reddogblitz Posted August 5 Posted August 5 12 hours ago, BillsFanNC said: But EPSTEIN!!!!!! This sounds just like lefties do when "TRUMP" does something they feel is worse than what Hillary did say "but her e-mails". As a person with zero allegiance to either party, I'd like to see them both looked into and let the chips fall where they may. 2 things can he true. A conspiracy by Brennan and Stretch etc happened AND "TRUMP" was in some way involved or had know of an under age sex ring. 1
BillsFanNC Posted August 5 Author Posted August 5 (edited) 1 hour ago, reddogblitz said: This sounds just like lefties do when "TRUMP" does something they feel is worse than what Hillary did say "but her e-mails". As a person with zero allegiance to either party, I'd like to see them both looked into and let the chips fall where they may. 2 things can he true. A conspiracy by Brennan and Stretch etc happened AND "TRUMP" was in some way involved or had know of an under age sex ring. I'm 100% certain that Trump's name appears in the Epstein files. I'm also 100% certain that Dems with their hair on fire about Trump somehow being a pedo ring lynchpin is just another in a very long series of get Trump hoaxes. As far as Hillary's emails we had the FBI director confirming that she did indeed have classified material on her illegal home server, but he just didn't feel it appropriate to prosecute. Which isn't his lane at all. So when we get Kash Patel confirming that there's indeed evidence that Trump was involved with Epstein's child sex trafficking operation and he, not Pam Bondi, decides not to prosecute, then we'll have a legit but her emails and but Epstein comparison. Edited August 5 by BillsFanNC 2
BillsFanNC Posted August 5 Author Posted August 5 (edited) When the King showed up around here his take on the IG report was that the FBI admitted that 'mistakes' were made and that they committed to fix them moving forward. Our bad for using FAKE political opposition research in place of actual corroborated intelligence and repeatedly lying to the FISA court. Yeah, our bad. We won't do that again. We promise. 😂 Edited August 5 by BillsFanNC 1
B-Man Posted August 6 Posted August 6 Please read. The cut off text: 1. It should be emphasized that it began, more or less, as a political smear campaign, designed for electoral advantage, that was then co-opted into a full blown information operation against the duly elected President and the American people. Shouting “They wanted to throw Trump in jail from the very beginning!” is just rejected out of hand, as it’s too jarring to their worldview. When they can be shown that what started as little white lies and insinuations were then built upon with bigger and more dangerous lies that eventually resulted in massive domestic and foreign crises with longterm ramifications, they can begin to understand how important it still is for accountability and historical accuracy. 2. The smear was co-opted into a full blown operation by Obama officials, intelligence agencies, and the mainstream media. They all knew from the very beginning that it wasn’t a situation of Trump secretly receiving orders from Putin himself, but in their zeal to support Hillary, and their horror that Trump’s message of calling them “fake news” was actually resounding with the American public, they were hand in hand a driving force behind kneecapping the President. When they claimed his joke about Russia finding Hillary’s emails was evidence of collusion, it was originally intended to maybe sway some low information voters from voting R to voting D. But when they saw the opportunity to partner with dirty swamp creatures to heighten the narrative to “existential” and even “criminal” levels, they didn’t even think twice.
BillsFanNC Posted August 6 Author Posted August 6 She wasn't supposed to lose. This whole operation is never exposed if Hillary wins like 98% of planet earth thought she would. But she didn't win, thus forcing the clean up operation via the same corrupt liars, their reliable media lackeys and useful idiots to try and squelch the obvious. It didn't work. 2 1 1
BillsFanNC Posted August 6 Author Posted August 6 Much remains hidden, but we know of at least three unreleased items which would further expose the treasonous nature of the operation against Trump: 1. Danchenko’s CHS Status: By January 12, 2017, the FBI had already decided to conceal Igor Danchenko’s existence by making him a confidential human source. This was before they ever even talked to him. What exactly happened behind the scenes? And why did they used the word “convert,” as if Danchenko was already working for them in some other capacity? 2. Missing Strzok Texts: We were led to believe we’ve seen all of Peter Strzok’s incriminating messages plotting the coup against Trump but months of texts from early 2017 are missing. That was when the FBI was hiding Danchenko, ignoring his disavowal of the dossier, lying to Congress about Steele, plotting to remove Flynn, and setting up a fraudulent special counsel operation. 3. Mark Lyall Grant Memo: This is a reported warning from the UK government, sent by National Security Adviser Mark Lyall Grant, supposedly flagging the Steele material as fraudulent. The memo was allegedly sent by Grant to Gen. Flynn but he never received it. Where is it and what does it say?
The Frankish Reich Posted August 6 Posted August 6 Can't see the forest for the trees crowd: the Annex actually finds that some of the emails implicating Hillary were most likely manufactured, presumably by Russian state actors. Proof of Russian meddling. Right there.
Wolfgang Posted August 6 Posted August 6 15 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Can't see the forest for the trees crowd: the Annex actually finds that some of the emails implicating Hillary were most likely manufactured, presumably by Russian state actors. Proof of Russian meddling. Right there. 2
BillsFanNC Posted August 6 Author Posted August 6 Finding! 😂 Dutifully regurgitating reliable media. Shocking! But that would look awfully bad for Charlie Savage, who has dutifully carried water for the Russia hoax for the past decade. So, in an article and accompanying post last night, Savage downplayed the emails and falsely claimed Durham had “decided they were fakes made by Russian spies.” The problem is, that’s not what Durham concluded at all. Durham certainly never said the emails were fabricated, and in fact said he couldn’t tell for sure. He said his office was unable to “determine definitively whether the purported Clinton campaign plan [intelligence] … was entirely genuine, partially true, a composite pulled from multiple sources, exaggerated in certain respects, or fabricated in its entirety.” Moreover, Durham’s team interviewed U.S. intelligence personnel who were “well-versed” in the matter, and they testified that their “best assessment was that the Benardo emails were likely authentic.” Savage dismisses this because these interviews happened early in Durham’s investigation. Durham also says that the CIA “prepared a written assessment of the authenticity and veracity of the above-referenced intelligence.” His description of their conclusion contains redactions, but it appears to say the CIA “stated that it did not assess that the above … memoranda … [were] the product of Russian fabrications.” In his report, Durham also noted contemporaneous events that lent credence to the claim that Clinton had approved the plan. “On July 29, 2016 — three days after the purported approval of the Clinton Plan intelligence — Michael Sussmann and Marc Elias, the General Counsel to the Clinton campaign, met with Fusion GPS personnel in Elias’s office at Perkins Coie,” Durham noted. Fusion GPS was the firm that hired Christopher Steele to cook up the Steele dossier. Also notable: Just days before the purported email alleging Clinton’s “approval” of the plan, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook was floating the claim to Jake Tapper that the Russians were meddling in the election “for the purpose of actually helping Donald Trump” — which would become a central claim of the Russia collusion hoax. Savage and his co-author and fellow Russiagate truther Adam Goldman rely heavily on two things to claim the purported Benardo emails are fake. First, they point to a line in the annex in which Durham says his “best assessment” is that the purported Benardo emails “were ultimately a composite of several emails,” which is obviously not the same thing as saying he thought the Russians completely made them up. Second, they rely on denials from the Clinton campaign. But they also represent those inaccurately. Savage and Goldman say Benardo “told Mr. Durham in 2021 that he had never seen the message and did not write it.” If you actually read the annex, Durham says, “Benardo stated that, to the best of his recollection, he did not draft the emails” but that “the last sentence in the email … sounded like something he would have said.”
Recommended Posts