technofog.

Now THERE is a reliable news source

Durham is out of anything reasonable to research or prosecute. He is sapping the US treasury for personal gain.

Interesting that Durham is focusing on the Clinton campaign now

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those that doubted my posts upthread that said this wouldn't end well for Durham....the post above with that tweet, yep.

Sure. We think that statements made by the DEFENSE attorneys will totally ensure that things won't end well for Durham.

This isn't statements by the defense attorneys. Durham has now produced the transcripts of interviews with Baker. Those transcripts are attached to the motion, and they say the exact opposite of what is in the indictment (https://pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/36/235637/04518930145.pdf). Recall the alleged false statement was that Sussman told Baker he wasn't there on behalf of any client. But the transcripts say that Baker affirmatively said to the DOJ Inspector General that Sussman told him "that some number of people that were his clients, who were, he described as I recall it, sort of cyber-security experts, had found about some strange connection between some part of Donald Trump's organizations and Alfa Bank, which was described as being controlled by the Kremlin."

Anonymous wrote:For those that doubted my posts upthread that said this wouldn't end well for Durham....the post above with that tweet, yep.

The only world in which it ended well for Durham was one in which the GOP’s coup was successful.

Anonymous wrote:For those that doubted my posts upthread that said this wouldn't end well for Durham....the post above with that tweet, yep.

Sure. We think that statements made by the DEFENSE attorneys will totally ensure that things won't end well for Durham.

For those that doubted my posts upthread that said this wouldn't end well for Durham....the post above with that tweet, yep.

Oops.

Anonymous wrote:Durham doesn’t want a bunch of crazy QAnon folks after him.

Perhaps he shouldn’t be feeding them more stuff to be fake angry about.

Anonymous wrote:

I said it before, this won't end well for Durham.

Time for a special counsel to investigate the Durham investigation.

Durham doesn’t want a bunch of crazy QAnon folks after him.

I said it before, this won't end well for Durham.

Durham is setting himself for sanctions. Judges don't like this "apolitical" political nonsense and they really don't like fake indictments.

Anonymous wrote:I started reading the indictment. It's almost twice as long as the Sussman charging document and, like that one, is very focused on all sorts of people who are not Danchenko.

Typically, charging documents for false statements to the FBI are short, one- or two-pagers. They are clear, direct, and describe the false statement. Only. They don't go on and on about what other people are saying to each other about other people. They are actually apolitical instead of only purportedly apolitical.

A bunch of the FBI interview reports with this guy are actually public because they were declassified and provided to the Senate. You can match up a couple of the allegations in the indictment with passages from those interviews, and it is obvious that Durham's allegations are a gross mis-characterization what these reports actually say.

I started reading the indictment. It's almost twice as long as the Sussman charging document and, like that one, is very focused on all sorts of people who are not Danchenko.

Typically, charging documents for false statements to the FBI are short, one- or two-pagers. They are clear, direct, and describe the false statement. Only. They don't go on and on about what other people are saying to each other about other people. They are actually apolitical instead of only purportedly apolitical.

Anonymous wrote:Here’s a good description by Turley:

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/11/04/igor-danchenko-arrested-as-part-of-durham-investigation/

I haven't read it. Judging by his comments during the Mueller investigation, I presume it just repeats "collusion is not a crime" over and over, right?