An early peek at some of John Durham's report

[oeb11]

TWK and HF - thank you for the relevant and informative posts. !

[HedonistForever]

The FBI’s assistant director of counterintelligence, Bill Priestap, and the FBI’s intelligence section chief both wrote to the CIA to describe Steele as “reliable," and Horowitz said, “Whether and how to present Steele's reporting” in the assessment was “a topic of significant discussion” among the drafters.

Did Priestap say "reliable" before or after he found out that his FBI had asked Steele's primary sub source if what Steele said was true?



This is where it could get problematic for the whole "the investigation began without political bias" assertion made by Horowitz.


We now know from the Horowitz report what nobody knew prior to his report that the "primary sub source" for Steele was interviewed by the FBI and he said everything, everything in the Steele dossier was utter bullshit. So the question becomes when did the "boy scout" painted Priestap, immune from political motivation first find out that the Steele dossier was pure bullshit? And did he ever speak up ( apparently he didn't ) and say "we can not in good faith have this dossier be any part of this investigation and certainly not presented to the FISA court as "verified, reliable information". It's simply a matter of the time line to bring Priestap into the cabal to be able to say, no, Crossfire Hurricane was not started with a pure un-political motive.

[rexdutchman]

The investigation began with Lies so from that point forward Fruit from the poisoned tree.
Funny how the LSM experts are all quite ,,on that point ,
Just pushing the politico agenda

[nevergaveitathought]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

The investigation began with Lies so from that point forward Fruit from the poisoned tree.
Funny how the LSM experts are all quite ,,on that point ,
Just pushing the politico agenda

+1

[Munchmasterman]

Who said you did?
Look at my post again.
The black is my response to your post. You know, the comment next to your post, that addresses your post.
The red is my response to the comment right below my response. You know, the comment my response directly addresses.

It's not that tough to figure out.

I've never claimed everything I post is proof or a fact. I post information to back up my position. Some times it's opinion, some times I post facts. I try to supply a link to things I consider to be facts.
I'm always more than ready to discuss any given issue.



You are correct to a certain extent. There are black and white areas but there are a lot of gray areas too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HedonistForever View Post
I agree that we could argue till the end of time what is "proof" and what isn't. So I'll change my statement to "let's see if the two reports confirm or cast doubt on my opinions" and yes, everything I and everybody else on this board posts is an opinion.


Your claim to know proof from not-proof is complete and total bullshit. The source that proves my claim is your post. Chock full of fake-news, caps, and bullshit.
Dunning-Kruger effect runs rampant and unchecked.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
No. You can. I know what it is and what it isn't.

With respect to the instant topic (OP), when the deranged bullshitters orchestrating the fraudulent, illegal "impeachment investigation" begin to get prosecuted for their lies under oath after they are subpoenaed before the Senate Trial before the Presiding Justice from the US Supreme Court who will find them in contempt for refusing to answer questions asked you will be informed what "proof" is when they insist upon their "Constitutional Rights" they have denied others through the fake process.

You will hear familiar phrases like .... "insufficient evidence"! And once it is determined by the assertion of THEIR RIGHTS that they knew all along that there were INALIENABLE RIGHTS then it will BE PROOF that their deception and lies WERE INTENTIONAL and not born from PURE IGNORANCE. Pisslousy will be firing staff members for "not informing her" thoroughly of the nuances and "legal technicalities" of "DUE PROCESS"!

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

I claimed no such thing. In fact, I claimed the exact opposite, that everything I post is either my opinion or if I post an article from a writer, it is his or her opinion and I happen to agree with their opinion.

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Now if you are claiming that everything you post is proof or a fact, you are full of bullshit.

[oeb11]

Blue text cannot be debated - too much Koolaid!

[rexdutchman]

Now Comey himself admits """"Real Sloppiness"""" in the fbbi and investigation but no misconduct
WOW what really they are going to dance around the Corruption of the start of this mess ,,,,

[HoeHummer]

Sloppiness and corruptions are the same, Rexsy? Like them callings everything a Coke in the Great White South, eh?

[Chung Tran]

Originally Posted by HoeHummer

Sloppiness and corruptions are the same, Rexsy? Like them callings everything a Coke in the Great White South, eh?

[rexdutchman]

I know this will be difficult for some to follow but YES sloppiness that leads the country to this point IS corruption ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,