Barr and Durham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cross Brennan off the list

You can almost taste the Trumpkin tears.

It's called flipping a witness. Happens all the time. Combine this with what Sally Yates testified to, and Comey might be a bit nervous.

I hate to point out the obvious, but you all cried foul when Mueller flipped witnesses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cross Brennan off the list

You can almost taste the Trumpkin tears.

It's called flipping a witness. Happens all the time. Combine this with what Sally Yates testified to, and Comey might be a bit nervous.

I hate to point out the obvious, but you all cried foul when Mueller flipped witnesses.

So again, if it was right for Muller to continue, why can't Durham? Stop opposing the investigation now that the shoe is on the other foot. Or are investigatios only allowed if Republicans are the targets? You should be cheering Durham so that Republicans can't do the same thing to Biden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cross Brennan off the list

You can almost taste the Trumpkin tears.

It's called flipping a witness. Happens all the time. Combine this with what Sally Yates testified to, and Comey might be a bit nervous.

I hate to point out the obvious, but you all cried foul when Mueller flipped witnesses.

So again, if it was right for Muller to continue, why can't Durham? Stop opposing the investigation now that the shoe is on the other foot. Or are investigatios only allowed if Republicans are the targets? You should be cheering Durham so that Republicans can't do the same thing to Biden.

DP. PP didn't say Durham can't investigate, just pointing out the hypocrisy in cheering for something now that you decried when it was less politically favorable for you.

I don't know any Dems who are even remotely concerned about the Durham investigation. It's a non-issue.

[Anonymous]

There is zero chance that Brennan is a "flipped" witness and would make this statement. You all are nuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

The person who pled guilty pled for an action that was wrong, that occurred in 2017, almost a year after the investigation began, and had nothing material to do with the investigation or the first two FISA warrants that were serviced on Carter Page.

And the Mueller investigation was cut short by Bill Barr and the spin off cases, for the most part, have been buried. That isn't transparency or rule of law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

That’s ridiculous. Of course someone with his background would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

That’s ridiculous. Of course someone with his background would.

DP. What would be the point? Someone in his position would know that a statement like this won’t chance Durham’s investigation, and it would just look worse later when it came out that Brennan lied about not being a target or subject. There’s no value in lying about this when he could have just stayed silent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

That’s ridiculous. Of course someone with his background would.

DP. What would be the point? Someone in his position would know that a statement like this won’t chance Durham’s investigation, and it would just look worse later when it came out that Brennan lied about not being a target or subject. There’s no value in lying about this when he could have just stayed silent.

The point would be to lay out the narrative that he is innocent and this is political.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

That’s ridiculous. Of course someone with his background would.

DP. What would be the point? Someone in his position would know that a statement like this won’t chance Durham’s investigation, and it would just look worse later when it came out that Brennan lied about not being a target or subject. There’s no value in lying about this when he could have just stayed silent.

The point would be to lay out the narrative that he is innocent and this is political.

He can do that either way. But if it comes out that he lied about being told he wasn’t a target or subject, that would undermine his narrative. He would be better off saying nothing unless it’s true that Durham told him this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

That’s ridiculous. Of course someone with his background would.

DP. What would be the point? Someone in his position would know that a statement like this won’t chance Durham’s investigation, and it would just look worse later when it came out that Brennan lied about not being a target or subject. There’s no value in lying about this when he could have just stayed silent.

The point would be to lay out the narrative that he is innocent and this is political.

He can do that either way. But if it comes out that he lied about being told he wasn’t a target or subject, that would undermine his narrative. He would be better off saying nothing unless it’s true that Durham told him this.

True. I just don’t think we can conclude he is not a target simply because he said it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

That’s ridiculous. Of course someone with his background would.

DP. What would be the point? Someone in his position would know that a statement like this won’t chance Durham’s investigation, and it would just look worse later when it came out that Brennan lied about not being a target or subject. There’s no value in lying about this when he could have just stayed silent.

The point would be to lay out the narrative that he is innocent and this is political.

He can do that either way. But if it comes out that he lied about being told he wasn’t a target or subject, that would undermine his narrative. He would be better off saying nothing unless it’s true that Durham told him this.

True. I just don’t think we can conclude he is not a target simply because he said it.

True, you could spin out wild conspiracy theories where every bit of evidence against theory is twisted into proof of it. But you’re probably wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

The person who pled guilty pled for an action that was wrong, that occurred in 2017, almost a year after the investigation began, and had nothing material to do with the investigation or the first two FISA warrants that were serviced on Carter Page.

And the Mueller investigation was cut short by Bill Barr and the spin off cases, for the most part, have been buried. That isn't transparency or rule of law.

This is blatantly false. Mueller himself testified there was no pressure to end his investigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

That’s ridiculous. Of course someone with his background would.

DP. What would be the point? Someone in his position would know that a statement like this won’t chance Durham’s investigation, and it would just look worse later when it came out that Brennan lied about not being a target or subject. There’s no value in lying about this when he could have just stayed silent.

The point would be to lay out the narrative that he is innocent and this is political.

He can do that either way. But if it comes out that he lied about being told he wasn’t a target or subject, that would undermine his narrative. He would be better off saying nothing unless it’s true that Durham told him this.

Oh, come on. When we discover that he is actually a target, the media would NEVER believe that Brennan lied about it. The media will cover for him.
It will be another opportunity for Brennan, et al, to question the Durham probe. This is such a predictable move by Brennan.
After 8 hours of interrogation, there is no way he is not going to issue a statement. And, any statement he issues is going to paint himself in a positive light.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just because Brennan isn't a target, does that mean nobody did anything wrong? (Fyi, someone has already pled guilty who was associated with the investigation). So Durham's investigation is entirely political and shut down because those who have been interviewed say so?

Seriously, the Muller investigation was allowed to proceed and lots of hearings were held to go over it with a fine tooth comb. Heck, democrats are still investigating Russia by seeking grand jury materials. Let's get the same from Durham's investigation.

Goose Gander Rule folks.

Just because Brennan's spokesperson says he is not a target, that doesn't mean he isn't a target.
Durham will not comment on statements like this. Brennan knows that. He's looking for positive media before the hammer falls.

There is absolutely no chance that some of Brennan's background would put a statement out claiming he isn't a target, if, in fact, he is a target. Just because Trump does things like that doesn't mean everyone behaves that way. Think back to 2016, would this type of behavior have been tolerated by our political class then? Ridiculous what people have come to expect now.

That’s ridiculous. Of course someone with his background would.

DP. What would be the point? Someone in his position would know that a statement like this won’t chance Durham’s investigation, and it would just look worse later when it came out that Brennan lied about not being a target or subject. There’s no value in lying about this when he could have just stayed silent.

The point would be to lay out the narrative that he is innocent and this is political.

He can do that either way. But if it comes out that he lied about being told he wasn’t a target or subject, that would undermine his narrative. He would be better off saying nothing unless it’s true that Durham told him this.

Oh, come on. When we discover that he is actually a target, the media would NEVER believe that Brennan lied about it. The media will cover for him.
It will be another opportunity for Brennan, et al, to question the Durham probe. This is such a predictable move by Brennan.
After 8 hours of interrogation, there is no way he is not going to issue a statement. And, any statement he issues is going to paint himself in a positive light.

It would actually become apparent pretty quickly whether it was Brennan or Durham who lied about this, because if Durham lied to Brennan about not being a subject or target in order to induce him to cooperate with the interview, Brennan’s team will move to exclude all evidence that came from or was derived from that interview. No such motion would must likely mean that Brennan lied.

Also, if Brennan has been told he was a target (and that has to be disclosed), he likely would not have agreed to be interviewed, and definitely not for 8 hours.