Barr and Durham

[Anonymous]

Yes, he is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

You better go tell Durham then, because he didn’t mention that in the indictment. And he brought it in DC. But when you call him up with your tip, be sure not to lie.

Go read the indictment.

I have. It does not mention any second statement in February to the FBI. You may be referencing a statement to "Agency-2." It's not clear what agency that is, but it is not the FBI. That statement is not charged. If he could have charged it, he certainly would have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Checking in here…finding out that DCUM is still full of peeps who took Russiagate at face value.

Things are just going to look worse and worse.

In 2024 Durham will come up with something. Right?

In 2024 Mueller will still have zero.

There actually was plenty in the Mueller report. Sorry. Presumably, you read Barr's interpretation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

You better go tell Durham then, because he didn’t mention that in the indictment. And he brought it in DC. But when you call him up with your tip, be sure not to lie.

Go read the indictment.

I have. It does not mention any second statement in February to the FBI. You may be referencing a statement to "Agency-2." It's not clear what agency that is, but it is not the FBI. That statement is not charged. If he could have charged it, he certainly would have.

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

[Anonymous]

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

They were on a Statute of LImitation for the first charge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

The way this charge was written is very different from how the Mueller charges were written. Those were written to tell a story about the charge.

This one is written to tell a story about Trump and how everyone was mean to him. And a lawyer who maybe said something to the FBI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

The way this charge was written is very different from how the Mueller charges were written. Those were written to tell a story about the charge.

This one is written to tell a story about Trump and how everyone was mean to him. And a lawyer who maybe said something to the FBI.

Or, maybe, how they thought it was okay to do something illegal because "Trump."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

The way this charge was written is very different from how the Mueller charges were written. Those were written to tell a story about the charge.

This one is written to tell a story about Trump and how everyone was mean to him. And a lawyer who maybe said something to the FBI.

Or, maybe, how they thought it was okay to do something illegal because "Trump."

No, not really. Did you read the document closely? Did you read any of Mueller's charging documents?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

The way this charge was written is very different from how the Mueller charges were written. Those were written to tell a story about the charge.

This one is written to tell a story about Trump and how everyone was mean to him. And a lawyer who maybe said something to the FBI.

Or, maybe, how they thought it was okay to do something illegal because "Trump."

No, not really. Did you read the document closely? Did you read any of Mueller's charging documents?

I did read the indictment. There will be more to come. NP. Sussman is going to talk as will others around him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

The way this charge was written is very different from how the Mueller charges were written. Those were written to tell a story about the charge.

This one is written to tell a story about Trump and how everyone was mean to him. And a lawyer who maybe said something to the FBI.

Or, maybe, how they thought it was okay to do something illegal because "Trump."

No, not really. Did you read the document closely? Did you read any of Mueller's charging documents?

I did read the indictment. There will be more to come. NP. Sussman is going to talk as will others around him.

What a relief that Durham is getting to the bottom of this!

What is he getting to the bottom of, again? I can't tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

The way this charge was written is very different from how the Mueller charges were written. Those were written to tell a story about the charge.

This one is written to tell a story about Trump and how everyone was mean to him. And a lawyer who maybe said something to the FBI.

Or, maybe, how they thought it was okay to do something illegal because "Trump."

No, not really. Did you read the document closely? Did you read any of Mueller's charging documents?

I did read the indictment. There will be more to come. NP. Sussman is going to talk as will others around him.

What a relief that Durham is getting to the bottom of this!

What is he getting to the bottom of, again? I can't tell.

I'm sorry you aren't able to parse through it all. Perhaps a better education?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

What can still be charged?

[Anonymous]

These posts are like an alphabet soup of vague and ambiguous pronouns so that the Trump supporters can claim we misinterpreted their posts when they later turn out to be wrong.

“They’re probably talking to them so there could be something else coming that will really make trouble for him because of what they did.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

DP. That statement was made to the CIA, I believe. It was included to bolster this claim but is not a second count. And, just like the statement to the FBI, not provable.

It can still be charged. This is not over. And, some other individuals alluded to in the indictment are either worried or cooperating.

The way this charge was written is very different from how the Mueller charges were written. Those were written to tell a story about the charge.

This one is written to tell a story about Trump and how everyone was mean to him. And a lawyer who maybe said something to the FBI.

Or, maybe, how they thought it was okay to do something illegal because "Trump."

No, not really. Did you read the document closely? Did you read any of Mueller's charging documents?

I did read the indictment. There will be more to come. NP. Sussman is going to talk as will others around him.

No big firm lawyer is going to plead/flip for this shaky weaksauce.