Sedition

Fun neither one of them have any authority over Durham. Durham is just getting stated. Just like Kash Patel he still has time in his position to de certify the stuff they have been keeping from the public.

Mickey

If Durham really did find proof that Clinton paid some hackers to spy on Trump while he was in the White House, I guess he will indict someone, either Hillary or the hackers. Right now he hasn't indicted anyone for that, and that's the simple fact of the matter.

Having done my research on this, I'm willing to take a $10000 bet with anyone that he won't indict anyone. Because it's pretty much bullshit. Any takers for my bet? Anyone???

Durham will get shut down soon by Mayorkis . Biden won’t let this go very far.

50 U.S.C. §§ 1801-11, 1821-29, 1841-46, 1861-62, 1871.

It works both ways !

LOL.

The consensus is that he has no case.

He is trying to distract from Trump's accounting firm firing him.

This isn't Durham's first rodeo. This guy has a great track record. I wouldn't bet against him.

A little fish is the best bait for a big fish .

"When you get indicted , you then plea , sort of like let’s make a deal . Who did Sussmann spill the beans on ?"

You left out some steps :)

When you get indicted, you have choices. You know, just like Prince Andrew! You can defend it, you can plead guilty. The prosecution can offer a plea, not the defendant. The defendant can ASK for one, but it is not entitled to one.

Sussmann has chosen to defend. Like I said yesterday, Dunham is only looking to try and tie shit together to split Sussmann out. Sussmann more than likely will win. Why do I feel confident in that? Because if there was something there, Dunham would have worked on some plea to get further down the rabbit hole. You saw that in the Mueller situation. You see that out of prosecutors a LOT. Why get the little fish when you can get the big fish by letting the little fish live.

When you get indicted , you then plea , sort of like let’s make a deal . Who did Sussmann spill the beans on ?

Please do.

I think you misunderstand my position on this. If there is something there, prosecute it. If there is not something there, say it and move on. This does not need to be another benghazi bullshit exercise. This is why I was disappointed in the Mueller report. There was enough to keep going and prosecute higher up the food chain. But someone . . . stopped it.

This is why if the J6 committee finds out more about Jordon, prosecute the fucker. If the J6 committee finds out that Trump was involved, prosecute the fucker.

If Matt Gaetz did violate laws with underage girls - prosecute the fucker.
When Alcee Hastings was found to have money in his freezer - prosecute the fucker.

Notice the trend here? :)

“Ohhhhh my pretties . . .“

I’m going to copy and paste that comment for when the next indictment is unsealed .

Ohhhhh my pretties . . .

courtlistener. com/docket/60390583/36/united-states-v-sussmann/

I wonder if the Tucker Carlson's of the world will report on Sussmann's response.

It seems that the data that was talked about was PRIOR to Trump being president. That the firm that did the DNS services noticed the anomalies and reported it. It seems more whistleblower than anything else.

Regardless the trial is set for May 22. Let's see how well Durham does that day, with his ONE charge to this ONE person for lying to the FBI. Remember, that is the WHOLE FUCKING CASE. There is NOTHING else that has been charged, therefore, nothing else that is being tried.

10y of worthless accounting..good luck with debt. He is now liability for the big boys and they will not bamba with him.

LMAO Sar the pipe dream you are chasing is dead in the water, You may want to try find something else that will get Trump. LMAO.

Mickey

Meanwhile Mazars issued a letter that "..the financial statement are ureliable" and "..Trump org is to notify anyone who received these statements that they should no longer rely on them". Mazars will probably testify against Trump claiming that information they received is fraud...lol..

Sure I bet he wants to show evidence of the fraud that took place .

Rudy is now complying with Jan-6 cmt ..lol

2
"At this point. I myself would rather just see it all go away and start concentrating on current issues."

That's exactly what all the crooked politicians count on.

“He’s Going to Deliver. He’s Unraveling BIGGEST Political Scandal in US History” – KASH PATEL DROPS BOMBS – Durham Grand Jury Interviewed 24 People So Far

Today’s Headline .

@DTH

Comey's fight was public versus private. He fought to have the testimony public.

McCabe was over memos, not testimony. That is documentation.

Those two were during Mueller's investigation. It was not a special committee.

The fights were not over testimony or documentation, but controlling the narrative.

McCarthy put on people that were being investigated. McCarthy had choices to put others on. McCarthy chose to not do that. McCarthy, ultimately, will be investigated as well. So will Devin Nunes, the guy who quit really damn fast.

But as you bring those names up that were not accepted, the irony of Durham's indictment against Sussmann does not go unnoticed. You know . . . the one that is all about conflict of interest.

I will stick with what Meadows and others have said , you didn’t prove them wrong .

@Erotic

“As you want to quote the fifth, the fifth gives the person the right to say "I plead the fifth" and not say anything. It does not give them the right to not show up.”

In the interest of fairness - I seem to recall that Comey and McCabe initially refused to testify (show up), and McCabe ultimately took the 5th. Lynch also refused to testify although I am not sure if she ever did. Not making a statement other than to point out it happens on both sides of the aisle.

“If this committee were NOT legal, there would be a SHITLOAD of people arguing against it. The senators would go ape shit over it. The press would go apeshit over it.”

While this committee is legal it is thought to be illegitimate by many. Pelosi refused to sit two members of the committee citing close ties to Trump. Yet three of her committee members were lead people in Trump's Impeachments. In response McCarthy pulled all his picks and Pelosi in turn picked two (2) token Republicans. I would stand by the comment that many view this committee as illegitimate.

Yeah. Stick to meadows. He has shown that he knows nothing.

If this committee were NOT legal, there would be a SHITLOAD of people arguing against it. The senators would go ape shit over it. The press would go apeshit over it.

Nice try though.

The Democrat party is finished.

Mickey

There is around 60% of Democrats want her investigated . This would stop her from running again . The Democrat party is a disgrace