I think Hunter is an absolute loser and a hot mess (fathered a child with a stripper and had an affair with his dead brother's widow, THAT puts him in very sick company), who coincidentally got filthy rich in Ukraine, where his daddy was Obama's point man for that particular country.

Look it up...NPR, Twitter, and Politico all dismissed the laptop emails as "false" before the election, then a year later they said "oh by the way the stories about the Hunter's emails were true".

A huge chunk of the media refused to cover what was in those emails, because they were afrtaid of the impact that reporting would have had on the election.

That's not what the media is supposed to do, that's not why the press has special constitutional protections.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/politi...disinformation

https://nypost.com/2021/04/02/npr-is...-intelligence/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...top-story.html

"Because Trump is relative as more and more info surfaces "

Joe Biden, the sitting president, isn't relevant! Gotcha.

How do you know that Durham made false statements? Because Hilary said so?

can you read Durham seems to be trying to charge people for irrelevant non material false statements nothing about him making false statements


you really need to watch and read New from other sources :btu:

they say reading helps improve your spelling and grammar...

If to people post there opinions and the tyme two do sow isn’t apropriate, rust assured their will be one guy we can awl depend on to set things right.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that's the most interesting thing you've offered in a very long time :)

"Jim get back to me when Biden tries to steal the election, or fudges his company's valuation or Has his un elected kids in the white House"

Mueller didn't investigate Trump for any of those things. Yet you were OK with that investigation.

Hilarys campaign team may well have tried to overturn the results of the 2016 election, by fabricating the Russia hoax.

Trumps kids were in unelected positions. Advisors arent elected.

You want Biden's son Hunter serving as a senior policy advisor? I doubt it.

How is it irrelevant if Hilary's campaign staff paid tech experts to hack into Trumps servers, when they were running against each other for president? And then continued to do so when he was POTUS?

2006, President George W. Bush appointed him Hunter Biden to the Amtrak board of directors

seems he had some experience .. Like i said you hail Trump's kids for using daddy's Name as Smart

But you accuse Biden of pay bribes or something so his Kid got rich But you cant prove it so you just lie about it But your not a partisan Hack ya ok

Yup. And purely a coincidence that Hunter sought his fortune in Ukraine, where VP Biden wielded a lot of power. Just a coincidence. Of all the countries on the planet, Hunter happened to get rich in the country where his VP daddy had a ton of influence.

I just checked, there are 195 countries in the world today. Hunter had to seek riches in Ukraine.

Jim like I said you Are a 1 trick Fox pony you need to read other sources other than the ones telling you what you want to hear


Thus far, Durham has not charged anyone with spying on Trump. how can that be if it happened


The FBI investigated Sussmann’s tip but concluded that it was not suspicious at all. The indictment said agents found that the computer in question “was not owned or operated by the Trump Organization,


In a later filing in October, Durham appeared to acknowledge that he did not have evidence that Sussmann ever spoke directly to the Clinton campaign about Alfa Bank.

have fun explaining how everyone's lying

"Thus far, Durham has not charged anyone with spying on Trump."

Hes. Not. Done.

He submitted a report last weekend, which supposedly showed that Hilarys lawyers hired people to hack into Trumps servers when he was running, and even White House servers after Trump was president.

I have 2 very simple questions...

(1) do you have concrete evidence that this spying never happened, that Durham is lying?

(2) if Durham is correct and that happened, is it a big deal?

You're dismissing this all as a waste, when he's just getting started. It may well turn out to be a waste, and if it is, I'll be the first one to say it.

But IF Hilarys lawyers paid tech experts to spy on Trump, I think most Americans would find that a huge deal. You'll all dismiss it, but most people won't.

You aren't capable of admitting flaws in democrats, or virtue in Republicans.

Durham has not “submitted a report”

The Words 'Infiltrate' and 'Spy' Appear Exactly Zero Times in John Durham's Recent Court Filing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

maybe we should wait for the report before jumping to conclusions...

Sorry, he submitted a "court filing" Friday night...not a "report".

Does that make you feel better?

I’m fine

The Words 'Infiltrate' and 'Spy' Appear Exactly Zero Times in John Durham's Recent Court Filing.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But Jesse Watters said:

"Durham’s documents show that Hillary Clinton hired people who hacked into Trump’s home and office computers before and during his presidency, and planted evidence that he colluded with Russia.

Yeah. You heard that right. Hillary broke into a presidential candidate’s computer server and a sitting president’s computer server, spying on them. There, her hackers planted evidence, fabricated evidence connecting Trump to Russia, then fed that doctored material to the feds and the media."

Worse than Watergate!

:rotflmao::rotflmao:

I don't watch Jesse waters. But apparently Joh Durham's court filing last Friday laid out that lawyers for the Hilary campaign paid tech experts to hack into Trumps servers, both before and after the election, meaning the hacked into WHite House servers after he was president.

It's probably a safe bet that neither you nor I know if Durham can actually show that. All I know about him, is he was hand picked to go to Boston to clean up the mess at the Justice Dept there because Whitey Bulger had people on his payroll. So hes kind of a competent, serious guy.

Maybe hes a partisan hack who will say anything Trump pays him to say. Maybe he's got the goods.

Any reason why we can't wait and see how it plays out?

did I say infiltarate or spy?

I said hack into. WHich is what Durhams filing alleges, which is kind of the same thing as infiltrate or spy, no?

The filing from Durham did not say the clinton campaign paid anyone to hack the Trump campaign. It also did not say that the data they are talking about was from when Trump was in the WH.

The lies about last week's filing which got Fox news and other right wing outlets all fired up seems to have died now that Durham yesterday pushed back against those lies and they have stopped covering them.

Durham had a good reputation but it looks like it will be shot after this.

If Fox told lies, and Durham pushed back against those lies, why would his reputation be shot?

Durham hasn't been making hysterical promises of results, I honestly didn't even know he was still investigating this.

oh please....

For the second time in two weeks, the conservative media has distorted and badly stretched the available evidence as it searches for a Democratic scandal. And for the second time in two weeks, significant additional evidence rebutting its claims has been met with a large-scale shrug from the supposed scandal’s many purveyors.


Shocking
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

must be learning from msnbc and cnn....

A fact that supports what I have been trying to relate that the problem isn't Trump at this point, it is the base of the GOP: Marjorie Taylor Greene and Rapey McForehead are far more popular among Republicans than Liz Cheney.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

For you, that's a problem. And that's a good reason for it not being a problem for most Republicans.

Those people would be working in a drive through if they weren’t in politics
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ohhh...can we make a list of candidates for this distinction?

and Biden would be wearing knee high white socks, eating dinner every day at 4:00 PM at Golden Corral, if not for politics.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Fox News Backs Down on Hillary Spying Claims

Say it ain’t so
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

what was your source for that quote you attributed to “the republican base”?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Sussmann not guilty. Extremely fast verdict. more or less total humiliation for Durham. Jury presumably recognized the picayune pettiness of the case.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Bill Barr was never a prosecutor and once again shows he was never fit to serve as AG. He applauds Durham’s failed prosecution of Sussmann because getting a story out was more important than a conviction. This is an abuse of prosecutorial power.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

“In a way, Durham has provided a valuable service. His inability to uncover evidence of a hoax confirms that Trump’s denials and diversions have been the real hoax all along.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Has there ever been someone who has ruined their good reputation as much Durham?

The final expected trial of special counsel John Durham’s probe took an unexpected turn Wednesday, with Durham grilling and rebuking his own witness after the witness seemed to bolster the defense of Igor Danchenko, a key Steele dossier source.

The dynamic was surprising because it was Durham’s first witness. And at times, while Durham personally questioned the witness, he strayed from the narrow case against Danchenko and focused more on the FBI’s mistakes in 2016 as it investigated then-candidate Donald Trump.

Durham – a Trump-era holdover who was appointed in 2019 to find government misconduct in the Trump-Russia investigation – charged Danchenko with lying to the FBI agents who were trying to corroborate the dossier. Danchenko has pleaded not guilty and says he told the truth.

But the situation shifted when the defense got to cross-examine Auten. Danchenko’s lawyers highlighted Auten’s previous testimony, given years ago to the Justice Department inspector general and to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which contradicted some of Durham’s claims.

Auten previously said Danchenko was “truthful” and “assisted” the Russia probe. He also said securing Danchenko as an FBI source was “one of the best things that came out of” the Russia probe. This undercuts the core of Durham’s indictment, which alleged that Danchenko serially lied to the FBI and impeded the investigators who were scrambling to verify the Steele dossier.

Danchenko’s defense attorney, Danny Onorato, asked Auten in court on Wednesday if that was still his belief today, and Auten answered in the affirmative, adding, “I stand by my testimony.”

The defense also elicited testimony indicating that Durham cherry-picked material from an FBI memo that Auten wrote, when there was exculpatory information on the very next page.

“And Mr. Durham didn’t take any steps to correct your wrong answer, did he?” Onorato asked.

Durham attacks his own witness
After Onorato finished, Durham returned for a final round of questioning, but the tone completely changed. Durham and Auten sparred for over an hour. Durham sounded angry at times, and many of Auten’s responses were adversarial, clearly not giving Durham the answers that fit his narrative.

Durham brought up the previously unknown fact that Auten was “recommended for suspension” by the FBI’s internal auditors. Auten acknowledged the recommendation, which he said is under appeal. Lawyers often bring up a witness’ past misconduct or punishments as a way to attack their credibility – but in this case, it was the prosecutor seemingly impeaching his own witness.

Durham coming up big for Barr and Trump, yawn.

I remember distinctly being told over and over how the Durham probe was going to indict half the Beltway and send all kinds of evil Trump haters to jail.

Durham couldn't convict a ham sandwich.

But thanks again to Durham, for his reminder that the Russia Investigation was NOT a hoax.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Amazing all that time and money spent and Durham came up with nothing. His own "witnesses" disagreed w/him.

Poor John Durham.

Leads investigation into CIA's destruction of interrogation tapes. Brings no charges.

Leads investigation into CIA enhanced interrogation techniques. Brings no charges.

Leads the "make Trump feel better" investigation. Gets laughed out of court twice.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device