Durham says CIA found data alleging Trump-Russia connection not 'technically plausible,' was 'user c

So if you prefer not to discuss it until people are found guilty of a crime why are you here in a thread reporting the new evidence that has been disclosed about THIS issue.

BTW I note that has never stopped you discussing and supporting the claims about Trump who has never been charged or convicted of a crime. Why the duplicity in your post?

 

The level of projection on display in the above post is either epic disingenuous irony or a necessary form of survival.

 

Uhhh...Not exactly... Even if you believe Durham (and few do), early 2017 is hardly the "get go"....

Sussman is charged for lying to the FBI in a September 19 2016 meeting.

SNIP
"For example, while the FBI did not reach an ultimate conclusion regarding the data’s accuracy or whether it might have been in whole or in part genuine, spoofed, altered, or fabricated, Agency 2 concluded in early 2017 that the Russian Bank 1 data and Russian Phone Provider 1 data was not ‘technically plausible,’ did not ‘withstand technical scrutiny,’ ‘contained gaps,’ ‘conflicted with [itself],’ and was ‘user created and not machine/tool generated," Durham wrote.
ENDSNIP

IOW, Durham's filing literally has NOTHING to do with the charge he made against Sussman.....

 

Try discussing the subject of the thread.

 

IOW it does and how the data he gave to then was false.

 

Durham is deconstructing Sussmann's defense. It's a complicated tale, but Durham indeed seems to be onto something.
CIA Bombshell: The Sussmann Data Was 'User Created'

Techno Fog, Substack

 

But that's not what he was charged with... I suggest you refamiliarize yourself with that charge...

Or read it for the first time, if that's the case...

 

I suggest you spend some time with the link in #32. Durham has his quarry cornered.

 

And I suggest you also read the actual charge against Sussman, then try to noodle out how this filing has anything to do with it?

Or, I can save you several hours and tell you it doesn't...

Tough choice on a beautiful Easter morning (where I am)

 

Each charge is merely a stepping stone to the next.
And if Sussmann's claims were based on fabricated cyber links then . . .

 

Then it means nothing....the entire idea is nothingness... alleged communications between a Russian server and a T**** server... from 2016....

Nothing came of it... Newsflash, but this is now 2022....

And the current filings are a sideshow of a sideshow

https://www.businessinsider.com/fed...utors-created-sideshow-sussmann-filing-2022-3

If you think anybody cares much about this, other than a chance to finally put a point on the board during the legal shutout of the past 5 years, you are highly mistaken

We are after much bigger fish for many bigger issues...

 

You are free to wish whatever you like. Having voted against Trump twice I have no political dog in this fight. But I do enjoy seeing self-righteous gasbags get cornered and seeing their dirty laundry exposed.
IMHO, the people who will care much about this are those who will go to prison or testify against their former associates.

 

You want to discuss RW speculation and fabrications. No thank you.

 

Well, this one is a bit different because, against all odds, they've managed to have a legal case not get laughed out of court (yet), so we need to make sure Durham tries the case he actually charged and not laser point at everything under the sun....

So far, he hasn't managed to... and I don't expect that to get any better, knowing the pressure he must be under to avoid another legal loss for the RW...

 

Doubling down on disingenuous^^^ 'debate' is not a credible format.

 

The charges against Sussman are remarkably weak.

And as to the folks who believe that Clinton or even Obama will be pulled in are delusional. 2-3 people charged over stuff unrelated to what the investigation is proclaimed top be about means it's a load of ****.

 

It's almost as if he, Durham, was feeling the heat to find anything for Trumpers to rally to.......AKA desperation.

 

That's wishful thinking. He's being quite patient.

 

The above is known as 'spin', maybe even a distinction without a difference but that's likely giving to much credit. He's giving himself a desperate reason to get paid.

 

No this is definitely related to this investigation. This person is being accused of being the one who fed the fake stuff to the authorities and lied about where it came from so they would look into it. Directly related.

 

Sorry, but I'm sure Durham has handsome income in his future regardless. His handling of this case is consistent with his reputation: deliberate and relentless.

 

They're incredibly weak, on par with those against the original criminal mastermind taken down by Durham, Kevin Clinesmith...

But that a judge hasn't done the requested summary dismissal is not something to be taken lightly...

Fully agree with your last sentence...

 

ROFL they only have his document false representation to law enforcement.

 

What makes it so weak when they have his own email containing his misrepresentation to law enforcement?

 

OK nice trivia

now

Try discussing the subject of the thread.