District Judge Anthony Trenga said in court Friday that Danchenko's answer to the FBI interviewer "was literally true" and that Durham's case on that specific charge was too weak to send to the jury. This is a major victory for Danchenko, who has maintained that he told the truth to the FBI agents who were trying to corroborate the dossier in 2017.
Cases that are TOO WEAK, to send to a jury.
3 yrs and one guilty plea,...that guy must have spent all his tuition money on mustache wax instead of being an attorney.
- eyecu2
- 10-14-2022, 01:54 PM
- Jacuzzme
- 10-14-2022, 05:40 PM
Who cares, the jig is up and everyone knows what happened. Hilda bought a bunch of ridiculous bullshit, the fbi used it to try’n oust trump knowing it was ridiculous bullshit, and the very guy who made up the ridiculous bullshit wouldn’t verify his own ridiculous bullshit even when they tried bribing him with a million bucks.
- eyecu2
- 10-15-2022, 08:18 AM
Who cares, the jig is up and everyone knows what happened. Hilda bought a bunch of ridiculous bullshit, the fbi used it to try’n oust trump knowing it was ridiculous bullshit, Originally Posted by Jacuzzme
Oh why so glum chum?
I thought according to the right- wingers here on this board and off of Faux News, Durham was gonna really dig in and ferret out all these bad deed doers?!!
"The Jig is up"?
Seems he not only can't find anyone to prosecute, but when he does try, the courts just laugh him out on prima fascia components or facts that don't meet the bar for prosecution.
From Fox Durham probe: Trump team says Americans should be 'waiting for the next shoe to drop' ahead of Danchenko trial.
But I can see why the repturds are now saying "no big deal", since he's proven to be a complete disappointment to their cause.
Maybe if they had that high power attorney Rudy Giuliani, or the kraken lady, then they could find some real dastardly people on the left!?
- Jacuzzme
- 10-15-2022, 09:20 AM
Who’s glum? I don’t know or care who Danchenko is or what happens to him, but the undeniable truth came out in his trial.
- berryberry
- 10-15-2022, 10:52 AM
Yeah the libtards can't stand that the Russian Hoax fraud was exposed.
So instead they celebrate that ONE charge against some low level guy gets thrown out in the ridiculously biased DC area courts
So instead they celebrate that ONE charge against some low level guy gets thrown out in the ridiculously biased DC area courts
- eyecu2
- 10-15-2022, 12:01 PM
one charge???
Keep up my dude. Math is hard, but there was another guy Sussman who was found innocent, and so was this last guy?
What you fail to acknowledge is that even Meuller had substantiated charges and people pled guilty to them. MANY PEOPLE.
The only people calling anything a HOAX is the wanton willing FAUX News idiots who repeat the caw of their scripted hosts like, Tuckie, Hannity, Ingridiot, and the rest of the crew. (Good little lemmings like to get cookies I bet)
Keep up my dude. Math is hard, but there was another guy Sussman who was found innocent, and so was this last guy?
What you fail to acknowledge is that even Meuller had substantiated charges and people pled guilty to them. MANY PEOPLE.
The only people calling anything a HOAX is the wanton willing FAUX News idiots who repeat the caw of their scripted hosts like, Tuckie, Hannity, Ingridiot, and the rest of the crew. (Good little lemmings like to get cookies I bet)
- berryberry
- 10-15-2022, 12:32 PM
- Jacuzzme
- 10-15-2022, 12:58 PM
one charge???WTF dude? Living in a police state doesn’t bother you? The FBI admitted to trying to bribe Steele into verifying his bullshit dossier and he wouldn’t. They used it anyways, knowing full well it was a bunch of made up garbage, at the FISA court to gain access to Trumps campaign. Remember the outrage when Trump said they “tapped his wires”? They did and have now admitted it.
Keep up my dude. Math is hard, but there was another guy Sussman who was found innocent, and so was this last guy?
What you fail to acknowledge is that even Meuller had substantiated charges and people pled guilty to them. MANY PEOPLE.
The only people calling anything a HOAX is the wanton willing FAUX News idiots who repeat the caw of their scripted hosts like, Tuckie, Hannity, Ingridiot, and the rest of the crew. (Good little lemmings like to get cookies I bet) Originally Posted by eyecu2
Hoax isn’t nearly a sufficient word. This is what an actual insurrection looks like, not a bunch of wackadoos walking between velvet ropes taking selfies.
- eyecu2
- 10-18-2022, 04:32 PM
Apparently for you it is hard
How many charges were filed against Danchenko?
Now how many were dismissed?
Come on, I am sure you can these two simple questions Originally Posted by berryberry
5 charges- 0, yes ZERO Convictions.
News just In; Acquitted of lying to the FBI.- Durham charges against Danchenko- and 1 is thrown out, and the other 4 are bubkis. The swan song of Durham .....
Swanny River...how I love ya, how I love ya.....
- Jacuzzme
- 10-18-2022, 05:59 PM
Nobody cares about Danchenko, he’s small potatoes. If what this trial revealed doesn’t upset you, you’re much better off a citizen (or government official) of China or Russia. Having a secret police force that goes after political opponents is as unamerican as it gets.
- HDGristle
- 10-18-2022, 06:10 PM
The Gazpacho?
- eyecu2
- 10-18-2022, 06:13 PM
Nobody cares about Danchenko, he’s small potatoes. If what this trial revealed doesn’t upset you, you’re much better off a citizen (or government official) of China or Russia. Having a secret police force that goes after political opponents is as unamerican as it gets. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme
Ok, so if Durham does it, it's uncovering a police state, but if Mueller who's report caught people does it, it's a conspiracy against a rival. And further if Trump explicitly calls out wanting dirt on a political rival on a taped call, then it's completely okay cuz he's trying to get to the bottom of corruption, by corrupting the already corrupted - and withholding approved aid until he receives that information?
But Joe Biden asks for a district attorney to be fired in Ukraine, to be re-assigned cause he is investigating his son..
Which of these bothers you the most??
They are all fucking troubling, and all make me sick to think ANY of them get away with this shit.
On the other hand I just don't see where any of these investigations lead to a single positive outcome for Americans. They seem to be distractions and again polarizing political fodder.
The reason I pointed out durham, for years Fox news, and the GOP put all their hopes and dreams behind him and he was going to be the Savior that ass fucked the Dems. Apparently he's impotent
- Salty Again
- 10-18-2022, 10:10 PM
)
- berryberry
- 10-18-2022, 10:38 PM
Nobody cares about Danchenko, he’s small potatoes. If what this trial revealed doesn’t upset you, you’re much better off a citizen (or government official) of China or Russia. Having a secret police force that goes after political opponents is as unamerican as it gets. Originally Posted by JacuzzmeYour wasting your time. He will never get it. He is so focused on his hatred of President Trump that he has lost the ability to think straight.
This is what happens when you pull a jury from an area that votes 95% Democrat. There is no chance of a fair trial in the DC area these days with the tainted jury pool. Libtards walk, Conservatives are tarred and feathered.
What WAS proven beyond doubt is that the FBI is corrupt. And should be completely dismantled. The issue is will the Republicans take the necessary actions to address this problem starting in January and how will Senile Biden try to block them?
- berryberry
- 10-18-2022, 10:45 PM
Kudos to John Durham for exposing the truth of ‘Russiagate’
A prosecutor can be an agent of sunlight or an agent of cover-up. John Durham is letting the sun shine.
The Russiagate special prosecutor has taken on a tough case: indicting Igor Danchenko, the principal sub-source for the discredited “Steele dossier,” which was penned by former British spy Christopher Steele and commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign to smear her GOP rival, Donald Trump, as a Kremlin mole.
The peddling of a false narrative of Trump collusion with Russia was a product of the Clinton campaign and the FBI. Voluminous reports by the Justice Department’s inspector general have demonstrated that the bureau’s hierarchy was seized by anti-Trump animus. The FBI knowingly allowed itself to be fed partisan opposition research that was sensational, salacious, often flat-out ridiculous, but always — because it portrayed Trump as a traitorous lout — too good
There was no shortage of nod-and-wink. The too-clever-by-half G-men, who like to project themselves as above politics as they meddle in election after election, feigned some distance between themselves and the Clinton campaign. Knowing DNC lawyer Michael Sussmann was attached at the hip to the Clinton campaign, the bureau let him pretend otherwise when he delivered bogus data advertised as proving a Trump-Kremlin communications back channel. Knowing Steele’s mission was to dig up dirt on Trump for the benefit of the Clinton campaign, the bureau indulged his “just a concerned former intelligence officer” pretensions.
For its part, the Clinton team purported to despise the FBI, blaming then-Director James Comey for improperly disclosing evidence of Hillary’s national-security recklessness in the emails scandal. Conveniently forgotten was that she was able to run only because Comey proclaimed that she shouldn’t be indicted.
Behind this public theater, Clinton operatives exploited their bureau contacts, and in hopes of nailing Trump, the FBI — with eyes wide open — allowed itself and its awesome investigative powers to be exploited.
The culmination of this collusive arrangement, one of the great political dirty tricks in American history, was the FBI peddling to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, under oath, the uncorroborated rumor, innuendo, and sheer fabrications of the Steele dossier. Not once, not twice, not thrice, but four separate times, over close to a year and for months into his presidency, agents depicted Trump as a clandestine agent of Moscow.
This is where Danchenko comes in. A cagey operator whom the FBI credibly suspected as a Russian asset a dozen years ago, he was the main source of “intelligence” — which is apparently Russian for “gossip among drinking buddies” — that Steele turned into the faux reports that comprised the dossier.
In his probe into the origins of the bureau’s Trump-Russia investigation (codenamed “Crossfire Hurricane”), Durham discovered that, although Danchenko acknowledged that the Steele dossier was farcical, he also appeared to have misled the FBI regarding his sources. In particular, he made up a conversation with Sergie Millian — a loose Trump associate whom Danchenko doesn’t know and never actually communicated with. The result was the dossier claim that Trump and the Kremlin were in a “conspiracy of cooperation.”
Durham charged Danchenko with four counts of lying about Millian (in addition to a count involving Danchenko’s alleged concealment of a second source, Clinton ally Charles Dolan, which the presiding trial judge dismissed due to vagueness on Friday at the close of the prosecution’s evidence). It is a tough case for Durham because it’s hard to expect a jury to convict someone for lying to the FBI about comparatively less serious matters when the FBI itself was blatantly and serially dishonest with a federal court — with apparent impunity.
That’s why Durham deserves our praise. Under the circumstances, he has a motive to soft-pedal the FBI’s misconduct, to try to keep the jury focused on the defendant who is actually charged in the case.
Instead, Durham has done exactly the opposite. He has been transparent about the FBI’s malfeasance. It was Durham who proved that the FBI offered Steele a cool million bucks if he could prove his claims against Trump, and that neither Steele nor Danchenko could do so. It was Durham who proved that the FBI then swore four times that the unverified dossier information was verified. It was Durham who proved that even after finally interviewing Danchenko after the first two sworn applications, and hearing from him that the dossier was nonsense, the FBI continued relying on the anti-Trump dossier — willfully concealing Danchenko’s disavowal of it from the Justice Department and the court.
It was also Durham who proved that, even after the dossier debacle, the FBI signed Danchenko as a paid informant, lavishly paying him $200,000 over three years — with one agent unsuccessfully trying to get approval to pay him another $346,000 before the gravy train was finally derailed. Durham also proved that the agent who signed Danchenko as an informant falsely claimed to the bureau unit that monitors informants that there was no derogatory information about him. That is, the agent failed to check the bureau’s own records showing that the FBI had suspected Danchenko as a Russian asset. And that was only the most egregious of the rudimentary due-diligence failures to probe his background, motivations, and foreign government interactions.
Understandably, the more appalled the jury becomes over the FBI’s behavior, the less inclined it may be to convict Danchenko. So there is risk for Durham, who knows the media-Democrat complex is rooting against him.
I believe he’s more prudent than that, though. John Durham is experienced and honorable enough to know that his only chance of prevailing is to show the jury that he is uncovering government misconduct and incompetence, not concealing it. And he knows, no matter what the jury decides about Danchenko, the highest public interest is accountability for the unholy alliance between politics and law enforcement. Kudos to the special counsel for exposing it.
https://nypost.com/2022/10/17/kudos-...of-russiagate/
A prosecutor can be an agent of sunlight or an agent of cover-up. John Durham is letting the sun shine.
The Russiagate special prosecutor has taken on a tough case: indicting Igor Danchenko, the principal sub-source for the discredited “Steele dossier,” which was penned by former British spy Christopher Steele and commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign to smear her GOP rival, Donald Trump, as a Kremlin mole.
The peddling of a false narrative of Trump collusion with Russia was a product of the Clinton campaign and the FBI. Voluminous reports by the Justice Department’s inspector general have demonstrated that the bureau’s hierarchy was seized by anti-Trump animus. The FBI knowingly allowed itself to be fed partisan opposition research that was sensational, salacious, often flat-out ridiculous, but always — because it portrayed Trump as a traitorous lout — too good
There was no shortage of nod-and-wink. The too-clever-by-half G-men, who like to project themselves as above politics as they meddle in election after election, feigned some distance between themselves and the Clinton campaign. Knowing DNC lawyer Michael Sussmann was attached at the hip to the Clinton campaign, the bureau let him pretend otherwise when he delivered bogus data advertised as proving a Trump-Kremlin communications back channel. Knowing Steele’s mission was to dig up dirt on Trump for the benefit of the Clinton campaign, the bureau indulged his “just a concerned former intelligence officer” pretensions.
For its part, the Clinton team purported to despise the FBI, blaming then-Director James Comey for improperly disclosing evidence of Hillary’s national-security recklessness in the emails scandal. Conveniently forgotten was that she was able to run only because Comey proclaimed that she shouldn’t be indicted.
Behind this public theater, Clinton operatives exploited their bureau contacts, and in hopes of nailing Trump, the FBI — with eyes wide open — allowed itself and its awesome investigative powers to be exploited.
The culmination of this collusive arrangement, one of the great political dirty tricks in American history, was the FBI peddling to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, under oath, the uncorroborated rumor, innuendo, and sheer fabrications of the Steele dossier. Not once, not twice, not thrice, but four separate times, over close to a year and for months into his presidency, agents depicted Trump as a clandestine agent of Moscow.
This is where Danchenko comes in. A cagey operator whom the FBI credibly suspected as a Russian asset a dozen years ago, he was the main source of “intelligence” — which is apparently Russian for “gossip among drinking buddies” — that Steele turned into the faux reports that comprised the dossier.
In his probe into the origins of the bureau’s Trump-Russia investigation (codenamed “Crossfire Hurricane”), Durham discovered that, although Danchenko acknowledged that the Steele dossier was farcical, he also appeared to have misled the FBI regarding his sources. In particular, he made up a conversation with Sergie Millian — a loose Trump associate whom Danchenko doesn’t know and never actually communicated with. The result was the dossier claim that Trump and the Kremlin were in a “conspiracy of cooperation.”
Durham charged Danchenko with four counts of lying about Millian (in addition to a count involving Danchenko’s alleged concealment of a second source, Clinton ally Charles Dolan, which the presiding trial judge dismissed due to vagueness on Friday at the close of the prosecution’s evidence). It is a tough case for Durham because it’s hard to expect a jury to convict someone for lying to the FBI about comparatively less serious matters when the FBI itself was blatantly and serially dishonest with a federal court — with apparent impunity.
That’s why Durham deserves our praise. Under the circumstances, he has a motive to soft-pedal the FBI’s misconduct, to try to keep the jury focused on the defendant who is actually charged in the case.
Instead, Durham has done exactly the opposite. He has been transparent about the FBI’s malfeasance. It was Durham who proved that the FBI offered Steele a cool million bucks if he could prove his claims against Trump, and that neither Steele nor Danchenko could do so. It was Durham who proved that the FBI then swore four times that the unverified dossier information was verified. It was Durham who proved that even after finally interviewing Danchenko after the first two sworn applications, and hearing from him that the dossier was nonsense, the FBI continued relying on the anti-Trump dossier — willfully concealing Danchenko’s disavowal of it from the Justice Department and the court.
It was also Durham who proved that, even after the dossier debacle, the FBI signed Danchenko as a paid informant, lavishly paying him $200,000 over three years — with one agent unsuccessfully trying to get approval to pay him another $346,000 before the gravy train was finally derailed. Durham also proved that the agent who signed Danchenko as an informant falsely claimed to the bureau unit that monitors informants that there was no derogatory information about him. That is, the agent failed to check the bureau’s own records showing that the FBI had suspected Danchenko as a Russian asset. And that was only the most egregious of the rudimentary due-diligence failures to probe his background, motivations, and foreign government interactions.
Understandably, the more appalled the jury becomes over the FBI’s behavior, the less inclined it may be to convict Danchenko. So there is risk for Durham, who knows the media-Democrat complex is rooting against him.
I believe he’s more prudent than that, though. John Durham is experienced and honorable enough to know that his only chance of prevailing is to show the jury that he is uncovering government misconduct and incompetence, not concealing it. And he knows, no matter what the jury decides about Danchenko, the highest public interest is accountability for the unholy alliance between politics and law enforcement. Kudos to the special counsel for exposing it.
https://nypost.com/2022/10/17/kudos-...of-russiagate/