Donald Trump Private Citizen

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
I already posted two articles on it. Just post Trump babble to show how his babble is considered newsworthy.
The article quoted Trump who was clearly making a false statement. It state that Durham's is alleging that Clinton's campaign paid "to mine Internet data".

lulz at the peej citing at what Trump said as being true. Then again peej has never been good with facts.
 

rkymtnman

Well-Known Member
says=alleges=not guilty. the best durham's come up with is lying to the fbi. which still hasn't been proven in court. which trump seemed to think was ok since he pardoned bannon, flynn and stone for the same
 

PJ Diaz

Well-Known Member
Got it, you guys think John Durham is lying. Kinda weird based on his professional track record. He's not a political pundit.
 

PJ Diaz

Well-Known Member
seems like that's been done ad nauseum. trump had 4 years of the most corrupt DOJ since Nixon and she wasn't even under investigation by anybody in the US gov't.
Investigations are good when they can arrive at the truth. I wonder how many times @hanimmal (glad I have him on ignore for a while now) has posted screenshots of the Steele Dossier, as if it were a fact. Funny how we now discover it was all BS contrived by the Clinton campaign.

 

printer

Well-Known Member
Investigations are good when they can arrive at the truth. I wonder how many times @hanimmal (glad I have him on ignore for a while now) has posted screenshots of the Steele Dossier, as if it were a fact. Funny how we now discover it was all BS contrived by the Clinton campaign.

Don't count your chickens yet.
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Got it, you guys think John Durham is lying. Kinda weird based on his professional track record. He's not a political pundit.
If he isn't indicting, he's breaking DOJ policy by publicly blathering about an ongoing investigation. He needs to put up or shut up, like every other federal prosecutor, you never hear a peep except for what's in the indictment when it drops. To do otherwise is to play politics and betray ones oath of office.
 

PJ Diaz

Well-Known Member
If he isn't indicting, he's breaking DOJ policy by publicly blathering about an ongoing investigation. He needs to put up or shut up, like every other federal prosecutor, you never hear a peep except for what's in the indictment when it drops. To do otherwise is to play politics and betray ones oath of office.
Since when is a court filing considered "blathering"?
Here's the court filing.
 

Offmymeds

Well-Known Member
What a complete load of horseshit at a very convenient time. Reminder-$300 million Trump Moscow deal concealed.

Durham indicted the lawyer (unlikely to stick), then refers to him as an indicted lawyer in a motion "to inquire into potential conflicts of interest". Big whoop. Essentially a tech firm got the ping data between Trump Towers and Alfa Bank, the bank of money-laundering fame. Then Durham tries to make those DNS lookups suspicious by comparing it to the total DNS lookups of the entire nation. DNS lookups would connect the Russian mobile phones to the ping data. Big whoop again.

Note the words illegally or by illegal means isn't in the article but the trigger words, purportedly, allegedly, spied, accessed, enlisted the aid of and so on riddle the article. Putting the words "internet traffic", "cyber issue", and "cyber-related matter" in quotations marks" makes it all look suspicious to idiots. Morons won't know what "DNS lookups" are or ping data

Steele himself never claimed the dossier was 100% factual nor did anyone else. That's the nature of his business. Parts of it were confirmed.

Another big mountain from a tiny little mole hill to cover the Mazars story but watch the press follow this. Fortunately, the Mazars story will have undeniable repercussions for Trump.
 

ANC

Well-Known Member
Donald Trump's accounting firm has cut ties with the former president and said a decade of financial reports should "no longer be relied upon".
The firm, Mazars, said in a letter to the Trump Organization that it could not stand behind statements it had prepared for Mr Trump from 2011-20.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Donald Trump's accounting firm has cut ties with the former president and said a decade of financial reports should "no longer be relied upon".
The firm, Mazars, said in a letter to the Trump Organization that it could not stand behind statements it had prepared for Mr Trump from 2011-20.
The part where his lawyers "argued that Mazars’ characterization of its work “effectively renders the investigations by the D.A. and A.G. moot.”" was the cherry on top.
 

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Investigations are good when they can arrive at the truth. I wonder how many times @hanimmal (glad I have him on ignore for a while now) has posted screenshots of the Steele Dossier, as if it were a fact. Funny how we now discover it was all BS contrived by the Clinton campaign.

lmao I have never posted anything from the 'Steele Dossier' as you propagandists like to call it. Hearings, court docs, actual reports like the Mueller and bi-Partisan senate report not he Russian attack on our democracy sure, but I have not even read the 'Steele Dossier'.

More lying bullshit from Peej.

Besides the firm that first hired Steele was originally paid for by Ted Cruz. They later went to Clinton. But the cuck troll wouldn't know that I bet.

Got it, you guys think John Durham is lying. Kinda weird based on his professional track record. He's not a political pundit.
Doesn't mean Trump/Barr didn't have something on him to get him to activate into one now does it?
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
Since when is a court filing considered "blathering"?
Here's the court filing.
Filings are publicity, indictments are the real deal, Durham's job is PR for Barr and Trump, nothing more, there will be no prosecutions, just press. There was no real crime here, not like the treason that was going on with Trump.

What about Hillary's emails? What about Trump's massive ongoing scandal over records and private cellphones, not to mention sedition and insurrection? So you figure these are honest people? Durham and Barr?
 

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
‘This could lead to going bankrupt,’ says George Conway

CNN's John Berman and George Conway discuss possible implications of former President Donald Trump's long-time accounting firm informing the Trump Organization that it should no longer rely on nearly 10 years' worth of financial statements and that they would no longer be their accountants, citing a conflict of interest.
 
Top