Dear #DeepState Coup Catchers Durham and Barr

[B-Man]

 

[BillStime]

☝️🤡

 

 

😝🤩😂

[B-Man]

 

 

 

 

 

Some won't even watch and dismiss it.....................................It will be obvious who those  are.

 

 

 

 

.

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

 

 

Some won't even watch and dismiss it.....................................It will be obvious who those  are.

 

 

 

 

.

 

I’m on the edge of my seat B!   Will it be those delivering late breaking news about DJT coordinating delivery of material to archivists?  Or is it those who cite unaltered phone logs as proof positive alterations occurred?  
 

I’m off to check the WaPo—who according to one poster broke a story 50 years ago as proof positive that they were on to something—when I checked earlier the only story I could find was one about the cost of the Durham probe.  

[BillStime]

7 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I’m on the edge of my seat B!   Will it be those delivering late breaking news about DJT coordinating delivery of material to archivists?  Or is it those who cite unaltered phone logs as proof positive alterations occurred?  
 

I’m off to check the WaPo—who according to one poster broke a story 50 years ago as proof positive that they were on to something—when I checked earlier the only story I could find was one about the cost of the Durham probe.  

BUT HER EMAILS

[BillStime]

 

[B-Man]

 

[BillStime]

[BillStime]

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Fortunately the simpletons on this board, you know who they are, have taught us that when the WH refuses to answer, that means that they are guilty  😆

 

 

 

White House refuses to answer question on Durham probe revelations

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/white-house-refuses-answer-question-durham-probe-revelations

 

 

 

lmao - the simpletons - 👆🤡

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[aristocrat]

 

[716er]

They'll get Hillary this time.

[B-Man]

7 minutes ago, 716er said:

They'll get Hillary this time.

 

 

Oh the irony, in the story where they tried to frame Trump.......LOL

 

 

Former DNI Ratcliffe Expects More Indictments From Durham Probe

 

 

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said he believes that Justice Department special counsel John Durham's investigation will result in more indictments.

 

A filing from Durham on Friday said Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign paid a technology company to "infiltrate" Trump Tower servers, and later the White House. The purpose of the infiltration was to establish a "narrative" of collusion between then-Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russia.

 

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/intelligence-director-ratcliffe-russia-clinton/2022/02/14/id/1056768/

 

 

[BillsFanNC]

Durham will never get Hillary. Or Obama. Or Comey. Or Brennan. Etc...

 

But Durham may well get the lackeys doing their bidding and expose the whole damn thing. He's already snared a few.

 

But by all means keep believing the same media that has been lying to you all along.

 

 

[BillStime]

1 hour ago, BillsFanNC said:

Durham will never get Hillary. Or Obama. Or Comey. Or Brennan. Etc...

 

But Durham may well get the lackeys doing their bidding and expose the whole damn thing. He's already snared a few.

 

But by all means keep believing the same media that has been lying to you all along.

 

 

Fox News adores you

[B-Man]

2 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:

Durham will never get Hillary. Or Obama. Or Comey. Or Brennan. Etc...

 

But Durham may well get the lackeys doing their bidding and expose the whole damn thing. He's already snared a few.

 

But by all means keep believing the same media that has been lying to you all along.

 

 

 

I agree.

 

There is no doubt that the leaders behind the false Russia-gate story are never going to be convicted of anything,

 

but, let's just have the truth come out.

 

That will be enough to stop it from happening again.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 15, 2022 by B-Man

[BillStime]

38 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

I agree.

 

There is no doubt that the leaders behind the false Russia-gate story are never going to be convicted of anything,

 

 

YOUR OWN GOP SENATE REPORT HIGHLIGHTED ALL OF THE TRUMP RUSSIAN ACTIVITY - the 140 plus meetings; sharing of campaign data, etc... but its a fake Russia-gate story? LMAO

 

Such a cute little hack, Bonnie.

 

Meanwhile, your master DR just can't get stop sharing fake news because admit - it was a BAD day for Conald Trump.

 

GalacticRedPill Retweeted:

 

 

[B-Man]

 

Durham probe has 'accelerated,' with more people 'cooperating,' coming before grand jury

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/durham-probe-accelerated-more-people-cooperating-coming-before-grand-jury

 

 

 

.

[BillStime]

9 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

I agree.

 

There is no doubt that the leaders behind the false Russia-gate story are never going to be convicted of anything,

 

but, let's just have the truth come out.

 

That will be enough to stop it from happening again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

[Irv]

Hillary should be arrested, tried, and executed.  What a mess.  

[Doc]

Worse than Watergate, 9/11, WWII and January 6th combined.  

[Chef Jim]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

Worse than Watergate, 9/11, WWII and January 6th combined.  

How dare you compare this to January 6th!   
 

😡😡😡

[BillsFanNC]

In other words, a Clinton supporting contractor (Joffe) obtained sensitive information (perhaps unlawfully) about the Office of the President of the United States (Trump), manipulated the information, passed it to a DNC/Clinton lawyer (Sussmann), who then delivered it to the CIA.

All on American soil.

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

[All_Pro_Bills]

1 hour ago, B-Man said:

 

 

How long before the narrative "Durham is a Russian asset" gets cued up in the MSM?  What's so very scary about establishment media operatives is that they're so, so predictable.  

 

Otherwise he needs to be careful as people with dirt on the Clinton's have a 573% higher than average probability of committing suicide. 

[Big Blitz]

 

[BillStime]

Hysterical - someone is triggered and disappointed today...

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

[Westside]

3 hours ago, B-Man said:

 

 

 

Check out the reply’s. How the hell can people be that brainwashed. The liberal democrat is worse than a cult. She is going to be the next target for the democratic cartel to go after.
 

How anyone thinks that clinton is above spying must be living in a cave.

 

The democratic party is the most corrupt party ever!  Not even close! 

[Backintheday544]

8 hours ago, BillsFanNC said:

In other words, a Clinton supporting contractor (Joffe) obtained sensitive information (perhaps unlawfully) about the Office of the President of the United States (Trump), manipulated the information, passed it to a DNC/Clinton lawyer (Sussmann), who then delivered it to the CIA.

All on American soil.

 

 

In other other words:

Strangely, there wasn’t a lot of fact-checking going on down at Mar-a-Lago, but the actual reason that the “LameStream” media hadn’t covered the story was likely because, as the Times notes: (1) Sussmann’s conversation with the CIA had already been reported last October (2) Durham never once said anything about the White House being “infiltrate[d]” (3) the special counsel also never claimed the Clinton campaign had paid Joffe’s company and (4) perhaps most importantly, “the filing never said the White House data that came under scrutiny was from the Trump era.” In fact, lawyers for the data scientist who helped develop the data analysis in question, say this happened during— wait for it—Barack Obama’s presidency.

 

What Trump and some news outlets are saying is wrong,” attorneys Jody Westby and Mark Rasch told the Times. “The cybersecurity researchers were investigating malware in the White House, not spying on the Trump campaign, and to our knowledge all of the data they used was nonprivate DNS data from before Trump took office.”

In other words, Trump and company got the whole thing hilariously, mortifyingly incorrect. But fear not: We’re sure they’ll issue a lengthy correction and heartfelt apology to the people whose reputations they impugned—and the ones Trump suggested should be put to death—in no time.“

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/02/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-white-house-spying

 

Will we get a defamation letter suit or will Fox hide behind that they’re an entertainment company and not a news company protect them again?

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Backintheday544 said:

In other other words:

Strangely, there wasn’t a lot of fact-checking going on down at Mar-a-Lago, but the actual reason that the “LameStream” media hadn’t covered the story was likely because, as the Times notes: (1) Sussmann’s conversation with the CIA had already been reported last October (2) Durham never once said anything about the White House being “infiltrate[d]” (3) the special counsel also never claimed the Clinton campaign had paid Joffe’s company and (4) perhaps most importantly, “the filing never said the White House data that came under scrutiny was from the Trump era.” In fact, lawyers for the data scientist who helped develop the data analysis in question, say this happened during— wait for it—Barack Obama’s presidency.

 

What Trump and some news outlets are saying is wrong,” attorneys Jody Westby and Mark Rasch told the Times. “The cybersecurity researchers were investigating malware in the White House, not spying on the Trump campaign, and to our knowledge all of the data they used was nonprivate DNS data from before Trump took office.”

In other words, Trump and company got the whole thing hilariously, mortifyingly incorrect. But fear not: We’re sure they’ll issue a lengthy correction and heartfelt apology to the people whose reputations they impugned—and the ones Trump suggested should be put to death—in no time.“

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2022/02/donald-trump-hillary-clinton-white-house-spying

 

Will we get a defamation letter suit or will Fox hide behind that they’re an entertainment company and not a news company protect them again?

I get the appeal of a Vanity Fair expose….hard hitting infotainment, the latest trends and styles out of Hollywood, and a very strong online bra and panty offering.  At the same time—and I’m not knocking you here, this is about sourcing—I don’t trust a damn thing until it’s picked up by Entertainment Tonight.  
 

 

[Chef Jim]

9 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I get the appeal of a Vanity Fair expose….hard hitting infotainment, the latest trends and styles out of Hollywood, and a very strong online bra and panty offering.  At the same time—and I’m not knocking you here, this is about sourcing—I don’t trust a damn thing until it’s picked up by Entertainment Tonight.  
 

 

If you’re looking for hard hitting Hollywood political journalism you gotta read Variety. 

[Backintheday544]

6 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I get the appeal of a Vanity Fair expose….hard hitting infotainment, the latest trends and styles out of Hollywood, and a very strong online bra and panty offering.  At the same time—and I’m not knocking you here, this is about sourcing—I don’t trust a damn thing until it’s picked up by Entertainment Tonight.  
 

 

It’s quoting the Times.

 

The main gist from the Times:

 

Times notes:

- (1) Sussmann’s conversation with the CIA had already been reported last October

-(2) Durham never once said anything about the White House being “infiltrate[d]”

-(3) the special counsel also never claimed the Clinton campaign had paid Joffe’s company and

-(4) perhaps most importantly, “the filing never said the White House data that came under scrutiny was from the Trump era.” In fact, lawyers for the data scientist who helped develop the data analysis in question, say this happened during— wait for it—Barack Obama’s presidency.

 

Here’s the Times piece: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/14/us/politics/durham-sussmann-trump-russia.html

 

And Vanity Fair is much more legit than 99 percent of Bonnie’s spam.

[BillsFanNC]

Ohhh the Times! Well now that's different. I mean they have such a stellar journalistic record with this story after all. 

 

Long thread of actual journalism warning.

 

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Backintheday544 said:

It’s quoting the Times.

 

The main gist from the Times:

 

Times notes:

- (1) Sussmann’s conversation with the CIA had already been reported last October

-(2) Durham never once said anything about the White House being “infiltrate[d]”

-(3) the special counsel also never claimed the Clinton campaign had paid Joffe’s company and

-(4) perhaps most importantly, “the filing never said the White House data that came under scrutiny was from the Trump era.” In fact, lawyers for the data scientist who helped develop the data analysis in question, say this happened during— wait for it—Barack Obama’s presidency.

 

Here’s the Times piece: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/14/us/politics/durham-sussmann-trump-russia.html

 

And Vanity Fair is much more legit than 99 percent of Bonnie’s spam.

“A spicy story about another story is better than a factual recounting of the subject of the story.”

 

-Cynthia Muffins Fair

Publisher Emeritus 

Vanity Fair 
 

 

[B-Man]

 

“The Durham investigation makes clear that Hillary Clinton and the power elite spied on the Trump campaign and White House, undermining our democracy, launching us into a new Cold War, endangering America and the world. Clinton and her warmongers must be held accountable,” Gabbard tweeted on Tuesday

 

 

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

                                       

 

 

 

 

[Chef Jim]

7 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

“A spicy story about another story is better than a factual recounting of the subject of the story.”

 

-Cynthia Muffins Fair

Publisher Emeritus 

Vanity Fair 
 

 

Cynthia Muffins Fair Caught Serving Caviar with Silver Spoon. 
  - Geoffrey ‘Biff’ Bifferella

Chief Editor - Society Pages

Variety

[BillsFanNC]