Durham Prosecutes FBI Informants, While Protecting Their Handlers

realclearpolitics ^ | 9/29/2022 | paul sperry

[bitt]

NOT YOU, THAT’S OBVIOUS.

[bitt]

The Durham Quiz
Take The Quiz And See How Much You Understand About What Durham’s Proven Thus Far

Sep 27

Allow me to ask a series of questions about what Special Counsel John Durham has already established at trial via documented evidence and testimony:

1. Did the Hillary Clinton campaign secretly hire federal cybersecurity contractors with access to classified government databases?

Yes. No.

2. Were these cybersecurity contractors hired by the Clinton campaign given a specific list of people to target for illegal surveillance?

Yes. No

3. Did the illegal surveillance the cybersecurity contractors were involved in on behalf of the Clinton campaign involve taking from the federal agency databases classified and non public data related to the specific targets on the list they were given?

Yes. No

4. After taking the classified and non public data related to the Clinton Enemies List they were given, did the cybersecurity contractors working in conjunction with Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS fashion two specific Trump/Russia collusion hoaxes with this data?

Yes. No

5. Is stealing classified information off of federal databases and fashioning it into hoaxes that you then hand over to federal law enforcement a major crime?

Yes. No

6. When someone pays someone else to steal classified information, the theft of classified information and privileged data is called ‘espionage’.

Yes. No

7. When this stealing of classified/non public data off of federal databases to construct hoaxes targeting a political campaign morphs into continuing an illegally predicated surveillance and investigation of a sitting President and his close Cabinet members and associates, it becomes treason against the United States.

Yes. No

8. If he so desired, Special Counsel John Durham could charge all involved in payment for the theft of classified/non public data to construct the Alfa Bank & Steele Dossier hoaxes with espionage?

Yes. No

9. If he so desired, Special Counsel John Durham could charge all involved in continuing an illegally predicated federal criminal investigation and surveillance of a sitting President, his Cabinet and his staff and his family?

Yes. No

10. Durham already established in official court filings that the FBI hired as a CHS a Russian national with an unresolved espionage investigation against him.

Yes. No

11. This Russian national investigated for espionage against the United States back in 2009/2010 was the main source for the Steele Dossier, the hoax used to obtain a FISA warrant against Carter Page and, by extension, Donald Trump and his campaign.

Yes. No

12. This Russian national and suspected Russian spy and disinformation agent attempted to steer the FBI away from an actual Steele Dossier source: Longtime Clinton family associate and power broker Charles H. “Chuck” Dolan.

Yes. No

13. This Russian national who’s trial begins in two weeks also attempted to proffer a fake Steele Dossier source to the FBI, Sergei Millian.

Yes. No

14. Christopher Steele was fired as a CHS by the FBI in October of 2016. Steele’s main employee, Igor Danchenko, was subsequently hired as an FBI CHS in March of 2017 and kept on until he was let go in October of 2020. An FBI informant is usually hired to inform on people they’ve been in close association with.

Yes. No

15. You’re not asking me if Special Counsel John Durham can prove any of these crimes took place. All you’re really asking me is will he charge anybody for these crimes he’s already proven took place.

Yes. No

QUIZ KEY: The answer to all 15 questions is…YES.

[Boogieman]

“There is no statute of limitations on ‘conspiracy’ if it is continuing.”

As if Durham ever had any intention to charge someone with conspiracy. That’s a knee slapper.

[piasa]

Paul Kamenar is/was the lawyer of Roger Stone’s aide Andrew Miller

[piasa]

And the organization he belongs to, affiliated with the NY Post, did a pretty good job exposing
congressman Gregory Meeks’corruption in a case involving some foreign country, I think Guyana.

[lepton]

Bump

[Bob Ireland]

*** he has spared the FBI agents who handled them, raising suspicions he's letting investigators off the hook in his waning investigation of misconduct in the Russiagate probe

OR ..is Durham building states’ evidence to go up the chain?***

It has been relatively clear since the vapid plea deal with Kevin Clinesmith that Durham was intending to treat his Russiagate probe as exposing an op to fool the FBI. Such a strategy might require the public to believe that FBI personnel are some of the stupidest most gullible rubes in law enforcement... the same public that elected Joe Bitem, AOC, John Fetterman . . . Oh well, never mind.

[ballplayer]

Deep State,we’re all going to be communist comrades folks,just accept it folks,America is over

[TBP]

He did lie, and Durham prettyk much proved it, but his exposure of the FBI's misconduct reduced his chances to convict Danchenko.

It was actually a brilliant plan by the Russians -- use one of their operatives to plant a story that they were actually trying to help the candidate they were trying to hurt, and vice versa.

Kudos to John Durham for exposing the truth of ‘Russiagate’