Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Durham Investigation [TMI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TMI wrote:
Forget the Russians. Testimony under oath from Mook is a better source for the story.

https://www.politico.com/...info-to-fbi-00034115

“Going to the FBI does not seem like a very effective way to get that information out to the public. We do that through the media,” he said.

Mook said that after discussions at the highest levels of the campaign, they decided to do just that. He also said that somewhere around that time he informed Clinton personally and she concurred.

“I discussed it with Hillary as well,” Mook said. “She agreed to that. ... She thought we made the right decision.”

https://www.cbsnews.com/...tigation-robby-mook/
Clinton was briefed about the decision to go to the press with the allegations in the fall of 2016, and according to Mook, "she thought we made the right decision."

https://www.cnn.com/...-mook-fbi/index.html

----------
The quote "personally approved" seems to be after the fact, not necessarily that Hillary came up with the plan to route the story to the media instead of the FBI.



How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Durham Investigation [TMI] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TMI wrote:
ike wrote:
TMI wrote:
Forget the Russians. Testimony under oath from Mook is a better source for the story.

https://www.politico.com/...info-to-fbi-00034115

“Going to the FBI does not seem like a very effective way to get that information out to the public. We do that through the media,” he said.

Mook said that after discussions at the highest levels of the campaign, they decided to do just that. He also said that somewhere around that time he informed Clinton personally and she concurred.

“I discussed it with Hillary as well,” Mook said. “She agreed to that. ... She thought we made the right decision.”

https://www.cbsnews.com/...tigation-robby-mook/
Clinton was briefed about the decision to go to the press with the allegations in the fall of 2016, and according to Mook, "she thought we made the right decision."

https://www.cnn.com/...-mook-fbi/index.html

----------
The quote "personally approved" seems to be after the fact, not necessarily that Hillary came up with the plan to route the story to the media instead of the FBI.


Isn’t that pretty much the opposite of the supposed scandal? That is, rather than try to get Obama to use the FBI against Trump, Hillary preferred going directly to the public.

Well, once the story had gone public via the media, what choice did the FBI have but to investigate? Of course, I am assuming that Mook is telling the truth in this matter.

The FBI should have ample discretion whether or not to pursue an investigation prompted by allegations that politicians hurl at each other. But, if it chose to investigate based on its assessment, rather than pressure from Hillary or Obama, it’s hard to see any scandal here.
Quote Reply
Re: Durham Investigation [ike] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ike wrote:


The FBI should have ample discretion whether or not to pursue an investigation prompted by allegations that politicians hurl at each other. But, if it chose to investigate based on its assessment, rather than pressure from Hillary or Obama, it’s hard to see any scandal here.


You're just not looking hard enough. Maybe try Fox News. All these headlines are currently on the Fox News front page. Laura Ingraham called it bigger than Watergate. It's not hard to see why their fans think there is something real there.




Fired FBI agent claims Durham probe 'never should have taken place'


IRS reportedly removes ‘entire investigative team’ in Hunter Biden probe


Bombshell Durham report confirms FBI, DOJ had radical motives


Sen Lindsey Graham demands hearing on Durham report


Disgraced ex-FBI agent reacts to Durham report on Trump-Russia collusion with victory lap
Quote Reply
Re: Durham Investigation [Thom] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thom wrote:
ike wrote:


The FBI should have ample discretion whether or not to pursue an investigation prompted by allegations that politicians hurl at each other. But, if it chose to investigate based on its assessment, rather than pressure from Hillary or Obama, it’s hard to see any scandal here.


You're just not looking hard enough. Maybe try Fox News. All these headlines are currently on the Fox News front page. Laura Ingraham called it bigger than Watergate. It's not hard to see why their fans think there is something real there.




Fired FBI agent claims Durham probe 'never should have taken place'


IRS reportedly removes ‘entire investigative team’ in Hunter Biden probe


Bombshell Durham report confirms FBI, DOJ had radical motives


Sen Lindsey Graham demands hearing on Durham report


Disgraced ex-FBI agent reacts to Durham report on Trump-Russia collusion with victory lap


Can the FBI sue the shit out of Fox like Dominion did?

Suffer Well.
Quote Reply
Re: Durham Investigation [Thom] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
What will always be bonkers to me is that Mueller's investigation lasted less than 2 years, while the Durham report lasted around 3.

What was the end result of the report, Durham said a preliminary investigation should have been opened and not a full investigation?

It seems like this was an easy way out for Durham to get trump what he wanted (saying that the full investigation should have been brought - while Durham covers himself because he couldnt say no investigation should have been brought). These seems like an obvious way out when you were picked by trump to run the investigation.

All of this is so dumb, it would be like people arguing HRC was correct to have a private server because Comey said "no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute."
Last edited by: sosayusall: May 16, 23 8:03
Quote Reply

Prev Next