Durham's Investigations Fizzles

[whell]

Originally Posted by Rajoo

Good Lawd, you snuck in the word criminally. I simply posted a quote from the linked article. But since you are so vigorously defending your alleged crook and traitor, convicted sexual assaulter and all around conman,

That to me is collusion. Try and refute this.

It would be folly to refute an opinion. As Ike loves to say: "Opinions are like assholes" etc., etc.

Of course, I have an opinion as well. This opinion is as valid as yours. The difference might be the volume of evidence that this opinion is supported by.

The opinion that I have, and have long had, is the whole "Russian Collusion" thing is an election-year dirty trick that took on a life of its own. One of the cornerstones of this opinion is a story that's been circulating for a while:

In July 2016 - months before the 2016 election - then CIA director Brennan briefed Obama and Obama's national security team - including Biden - that candidate Hillary Clinton was about to stir up some "disinformation" of her own.

'In late July 2016, U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign to stir up a scandal against U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians' hacking of the Democratic National Committee.

'The [Intelligence Community] does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.'

It goes on to describe how CIA director John Brennan briefed Obama and his top national security officials on the intelligence, including the 'alleged approval by Hillary Clinton on July 26, 2016, of a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.'

We know that, according to CNN:

Two special counsel investigations, multiple congressional inquiries, civil lawsuits in the US and the United Kingdom, and an internal Justice Department review have now fully unspooled the behind-the-scenes role that some Democrats played in this saga. They paid for the research, funneled information to Steele’s sources, and then urged the FBI to investigate Trump’s connections to Russia.

Further, Justice Dept Bruce Ohr knew that the Steele Dossier was a complete fabrication and told Justice Dept officials and the FBI between July and August 2016 that this was the case.

My opinion, then, is that all these folks knew that the genesis of the Russian collusion allegations was the Clinton campaign. They knew this before, during, and after the election.

With Michael Sussmann out there pushing this story, and the Steele Dossier, to both the news media and the FBI, the "cat was out of the bag".

Comey and Brennen then 'spiked the football": Comey by briefing Trump about the existence of the Steele dossier, and Brennen by spinning the "evidence" of Russian interference as an effort to help Trump in the election.

Your observation that Trump was engaged with Russian nationals was not wrong. But those contacts were purposefully mischaracterized by Brennen and others, who KNEW that all of this was BS.

Trying to discern Brennan's motivations for furthering the Russian collusion narrative beyond the 2016 election would only be guessing. The same goes for the other players in this saga.

I do think, however, that some people tried to take matters into their own hands at the FBI, and tried to discredit a presidential candidate and then a sitting president. The government then had to do what governments do: protect itself.

That's what the real purpose of the Mueller probe was: to try to provide a cloak of credibility to the actions of the Justice Department and the FBI, while then getting rid of the folks who took matters into their own hands and abused their positions for their own reasons.

And that, my friend, is collusion at the highest levels of government, wrapped up in a pretty package to deflect criticism from those who deserve it.

[Chicks]

ROFLMAO. Whell's World in a nutshell - crazytown.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Chicks

ROFLMAO. Whell's World in a nutshell - crazytown.

It's only crazy town if, like you, you ignore the facts...or you want to continue to base your worldview on the crap that emanated from the Clinton campaign about this. If you do, that's your problem not mine.

Or, maybe you have a lead on the whereabouts of the "pee-pee video"?

[donquixote99]

Did you ever notice how dogs love to bark and bark at each other as long as there's a fence between them, and they will even excitedly look forward to opportunities to do this? On the other hand if the gate is open they will generally stop barking, cautiously sniff each other, and deal with each other respectfully. Being online for people is like having a fence for dogs.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

It would be folly to refute an opinion. As Ike loves to say: "Opinions are like assholes" etc., etc...

It would have been political malpractice for Hillary not to tie Trump and his campaign to the Russians considering his history of money-laundering for Russians through condo sales, his ongoing (yet denied) Russian hotel project, his campaign's multiple outreach efforts to the Russians, his fawning behavior toward Putin and his campaign manager's ties to Russian intelligence just as it would be malpractice on the part of DOJ not to commence a counterintelligence investigation of Russia's efforts to support Trump and undermine Hillary.

Trump and his campaign richly deserved being implicated and/or prosecuted for their actions surrounding the 2016 election. He's no victim. I'm starting to think your unwavering defense of Trump has to do with your own sense of victimhood (and obvious gullibility) for having being conned by such an obvious fraud and career criminal.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by finnbow

It would have been political malpractice for Hillary not to tie Trump and his campaign to the Russians considering his history of money-laundering for Russians through condo sales, his ongoing (yet denied) Russian hotel project, his campaign's multiple outreach efforts to the Russians, his fawning behavior toward Putin and his campaign manager's ties to Russian intelligence just as it would be malpractice on the part of DOJ not to commence a counterintelligence investigation of Russia's efforts to support Trump and undermine Hillary.

Trump and his campaign richly deserved being implicated and/or prosecuted for their actions surrounding the 2016 election. He's no victim. I'm starting to think your unwavering defense of Trump has to do with your own sense of victimhood (and obvious gullibility) for having being conned by such an obvious fraud and career criminal.

Hillary losing to Trump was political malpractice on her part.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by nailer

Hillary losing to Trump was political malpractice on her part.

With an assist by both Comey and Putin. That said, she was a lousy candidate.

[nailer]

Originally Posted by finnbow

With an assist by both Comey and Putin. That said, she was a lousy candidate.

Considering just how close the election was blaming Putin, let alone Comey, smells like a commie fish.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

It's only crazy town if, like you, you ignore the facts...or you want to continue to base your worldview on the crap that emanated from the Clinton campaign about this. If you do, that's your problem not mine.

Or, maybe you have a lead on the whereabouts of the "pee-pee video"?

Failing to Prove His Theory of the Case in Court, John Durham Writes 400-Page Editorial Claiming He Was Still Right All Along.

And our boy Whell believes him. LOL.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by whell

It would be folly to refute an opinion. As Ike loves to say: "Opinions are like assholes" etc., etc.

Of course, I have an opinion as well. This opinion is as valid as yours. The difference might be the volume of evidence that this opinion is supported by.

The opinion that I have, and have long had, is the whole "Russian Collusion" thing is an election-year dirty trick that took on a life of its own. One of the cornerstones of this opinion is a story that's been circulating for a while:

And that, my friend, is collusion at the highest levels of government, wrapped up in a pretty package to deflect criticism from those who deserve it.

For addressing me as your friend, all is forgiven....and there is a lot to forgive. (BIG GRIN)

Yes to forming your own opinion, but calling it valid is stretching it a bit too far. I have just as much a right not to go there at all.

Finally, why all the bitching and moaning about a "dirty trick" (which I must say only one of the parties ever commit, and that's more than an opinion), it did not impact Trump's victory over HRC. So why all drama now? Want my opinion? I suspect the MAGAforce is setting up their own dirty tricks for the next election and true to form they accuse other of what they do themselves first.