Barr and Durham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone in the NSA gave Joffe's consortuim a contract to access the White House secure server. Why is Jake Sullivan still employed as the DNI?

The job was to prevent the hacking of white house servers. It started during the Obama Administration and ended soon after the Trump Administration started, assuming the Trump Administration would have their own security contract in place. Either way, this was DNS that was being tracked, not material content. There was nothing nefarious here no matter how much the RWNJ and conspiracy theorists try to claim otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This whole convoluted mess reads like a QAnon post to get RWNJ all worked up.

+1. I mean, I am willing to wait for more information, but this "bombshell" allegation was filed in a Motion to to Inquire into a Potential Conflict of Interest, in very vague language. It's a pretty bizarre way to tee up something that's "bigger than Watergate."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone in the NSA gave Joffe's consortuim a contract to access the White House secure server. Why is Jake Sullivan still employed as the DNI?

The job was to prevent the hacking of white house servers. It started during the Obama Administration and ended soon after the Trump Administration started, assuming the Trump Administration would have their own security contract in place. Either way, this was DNS that was being tracked, not material content. There was nothing nefarious here no matter how much the RWNJ and conspiracy theorists try to claim otherwise.

Thank you for this straightforward explanation. I suspected the word "exploit" in the original filing was doing a lot of work and was likely being used in the cyber context vice colloquial. Clever - you get the casual reader and partisans to say it's spying when the truth is that term is neutral in the realm of cyber analysis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone in the NSA gave Joffe's consortuim a contract to access the White House secure server. Why is Jake Sullivan still employed as the DNI?

The job was to prevent the hacking of white house servers. It started during the Obama Administration and ended soon after the Trump Administration started, assuming the Trump Administration would have their own security contract in place. Either way, this was DNS that was being tracked, not material content. There was nothing nefarious here no matter how much the RWNJ and conspiracy theorists try to claim otherwise.

Thank you for this straightforward explanation. I suspected the word "exploit" in the original filing was doing a lot of work and was likely being used in the cyber context vice colloquial. Clever - you get the casual reader and partisans to say it's spying when the truth is that term is neutral in the realm of cyber analysis.

So you ARE mooring your boat to this pier

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone in the NSA gave Joffe's consortuim a contract to access the White House secure server. Why is Jake Sullivan still employed as the DNI?

The job was to prevent the hacking of white house servers. It started during the Obama Administration and ended soon after the Trump Administration started, assuming the Trump Administration would have their own security contract in place. Either way, this was DNS that was being tracked, not material content. There was nothing nefarious here no matter how much the RWNJ and conspiracy theorists try to claim otherwise.

Thank you for this straightforward explanation. I suspected the word "exploit" in the original filing was doing a lot of work and was likely being used in the cyber context vice colloquial. Clever - you get the casual reader and partisans to say it's spying when the truth is that term is neutral in the realm of cyber analysis.

So you ARE mooring your boat to this pier

Read 14:03, dear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mark Elias, Jake Sullivan, Kathryn Ruemmler and unknown NSA employee should be worried right now.

They probably have nothing to worry about where it comes to Durham. Instead what they will now have to worry about is some unhinged QAnon nutjob showing up at their office, their house or their kid's school with an AR-15.

We've been hearing "DURHAM'S GOT THE GOODS! INDICTMENTS ARE COMING!" since all the way back in the summer of 2019, yet, despite Durham's many accusations and despite the insane right wing media circus around all of it, not a damn thing of substance has materialized.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This whole convoluted mess reads like a QAnon post to get RWNJ all worked up.

+1. I mean, I am willing to wait for more information, but this "bombshell" allegation was filed in a Motion to to Inquire into a Potential Conflict of Interest, in very vague language. It's a pretty bizarre way to tee up something that's "bigger than Watergate."

+1 and add filed in a Friday night of Super Bowl weekend.

[Anonymous]

So far three indictments by Durham. There will be more forthcoming and those will be bigger fish. The January 5th Oval office meeting and the Susan Rice memo on the last day of 44's day in office are of particular focus. We know that Comey has sat in front of the grand jury... what did he say?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So far three indictments by Durham. There will be more forthcoming and those will be bigger fish. The January 5th Oval office meeting and the Susan Rice memo on the last day of 44's day in office are of particular focus. We know that Comey has sat in front of the grand jury... what did he say?

Recall what Durham was appointed for. To investigate the beginning of Mueller's investigation. That includes the dossier and Papadopoulos. Apparently, Durham is including the Alfa Bank server, as well.

You are including Rice and Comey? That's as crazy as charging Sussman. Are you Durham? What exactly are you doing? Do you know?

[Anonymous]

Coincident?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Watching the left and media try to cover is hilarious. Durham has the goods, will prove it in court and others will fall. This is worse than Watergate.

Oh my god, you have no idea how stupid you sound but you will someday understand things that you are completely in the dark about today. Until then I can only laugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone in the NSA gave Joffe's consortuim a contract to access the White House secure server. Why is Jake Sullivan still employed as the DNI?

The job was to prevent the hacking of white house servers. It started during the Obama Administration and ended soon after the Trump Administration started, assuming the Trump Administration would have their own security contract in place. Either way, this was DNS that was being tracked, not material content. There was nothing nefarious here no matter how much the RWNJ and conspiracy theorists try to claim otherwise.

Thank you for this straightforward explanation. I suspected the word "exploit" in the original filing was doing a lot of work and was likely being used in the cyber context vice colloquial. Clever - you get the casual reader and partisans to say it's spying when the truth is that term is neutral in the realm of cyber analysis.

So you ARE mooring your boat to this pier

Read 14:03, dear.

Read the actual document….dear

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone in the NSA gave Joffe's consortuim a contract to access the White House secure server. Why is Jake Sullivan still employed as the DNI?

The job was to prevent the hacking of white house servers. It started during the Obama Administration and ended soon after the Trump Administration started, assuming the Trump Administration would have their own security contract in place. Either way, this was DNS that was being tracked, not material content. There was nothing nefarious here no matter how much the RWNJ and conspiracy theorists try to claim otherwise.

Thank you for this straightforward explanation. I suspected the word "exploit" in the original filing was doing a lot of work and was likely being used in the cyber context vice colloquial. Clever - you get the casual reader and partisans to say it's spying when the truth is that term is neutral in the realm of cyber analysis.

So you ARE mooring your boat to this pier

I am a DP than the one your originally responded to, but despite your really strange analogy here, yes, yes I am. Nothing will come of this except years of conspiracy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watching the left and media try to cover is hilarious. Durham has the goods, will prove it in court and others will fall. This is worse than Watergate.

Oh my god, you have no idea how stupid you sound but you will someday understand things that you are completely in the dark about today. Until then I can only laugh.

Stay classy DCUM... when you can't refute the message, attack the messenger.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Watching the left and media try to cover is hilarious. Durham has the goods, will prove it in court and others will fall. This is worse than Watergate.

Oh my god, you have no idea how stupid you sound but you will someday understand things that you are completely in the dark about today. Until then I can only laugh.

Stay classy DCUM... when you can't refute the message, attack the messenger.

This is Durham we're talking about. There is no message.