Durham's investigation of the investigation

Read the actual indictment instead of relying on someone else’s opinions about it. Durham’s indictment states specifically that the sever was not located in Trump Tower, was not part of the Trump organization, and was owned by a third party firm hired to send electronic maketing materials. The indictment also states that they have evidence that the computer experts knew that this activity was not suspicious when working on it.

Here is the link to the indictment:
https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1433511/download

That article is quoting the lawyers for people who are now involved in the investigation based on the work they did for Joffe which Sussmann then turned into the FBI claiming he was just a concerned citizen when he was actually billing the time to the Clinton Campaign.

 

And in comes Pacific with the “may have”, “could have”, “might have”, “should have” propaganda.

Like a broken record, these things pop at the same time every time.

Some people never tire of letting the girls take all of their money.

 

There you go again.

 

Does anyone remember how many wanted the Mueller investigation shut down because it was taking too long? “If there was anything to find, they wouldn’t need almost two years to find it!”

Since the Durham investigation has exceeded the length of the Mueller probe, I’m guessing they’ll be asking for the end to this one very soon.

 

LOL, you can't assume an indictment is an accurate statement of facts or that it hasn't omitted facts. You make the same error you accused the OP of making.

 

Comparing the two is like comparing Apples and Pink Hippopotamus. Durham's investigation has had to work through the COVID shutdown, when Mueller's did not. That likley cost them at least a 9 to 12 months worth of time. This investigation is not interfering with a POTUS' ability to govern as it does not deal with whether a POTUS was legitimately elected.

Finally, this investigation deals with how the capabilities of US IC were turned against a POTUS candidate of one of the two major parties based on false opposition research paid for by the opposing POTUS campaign and fed to the FBI that resulted in a FISA warrant against campaign aides. Whether you are a Republican, Democrat, Green, Libertarian, etc, you should never want that to happen again and we need to know how it happened last time in order to prevent it from happening again.

 

No.

 

So an investigation into the possibility that the US IC turned against a US president is worth several years?

And an investigation into the possibility that a president colluded with a foreign power to win an election is worth maybe 1 year?

 

Im sorry you missed the glory days.

 

The FBI had interviewed Steele’s main source by early ‘17 and he told the FBI that what was in the Dossier was not “Intel” he had gathered but gossip from his friends. There was absolutely no collection with the US IC to back up the claims that Trump had colluded with Russia or it would have been included in the Mueller Report. The investigation of collusion should have ended a lot faster than it did. That was the complaint you heard.

 

If I recall correctly, the Steele report was only one of many sources, eg all the reports that came from the five eyes network, the famed Russian “adoption” meeting, and Manafort transferring election data to Kilimnik. Not to mention all the obstruction stuff.

But the major point I would like to make is that nobody knew of any of that at the time, as the report was extremely closely guarded. And yet so many felt qualified to suggest that it was a witch-hunt.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting that the Durham investigation be ended. How the heck would I know how long it should take? But I don’t think that the new found investigative patience of the right-leaning masses is as objectively logical as you are suggesting.

 

I'm sorry but your recollection is not accurate. And remember, we are just talking about collusion, not obstruction. There were three main prongs to the "Trump-Russia Collusion" FBI investigation. 1. Alfa Bank info given to the FBI by Sussmann. 2. Steele Dossier given to the FBI by multiple different people. 3. George Papadopoulos knowledge of Russians hacking Clinton's emails that the Aussie Ambassador alerted the FBI to. If the FBI was really worried about Manafort, they should have given Trump a defensive briefing about him back in June/July '16 and had him removed from the campaign.

The FBI determined #1 was not suspicious. The FBI knew by early '17 that #2 was not reliable based on interviews with the main sub-source. #3 is still an unknown. And again, there was absolutely nothing in the US IC collection that supported any of allegation that Trump and Russia were colluding.

 

Collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia has plenty of evidence:

1. The Trump campaign met with Russian agents to discuss ways to harm their opponent in exchange for policy.
2. The Trump campaign shared private polling data with the Russians, who were attempting to help Trump.
3. Multiple GOP operatives we're knowingly funneling illegal campaign money into the Trump campaign from Russia.
4. Papadopoulos and Stone both were aware of and communicating to major members of the Trump campaign (including family) about illegal activity by the Russians to assist the Trump campaign.

The question is whether Trump was aware of his campaign's collusion with Russia. But the campaign was definitely colluding.

 

1) again, there was no way for any of us to know that back then. How could we have known what was in the report before it was released? Still much of the report is redacted. I don’t see why we should be so confident we know all about everything.

2) there appear to be several parts of the mueller report relevant to the obstruction allegation.

3) If there was so obviously absolutely no basis for the special investigation, why did people like Rosenstein, Wray, Rubio, et al. continually suggest otherwise? Did they somehow have less information than the general public?

It’s possible that the public is full of legal eagles that have meticulously analyzed all of the justifications for both investigations and come to a carefully reasoned and objective argument why only one of them should be under severe time pressure. Of course there is a much simpler explanation as well.

 

I’m just driving by. I see you guys cars in the parking lot and know your inside getting your money taken away.

 

1. This is all about the collusion theory of the case.

2. There was plenty of evidence before the FBI and Mueller to wrap up the collusion aspects of the case, as referenced above, much earlier.

According to some on The Left, this is the last act of the Durham Investigation so it might be almost over. They fact that there are now multiple articles by others on the The Left calling for AG Garland to force Durham to end his investigation, likely proves that is not the case.

 

Im not surprised that people associated with the left would want to shut down the Durham probe. Perhaps they are scared that it will be politically damaging or that it’s just a partisan witch-hunt, but they will certainly claim the latter. Which is exactly the state we found ourselves in with the Mueller report.

 

Agreed. The outcome of this investigation will likely be viewed through the same partisan lenses as the Mueller Report.

 

I'm fine with investigating. The facts are what they are. Anyone who broke the rules/law should be punished, subject to their due process rights and how the government has handled similar infractions in the past. That's how things are supposed to work.