Durham investigation (Update: Sussman acquitted) (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    SaintForLife

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Oct 5, 2019
    Messages
    4,796
    Reaction score
    2,282
    Location
    Madisonville
    Online
    It looks like the first shoe has dropped with the Durham investigation with the Clinesmith plea deal. Clinesmith wasn't a low level FBI employee involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

    He worked with Strzok to arrange sending an FBI agent into Trump-Flynn briefing, was on the Mueller team, he took part in the Papadopoulos interviews, and he participated in the FISA process.



    From the NYT article:
    20200814_153906.jpg


    I wonder who else knew about the lies?



     
    The same New York Post that broke the Hunter Biden laptop story? The same laptop that Hunter now admits was his?



    You should check out the Press versus the President thread and article and see if you still think your non-New York Post sources still seem as credible as you think.

    So you’re using the NY Post to confirm a story by the….NY Post? Lol
     
    So you’re using the NY Post to confirm a story by the….NY Post? Lol
    The NY Post is simply reporting on the Hunter Biden letter where he admits the laptop at the Delaware computer shop was his.

    Screenshot_20230202_132403_Chrome.jpg

    But you can keep going with the made up doctors office story if you like.
     
    The same New York Post that broke the Hunter Biden laptop story? The same laptop that Hunter now admits was his?



    You should check out the Press versus the President thread and article and see if you still think your non-New York Post sources still seem as credible as you think.

    Also, you continue to ignore the inconvenience of the holes in the supposed repair shop story.

    A. Presumably Hunter Biden owned a laptop. It’s possible that the FBI has it now, but we don’t know for sure.

    B. The collection of files that Rudy pedaled to the NY Post, a rag known for publishing false stories, is NOT a laptop, it’s a collection of files that has been altered by known and unknown people for months.

    C. If the laptop’s drive was “water damaged” as claimed by repair shop, the material couldn’t have been extracted from it. Not if the serial number given by the repair shop is correct. Not possible, according to people who know their Macs.

    D. The external drive containing the collection of files was manufactured after the date that the laptop was supposedly dropped off at the repair shop, thus wasn’t Hunter’s and was probably purchased to carry out this scam.

    E. The lawyers for Biden are claiming the material was stolen or obtained illegally. Some of the emails are legitimate. Most of the rest of the stuff, especially the sensational stuff, was added by someone other than Hunter.
     
    The NY Post is simply reporting on the Hunter Biden letter where he admits the laptop at the Delaware computer shop was his.

    Screenshot_20230202_132403_Chrome.jpg

    But you can keep going with the made up doctors office story if you like.
    Where is this letter, I’d like to read it for myself. The NY Post article, which is full of loaded language and says things that are not proven as if they are, doesn’t link to the letter nor does it say how they came to see the letter. Seriously - this NY Post article is just garbage from a journalism standpoint. I don’t know how you can read it and think they‘re on the level, it’s very obviously just as slanted as it can be.
     
    SFL: some of your tweets above are more than a year old. And as previously said, do not say what you said. But one of your sources caught my attention. I actually think you have quoted a good source here, someone who will go where the facts lead him, rather than cherry pick to support a narrative. Here’s what he is saying recently:



    There’s a link to a free podcast there, you should listen to it.

    SFL-what no comment on this reporting from someone you yourself have quoted? And you have the nerve to chastise others for not reading the stuff you post.

    You were obviously misled by the hacks you follow on Durham. It was all a sham, and when it turned up a credible story on some illegal actions from Trump, Barr and Durham buried it.
     
    The NY Post is simply reporting on the Hunter Biden letter where he admits the laptop at the Delaware computer shop was his.

    Screenshot_20230202_132403_Chrome.jpg

    But you can keep going with the made up doctors office story if you like.
    Only dealing with, "But you can keep going with the made up doctors office story if you like."

    I for one have no idea what "doctors office story" you're talking to MT about.

    What I go with is the political argument that I've not paid any mind to the lap top story from its inception because it's irrelevant to politics.

    That's a valid argument.
     
    FullMonte's question in the other thread:

    Can you provide a link to this? I'm trying to understand how Hillary "created the entire Russia Trump collusion narrative" when the investigation by the FBI was opened before they had the Steele Dossier, and the efforts to create the Steele Dossier were started by Republicans trying to find dirt on Trump before he got the nomination.


    A Democratic PR executive and ally of the Clinton family who contributed information to the infamous Steele dossier said Thursday that he made up the sourcing of a claim that wound up in the discredited anti-Trump report.

    Charles Dolan Jr., a former aide to Hillary Clinton, testified in John Durham’s trial against Igor Danchenko on Thursday that he heard a claim about Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign while watching TV and regurgitated it to Danchenko, telling him that he had heard it from a “GOP friend” over drinks.

    “I actually got it off of cable news,” Dolan said, according to the Washington Times, adding that he was “trying to throw [Danchenko] a bone because he was helping me.”

    The nugget of information was relayed to former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, and purportedly provided insight into why he had left the campaign. It made it into ex-British spy Christopher Steele’s dossier via Danchenko, despite the sourcing being completely fabricated.

    Danchenko, a private researcher and former FBI informant, emailed Dolan in August 2016 informing him that he was working on a “project against Trump” and asked the Democratic operative for “any rumor, thought, or allegation” related to Manafort.

    “Let me dig around on Manafort,” Dolan responded, later emailing Danchenko the lie that he “had a drink with a GOP friend of mine” who told him Corey Lewandowski, who previously served as Trump’s campaign manager, “hates Manafort” and “is doing [a] dance” about Manafort’s resignation.

    “I thought I’d embellish a bit,” Dolan said on the witness stand.



    20230201_172809.jpg




    Wait....that says that he emailed Dolan in August 2016? Is that the earliest? Is that when it started?

    The reason I ask is because Popadopalous was drunkenly bragging to Australian diplomats that Russia had offered the campaign dirt on Hillary in May of 2016. Australia told the DOJ about it, and that's when the FBI started the investigation. So, if you want to go with "Hillary started the Russia collusion narrative," you'll have to find something from her side from before May of 2016.
     
    The NY Post is simply reporting on the Hunter Biden letter where he admits the laptop at the Delaware computer shop was his.

    Screenshot_20230202_132403_Chrome.jpg

    But you can keep going with the made up doctors office story if you like.
    Ummm...you might want to re-read what you keep posting. Nowhere in what you posted does Hunter Biden (or anyone associated with him) state that Isaac ever had a laptop (or any other device) that was owned by Hunter. It says quite clearly that "Isaac "unlawfully" accessed Hunter's laptop DATA."

    So, if the laptop was illegally copied by the doctor, and given to Isaac, then Isaac had unlawfully accessed Hunter's laptop data. Here are his lawyers stating as much.


    "These letters do not confirm Mac Isaac’s or others’ versions of a so-called laptop," Lowell told Fox News Digital. "They address their conduct of seeking, manipulating and disseminating what they allege to be Mr. Biden’s personal data, wherever they claim to have gotten it."
     
    Ummm...you might want to re-read what you keep posting. Nowhere in what you posted does Hunter Biden (or anyone associated with him) state that Isaac ever had a laptop (or any other device) that was owned by Hunter. It says quite clearly that "Isaac "unlawfully" accessed Hunter's laptop DATA."

    So, if the laptop was illegally copied by the doctor, and given to Isaac, then Isaac had unlawfully accessed Hunter's laptop data. Here are his lawyers stating as much.

    And this is why the garbage NY Post story didn’t include a link to the actual letter. It just regurgitated its old story from back in the day, and stated a bunch of speculation as if it was fact. Total garbage.
     
    Wait....that says that he emailed Dolan in August 2016? Is that the earliest? Is that when it started?

    The reason I ask is because Popadopalous was drunkenly bragging to Australian diplomats that Russia had offered the campaign dirt on Hillary in May of 2016. Australia told the DOJ about it, and that's when the FBI started the investigation. So, if you want to go with "Hillary started the Russia collusion narrative," you'll have to find something from her side from before May of 2016.
    Inconvenient facts will be ignored, and a mega post with twenty tweets will be made until the facts just disappear under the BS.
     
    Wait....that says that he emailed Dolan in August 2016? Is that the earliest? Is that when it started?

    The reason I ask is because Popadopalous was drunkenly bragging to Australian diplomats that Russia had offered the campaign dirt on Hillary in May of 2016. Australia told the DOJ about it, and that's when the FBI started the investigation. So, if you want to go with "Hillary started the Russia collusion narrative," you'll have to find something from her side from before May of 2016.
    There's more:

     
    Ummm...you might want to re-read what you keep posting. Nowhere in what you posted does Hunter Biden (or anyone associated with him) state that Isaac ever had a laptop (or any other device) that was owned by Hunter. It says quite clearly that "Isaac "unlawfully" accessed Hunter's laptop DATA."

    So, if the laptop was illegally copied by the doctor, and given to Isaac, then Isaac had unlawfully accessed Hunter's laptop data. Here are his lawyers stating as much.

    How did Isaac unlawfully access Hunter's laptop data if he never had the laptop? Let me guess. The Russians?

    Can someone post a link to an article that talks about this doctor version?

    How did Hunter sign this if Isaac never had his laptop?


    Hunter's lawyers: The government needs to prosecute Isaac for accessing Hunter's data on the computer that Hunter signed for the data to be recovered, but Isaac never had the computer 🤣

    It's like calling the police and asking them to find a stolen car that may or may not be yours.
     
    SFL-what no comment on this reporting from someone you yourself have quoted? And you have the nerve to chastise others for not reading the stuff you post.

    You were obviously misled by the hacks you follow on Durham. It was all a sham, and when it turned up a credible story on some illegal actions from Trump, Barr and Durham buried it.
    lol. The article from the Columbia Journalism Review The Press versus the President shows you were the one who was misled by the media who pushed the Russiagate BS. It's such an exhaustive and definitive article from a mainstream credible source that you had to resort to trying to discredit the author. The same author who is a pulitizer prize journalist and was an investigative journalist for the NYT for 30 years! Keep your head in the sand, but if you had any intellectual curiosity you would read it. You won't read it because it contradicts many things that you still think are true.

    They must be referencing this article in that podcast right?

    So you are using one of the biggest purveyors of Russiagate in the NYT to try to discredit the coming report from Durham? This NYT?






    In regards to the article, they based a good portion of it from the lawyer of Stephan Halper. Halper was found to be not truthful a few times during Crossfire Hurricane & while he was targeting the Trump campaign. I wonder why the NYTs left out the important detail that Luskin is Halper's attorney:

    “This stuff has my head spinning,” Mr. Luskin said. “When did these guys drink the Kool-Aid, and who served it to them?”

    What about this dishonest part of the article that makes the reader think they investigated Trump? Read it carefully:

    • Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham never disclosed that their inquiry expanded in the fall of 2019, based on a tip from Italian officials, to include a criminal investigation into suspicious financial dealings related to Mr. Trump. The specifics of the tip and how they handled the investigation remain unclear, but Mr. Durham brought no charges over it.

     
    SFL: all you do is regurgitate the same people over and over, and refuse to engage with legitimate queries that poke holes in your narrative. I noticed you didn’t address the nice critique of your new fave article that Buddha posted. How it overlooks a lot in order to zero in on some things that don’t matter, giving them great importance while ignoring inconvenient facts that get in the way of his narrative. He’s following the same playbook all your other pals follow, and his credibility is shot, as far as I’m concerned.

    Barr and Durham found nothing they could prosecute for, that’s just a fact. Durham failed spectacularly and made a fool of himself, ruining a decent reputation.

    Barr evidently covered up a criminal investigation that involved Trump, but you want to sweep that under the rug based solely on Barr’s say-so? Lol. Yeah, the burglar says it was nothing, so just let him go. I mean his word is good, right? 🤦‍♀️

    You never address the facts that are known that prove Trump was shady as hell about Russia, lied about his business dealings in Russia (and China too for that matter), knew Russia was trying to help him get elected and welcomed the help. Trump wasn’t unduly persecuted, he brought everything that happened to him on himself by being a crooked shady piece of shirt human being. You are not supposed to welcome help from a foreign country to get elected. That’s inviting election interference and Trump did that.
     
    SFL: you also don’t address the letter from Hunter’s lawyer that spelled out with documentation how the repair shop owner admitted he didn’t have the right to read Hunter’s files, but he did it anyway. And he did it the day after he received the files. Per his own statements.

    So the story that he had the right to read the files because the laptop was “abandoned” is pretty dishonest, since he admitted he read the files right away.

    Nor do you address his changing story - he didn’t know who dropped off the laptop, then he did know. You’ve also never commented on how all those files were added to the “laptop” after the date that the FBI supposedly picked up the “laptop”.
     
    How did Isaac unlawfully access Hunter's laptop data if he never had the laptop? Let me guess. The Russians?

    Can someone post a link to an article that talks about this doctor version?

    How did Hunter sign this if Isaac never had his laptop?


    Hunter's lawyers: The government needs to prosecute Isaac for accessing Hunter's data on the computer that Hunter signed for the data to be recovered, but Isaac never had the computer 🤣

    It's like calling the police and asking them to find a stolen car that may or may not be yours.

    LOL....thanks for confirming what we all know. You don't even read out posts before you respond.

    You ask "How did Isaac unlawfully access Hunter's laptop data if he never had the laptop? Let me guess. The Russians?"
    From my post, which you quoted "So, if the laptop was illegally copied by the doctor, and given to Isaac, then Isaac had unlawfully accessed Hunter's laptop data." That's just one scenario where someone could have stolen the data, and given it to Isaac. If someone got the data illegally, it's not like Giuliani could simply say "Hey, look at this computer data I have. He needed someone to come up with a plausible story on how the data got to them." I don't think that they were smart enough to realize that people would start poking holes in the story, or that Isaac would be so unconvincing in his original story and interviews that it wouldn't be believable.

    "How did Hunter sign this if Isaac never had his laptop?"
    Anyone who looks at that signature, and compares it to Hunter Biden's signature would see that it doesn't appear to be his signature. It looks almost nothing like Hunter Biden's actual signature, and the path the pen followed is completely different.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom