Clinton campaign seeks to block Durham access to Perkins Coie documents

archives said:
Examiner was looking for dirt on Trump, for Marco Rubio to be exact, as was the Clinton campaign, exact same thing, and the “feeding info” element/fraud is all innuendo, which is exactly why after three years Durham hasn’t come up with anything beyond finding some low level individual of lying
Click to expand...
Rubio? OK

but we KNOW Sussman was feeding info according to Durham (and lying about his invoilvement)
we KNOW Nellie Ohr worked for Fusion doing the same

Like I said it's pointless to discuss this with you.
there is Horowith which was pretty damning if not criminal ( although he did make DoJ referral)

Just keep the blinders on - im going to wait to see if we get anymore out of Durham
 
anchovies said:
Indication of what? What law are we talking about here? Is the Washington Examiner going to be investigated since they were the ones to hire and pay for the dirt on Trump?
Click to expand...

That was the Free Beacon.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/us/politics/trump-dossier-paul-singer.html

Poor Anchovies.
 
Legion said:
No. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...-hired-firm-that-later-produced-trump-dossier
Click to expand...
good. . it's all a foggy memory

Free Beacon says it doesn't have anything to do with the actual dossier.

"The Free Beacon had no knowledge of or connection to the Steele dossier, did not pay for the dossier, and never had contact with, knowledge of, or provided payment for any work performed by Christopher Steele," wrote the site's Editor in Chief Matthew Continetti and Chairman Michael Goldfarb.
 
 
dukkha said:
Rubio? OK

but we KNOW Sussman was feeding info according to Durham (and lying about his invoilvement)
we KNOW Nellie Ohr worked for Fusion doing the same

Like I said it's pointless to discuss this with you.
there is Horowith which was pretty damning if not criminal ( although he did make DoJ referral)

Just keep the blinders on - im going to wait to see if we get anymore out of Durham
Click to expand...

The point, “according to Durham,” none of which has been proven, to date, three years in, Durham has proved nothing, meaning it is pure innuendo, you are basing your arguments on pure innuendo

And the IG, twice, didn’t find anything illegal
 
archives said:
The point, “according to Durham,” none of which has been proven, to date, three years in, Durham has proved nothing, meaning it is pure innuendo, you are basing your arguments on pure innuendo

And the IG, twice, didn’t find anything illegal
Click to expand...

Rome wasn't built in a day, neither is this case.

There is NO QUESTION that the entire Russia Lie conspiracy took place, and who was involved.

NONE.

Durham will leave the indicted with nowhere to run....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top