Barr and Durham

[Anonymous]

Adding onto the above, earlier in the thread someone mentioned that part of Clinesmith’s plea agreement was that he would agree to be debriefed by prosecutors. That is how it works when someone is a target or subject of an investigation. They agree to a plea deal with prosecutors first, and then are interviewed once there’s no risk of further prosecution. If prosecutors attempt to question them while they are a subject or target, they will just plead the fifth and give the prosecutor nothing, but once the risk of prosecution is gone, they can no longer plead the fifth. That Brennan agreed to be interviewed without a plea deal in place barring further prosecution is strong evidence that Durham did tell Brennan that he is neither a target nor a subject of the investigation.

[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 would really, really love to hear the delusional thought process here. What exactly do you think Brennan did that was illegal again?

[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.

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.

Re-watch or read the transcript carefully. There are his exact words, and then there is what the right wing pulled from it to fit this narrative.

[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.

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.

Re-watch or read the transcript carefully. There are his exact words, and then there is what the right wing pulled from it to fit this narrative.

Here are the exact words. And, they are pretty clear that he testified there was no pressure to end his investigation early.

COLLINS:
At any time in the investigation, was your investigation curtailed or stopped or hindered?
MUELLER:
No.

---------

LESKO:
Were you ever fired as special counsel, Mr. Mueller?
MUELLER:
No.
LESKO:
Were you allowed to complete your investigation unencumbered?
MUELLER:
Yes.
LESKO:
And in fact, you resigned as special counsel when you closed up the office in late May of 2019. Is that correct?
MUELLER:
Correct.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/full-transcript-robert-mueller-house-committee-testimony-n1033216

[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.

“The hammer”. Love it.

[Anonymous]

Wasn't Brennan among those who went on tv and said there was evidence of collusion? And, denied it under oath?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't Brennan among those who went on tv and said there was evidence of collusion? And, denied it under oath?

I think so. Along with others. He also said the dossier did not play a role in the creation of intelligence community assessment on Russian interference. Under oath.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't Brennan among those who went on tv and said there was evidence of collusion? And, denied it under oath?

The new Senate report is relevant here.

Btw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't Brennan among those who went on tv and said there was evidence of collusion? And, denied it under oath?

I don’t know, do you want to provide some links instead of just speculating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't Brennan among those who went on tv and said there was evidence of collusion? And, denied it under oath?

I don’t know, do you want to provide some links instead of just speculating?

Still no evidence of collusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't Brennan among those who went on tv and said there was evidence of collusion? And, denied it under oath?

I don’t know, do you want to provide some links instead of just speculating?

Still no evidence of collusion.

The Senate GOP Intelligence Committee report outlines specifics of collusion. You may want to read it.

[Anonymous]

Guessing some folks are still sweating bullets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't Brennan among those who went on tv and said there was evidence of collusion? And, denied it under oath?

I don’t know, do you want to provide some links instead of just speculating?

Still no evidence of collusion.

The Senate GOP Intelligence Committee report outlines specifics of collusion. You may want to read it.

You wish there were but there isn't.

“We can say, without any hesitation, that the Committee found absolutely no evidence that then-candidate Donald Trump or his campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 election,” Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the acting chairman of the Senate panel, said in a statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guessing some folks are still sweating bullets.

Like Barr, who knows Trump will be irate when Durham’s investigation turns up nothing of significance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wasn't Brennan among those who went on tv and said there was evidence of collusion? And, denied it under oath?

I don’t know, do you want to provide some links instead of just speculating?

Still no evidence of collusion.

The Senate GOP Intelligence Committee report outlines specifics of collusion. You may want to read it.

You wish there were but there isn't.

“We can say, without any hesitation, that the Committee found absolutely no evidence that then-candidate Donald Trump or his campaign colluded with the Russian government to meddle in the 2016 election,” Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, the acting chairman of the Senate panel, said in a statement.

You trust Marco Rubio’s word? He has his head so far up Trump’s butt it’s amazing anyone could hear him speak.