Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. has known ALL of this since 2018 at the latest.
2. waits YEARS to even mention it.
3. Mentions it in a offhand manner in a completely unrelated filing.
4. Its already past the statute of limitations.
Thats because this isnt a crime, and its just a side mention in a unrelated filing. And the right wing media is suddenly claiming its something even Durham did not say it was.
I can't help but to think that new deeper revelations of reality are causing you pain.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,454 posts, read 12,481,493 times
Reputation: 10433
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
Nothing has been proven in regards to that. You conflating them being employed for something else, with them providing this information to Clinton. So far theres no proof.
And importantly...why did this get brought up after the statute of limitations in a side comment on a unrelated filing? Because theres nothing there. This was a way to accuse without having to defend the accusations.
Cool. Tell me how they hacked. Because heres the thing, this is being taken out of context by right wing media. Its a comment on a filing about conflicts of interest in the defenses lawyers. And the right wing media is making a TON of claims that have ZERO to do with reality.
You do know they were PAID to monitor the white house DNS systems? And that the "spying" is all about them reporting what they saw?
Do you even know what DNS is?
When you give your cleaning person access to your home, does that give them permission to rifle through your personal papers, or take items from your house? After all, you weren't "broken into", right?
Here's the problem. In no universe is it OK to use your allowed access to spy on a sitting President, and report to his political opponents. Or to use that information to attempt to take down that President. That's treason.
I'll give it to the Clintons. They are slippery as snakes. To install an operative that is given the keys to systems, giving them deniability is pretty genius.
This comment from a FOX article this morning hit the nail on the head:
DanPatch
1 hour ago
If these findings, and likely more to come, aren't followed by charges, arrests and prosecutions..then our country's laws will be rendered meaningless. This is the most blatent example of high sedition and treason by multiple actors ever revealed through legal channels. Nothing comes close. Watergate is paltry by comparison. Hats off to Durham and his team for determined, focused work in 'shark infested
waters'.
" This is the most blatent example of high sedition and treason by multiple actors ever revealed through legal channels."
LOL. yes I do think this is a nothingburger. 24 people interviewed? LOL. This is what? year 2 or 3? So...a person or two....per month. The gateway pundit is making allegations. Theyre making noise. This is utter nonsense. This entire bit of nonsense is based upon accusations Durham made in a minor filing.
Even better? Nothing here is new information. Weve known it all for years. And the statute of limitations expired even if there was some actual crime. Making this a easy one for Durham, he can make some side note....and then never defend it as the right wing media takes it and runs.
And OH NOES. People were PAID! For doing work! Its a conspiracy! A crime!
"I do think this is a nothingburger."
Of course you do and NO body is surprised.
BUT, shall we bring up every little thing you claimed about Trump?
Your TDS and blatant bias is dripping all over the place!
...But, there’s another intriguing piece of information that the Free Beacon just dropped — that in 2020, the Biden campaign also paid the same internet company being talked about concerning the Durham probe...
NPR, which is propaganda for the left, has spent far more time covering the Democrats blasting Durham as opposed to the specifics of what Durham is alleging.
Nothing has been proven in regards to that. You conflating them being employed for something else, with them providing this information to Clinton. So far theres no proof.
And importantly...why did this get brought up after the statute of limitations in a side comment on a unrelated filing? Because theres nothing there. This was a way to accuse without having to defend the accusations.
Because Durham needs to justify three years spinning his wheels and is trying to stay relevant?
Whatever, it’s had the desired effect. Lots of people parsed the gobbledygook and pulled a couple of words/passages that they think mean something.
Time will tell, I guess.
Because Durham needs to justify three years spinning his wheels and is trying to stay relevant?
Whatever, it’s had the desired effect. Lots of people parsed the gobbledygook and pulled a couple of words/passages that they think mean something.
Time will tell, I guess.
"Because Durham needs to justify three years spinning his wheels and is trying to stay relevant?"
Please provide the SAME sentiment you posted about Mueller!
I won't hold my breathe!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
