in an attempt to get “dirt” on Hillary Clinton; one low-level aide boasted to an Australian diplomat that Russia was aiding the Trump campaign; and the longtime Trump associate Roger Stone seems to have helped broker a leak of Clinton campaign emails hacked by Russians.

Each successive new gambit offers the tantalizing prospect that the crooked behavior everyone has seen on public display from Trump over the past seven years is somehow actually the product of nefarious plotting by his opponents. Now Trump is on to a new battle over his alleged absconding with presidential records, including highly sensitive information, to Mar-a-Lago. Once again, he has claims of hoaxes. Once again, they don’t hold water. Yet hope springs eternal among MAGA backers, well fertilized by manure spread by the former president. Trump’s vindication can never be failed; it can only be delayed.

Complete article here: The John Durham Probe Gave Trump What He Wanted

[pulmonarymd]

So all the right wing talking points were incorrect. What a shock.

[Tennesseer]

Sept 15, 2022 9:32:51 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

So all the right wing talking points were incorrect. What a shock.

Just another premature ejaculation from the thread author.

[djAdvocate]

as i said.  Bullshit Durham.
case closed.

[Tennesseer]

Poor Valuebuy must be devastated over this news.

Primary source for Trump-Russia dossier acquitted, handing special counsel Durham another trial loss

Igor Danchenko, the primary source for the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, was acquitted Tuesday of four counts of lying to the FBI in an embarrassing defeat for special counsel John Durham.

Durham has taken two cases to trial, and both have ended in acquittals. After more than three years looking for misconduct in the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe, Durham has only secured one conviction: the guilty plea of a low-level FBI lawyer, who got probation.

The jury returned not guilty verdicts on all charges against Danchenko, a Russian expat and think tank analyst who provided the bulk of the material for the anti-Trump dossier. Durham initially charged Danchenko with five counts of lying to the FBI, but a judge threw out one of the charges on Friday.

The verdict means jurors weren’t persuaded by Durham’s allegations that Danchenko lied to the FBI about his contacts with a Belarusian-American businessman who was a possible source for the dossier. The largely discredited dossier was a collection of unverified and salacious allegations compiled by retired British spy Christopher Steele, whose dirt-digging was indirectly funded by Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016.

Rest of article here: Primary source for Trump-Russia dossier acquitted, handing special counsel Durham another trial loss

[djAdvocate]

Oct 18, 2022 16:50:15 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Poor Valuebuy must be devastated over this news.

Primary source for Trump-Russia dossier acquitted, handing special counsel Durham another trial loss

Igor Danchenko, the primary source for the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, was acquitted Tuesday of four counts of lying to the FBI in an embarrassing defeat for special counsel John Durham.

Durham has taken two cases to trial, and both have ended in acquittals. After more than three years looking for misconduct in the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe, Durham has only secured one conviction: the guilty plea of a low-level FBI lawyer, who got probation.

The jury returned not guilty verdicts on all charges against Danchenko, a Russian expat and think tank analyst who provided the bulk of the material for the anti-Trump dossier. Durham initially charged Danchenko with five counts of lying to the FBI, but a judge threw out one of the charges on Friday.

The verdict means jurors weren’t persuaded by Durham’s allegations that Danchenko lied to the FBI about his contacts with a Belarusian-American businessman who was a possible source for the dossier. The largely discredited dossier was a collection of unverified and salacious allegations compiled by retired British spy Christopher Steele, whose dirt-digging was indirectly funded by Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016.

Rest of article here: Primary source for Trump-Russia dossier acquitted, handing special counsel Durham another trial loss

those statements are false.  it isn't "largely discredited".  it is "largely uncorroborated" but that is not AT ALL the same thing.  many details have emerged that are truthful.

the second assertion that this was "paid for indirectly" is also not true.  it was paid for indirectly AFTER it was paid for by the GOP.  

i am not sure who wrote this, but it is clearly not a "leftie".