Re: John Durham's Investigation & Hannity's Delusional Operation Boomerang
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2022 1:32 pm
Yeah, I retract, apparently he was "Primary sub-source" and there were a lot of errors in the dossier. ![Shrug :shrug:](./images/smilies/shrug.gif)
![Shrug :shrug:](./images/smilies/shrug.gif)
Falsehoods Unchallenged Only Fester and Grow
https://thefogbow.com/forum/
Of course there was, because it was Raw Intelligence, and not ready for publication. Raw Intel basically means they noted down everything they heard and the next phase was knocking off stuff they found out was untrue. Buzzfeed just ran with it in it's unfinished form, much to Steele's anger.
Do you know if there's a version of it available that just shows what's been verified as true? Id be very interested in seeing thatSuranis wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 11:20 am Steele is on record that he was surprised so much of it turned out to be true. And that's the point: even if you chop off the untrue portions, what was left was devastating. The US Media just behaves that if you disprove one thing in a report, then the whole lot becomes untrue.
I don't know the answer, but I just did a quick search and this blog post on KOS attempts to answer that question.Kriselda Gray wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 11:37 am Do you know if there's a version of it available that just shows what's been verified as true? Id be very interested in seeing that
https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sh ... cv3460-115Andrew Weissmann@AWeissmann_ 1h
An illustration that we can, and should be able to, expect even-handed rulings from judges regardless of which President nominated the judge; Judge Friedrich was nominated by Trump. Who nominated the person MAY influence some judges, but it often has no bearing at all.
Quote Tweet Kyle Cheney @kyledcheney 1h
Judge Friedrich has dismissed Carter PAGE's long-running lawsuit against DOJ, the FBI and many individuals involved in the FISA warrants used to surveil him.
Filing: https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/sh ... cv3460-115UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
CARTER PAGE,
Plaintiff,
v.
JAMES B. COMEY et al.,
Defendants.
No. 20-cv-3460 (DLF)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
As part of its investigation into the alleged connection between the Trump 2016 presidential campaign and the Russian government, the Federal Bureau of Investigation obtained warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to electronically surveil Carter Page, an informal advisor to the campaign. Page alleges that the surveillance was unlawful because the warrant applications were false and misleading. He brings
statutory and constitutional claims against the United States, the Department of Justice, the FBI, and individuals who worked at the FBI. Before the Court are the individual defendants’ Motions to Dismiss, Dkts. 80–87, and the government defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Dkt. 88. For the reasons that follow, the Court will grant each motion.
A leading Russiagate investigator is raising expectations for next week's trial in special counsel John Durham's investigation looking for misconduct in the FBI's Trump-Russia inquiry.
Kash Patel, a former top House Intelligence Committee aide and Trump administration official, made a prediction based on the Durham's claim in court that the alleged source for disgraced former British spy Christopher Steele's infamous anti-Trump dossier was a paid confidential human source for the FBI.
Durham's prosecution will "explode" the FBI’s "confidential human source corruption coverup network" being used for, in his view, a "disinformation campaign to the American public," Patel said in a recent interview on Real America's Voice.
The alleged source is Igor Danchenko, a U.S.-based Russian lawyer who is charged with five counts of making false statements tied to what he told the bureau about the dossier.
Danchenko has pleaded not guilty to the charges, and his trial in Virginia begins on Tuesday. In filings, Durham has also alleged the FBI botched a counterintelligence investigation into Danchenko that stretched from 2009 to 2011.
Kash Patel is only a leading "Russiagate investigator" in his own mind.Kendra wrote: ↑Sun Oct 09, 2022 8:15 pm https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d56ff478b8
A leading Russiagate investigator is raising expectations for next week's trial in special counsel John Durham's investigation looking for misconduct in the FBI's Trump-Russia inquiry.
Kash Patel![]()
Judge Anthony Trenga has issued his order on John Durham’s omnibus motion in limine in the Igor Danchenko case which was — as the equivalent motion was in the Michael Sussmann case — a last desperate bid to turn a false statements trial into a conspiracy theory.
On all the most substantive issues, including whether Durham will be able to fly a German Ritz Hotel staffer in to testify about the pee tape, which is not charged, Trenga ruled against Durham.
His rulings include:
That the pee tape allegations are not intrinsic to the charged crimes and the confusing and prejudicial nature of the claims would outweigh any probative value of the story
Unless Durham can prove that Danchenko gave Steele the information on Millian that ties him to the pee tape, prosecutors can’t introduce utterly equivocal answers Danchenko gave to the FBI that a pee tape source could be Millian
Durham can introduce evidence that Danchenko told Charles Dolan he worked for Steele (though the communications in question show primarily that Dolan knew it), but he can’t introduce evidence showing that Danchenko told others he worked for Steele
The only reason to introduce an email to a business associate would be as impermissible evidence of bad character; it is not sufficiently related to the charges against Danchenko to be admitted under 404(b)
An email Sergei Millian sent on July 26, 2016 can be admitted (I’ve shown that it reflects Millian coming back from Asia earlier than he otherwise would have), but two emails from 2020 are inadmissible hearsay because by then, “Millian certainly possessed motive and opportunity to misrepresent his thoughts”
Durham cannot introduce the details of the 2009 counterintelligence investigation into Danchenko because to introduce those details would require hearsay, and the details themselves would not be all that useful to proving the case against Danchenko but would be very prejudicial
Trenga will rule on evidence pertaining to the reliability or credibility of Durham’s witnesses at trial
Both the issues on which Trenga ruled for Durham — Dolan’s knowledge that Danchenko worked for Steele and Millian’s July 2016 email — may actually hurt Durham’s case. On all the other issues, every bit of Durham’s effort to spin a conspiracy theory, Trenga has ruled for Danchenko.
And aside from noting, twice, that Millian had “opportunity and motive to fabricate and/or misrepresent his thoughts,” there’s another sign that Trenga gets what Durham’s ruse is.
![]()
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/12/politics ... index.htmlAfter Onorato finished, Durham returned for a final round of questioning, but the tone completely changed. Durham and Auten sparred for over an hour. Durham sounded angry at times, and many of Auten’s responses were adversarial, clearly not giving Durham the answers that fit his narrative.
[...]
Many of Durham’s actions Wednesday vindicated his critics’ main complaint -- that he has used his trials to push a dubious narrative of intentional government misconduct against Trump, and of a far-reaching conspiracy by Democrats to smear Trump, without ever actually charging it.
Well, he gave an interim report, in 2019 I think, basically saying he hadn't found anyting. But he was forced to keep going by the Trump administration just so Trump could keep saying that there was an investigation into THE RUSSIA HOAX and people could keep saying that Durham is coming etc.
Barr's Prosecutor Sees No Evidence That Russia Probe Was A Setup By Intelligence: WaPo
Attorney General William Barr had personally picked U.S. Attorney John Durham to scrutinize the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation.
By
Sanjana Karanth
Dec 4, 2019, 08:22 PM EST
The prosecutor Attorney General William Barr personally appointed to oversee the Justice Department’s probe into the origins of the Russia investigation is reportedly unable to provide evidence to support the right-wing conspiracy theory that the investigation was a setup by U.S. intelligence officials.
U.S. Attorney John Durham told Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz that he has nothing to back the conservative claims that a Maltese professor was a U.S. intelligence asset deployed to trap members of President Donald Trump’s campaign, people familiar with the matter told The Washington Post in a report published Wednesday.
Barr specifically tapped Durham to scrutinize the basis of the Russia investigation. The attorney general is one of many Trump allies to criticize the FBI’s probe into the Trump campaign’s ties with Russia, especially when the investigation was taken over by then-special counsel Robert Mueller. Trump has repeatedly demanded a new probe to investigate those who investigated him.
A spokesperson for the Justice Department did not respond to HuffPost’s request for comment.
Republicans have tried to claim that Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud was a CIA plant used to trap members of the Trump campaign. Mueller identified Misfud in his report as the person who first informed Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos that Russia had dirt on Trump’s 2016 political rival Hillary Clinton. The communication between Mifsud and Papadopoulos jump-started the investigation into Russian interference after Papadopoulos bragged about his interactions with Mifsud to an Australian diplomat who reported what he’d heard to the FBI, according to the Mueller report.
To investigate whether Mifsud was a U.S. intelligence asset, Horowitz’s office reportedly reached out to several intelligence agencies, which all said the professor was not an asset of theirs.
Horowitz then reached out to Durham, who had no evidence supporting the claim that the Russia investigation was a setup, the Post reported.