Congress Criminal Referral Clinton, Comey, McCabe, Lynch, Strzok, and Page to DOJ

#7,576
#7,576
RockyTop85 said:
Just going to leave this here for no reason at all.
Click to expand...
Oh there was a reason I’m sure but for the life of me I can’t see how that relates to the various options available on why the prosecutor resigned other than “Barr is poisoning them well”.

Did you by chance read the origin article The Hill quoted?
 
#7,577
#7,577
NorthDallas40 said:
Oh there was a reason I’m sure but fir the life of me I can’t see how that relates to the various options available on why the prosecutor resigned other than “Barr is poisoning them well”.

Did you by chance read the origin article The Hill quoted?
Click to expand...
I don’t want to hurt your sensitive feelings with another explanation of something that turns out to be super obvious.
 
#7,578
#7,578
RockyTop85 said:
I don’t want to hurt your sensitive feelings with another explanation of something that turns out to be super obvious.
Click to expand...
What unnamed source did I give the benefit of the doubt to Cletus?

Did she not resign? What I said was from the article vs the tweet the context reads different.

Did I miss where Ms Dannehy was accused of calling our troops suckers and losers?
 
#7,579
#7,579
RockyTop85 said:
I don’t want to hurt your sensitive feelings with another explanation of something that turns out to be super obvious.
Click to expand...
Seriously go read the origin story which is what I did before my first reply. The context of our sister’s tweet reads that Barr is attempting to impose a particular narrative which is her usual schtick. The origin article seems to indicate a desire to get this wrapped the hell up as it has drawn on. The origin article even points to concerns that the whole body of work will be white washed away if Trump loses and that’s from all of Durham’s team supposedly. And without more information from people involved we don’t know. So... nobody gets the benefit of the doubt without more info... right?
 
#7,580
#7,580
RockyTop85 said:
I don’t want to hurt your sensitive feelings with another explanation of something that turns out to be super obvious.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think that in effect we have a difference between:

"This unnamed source proves that Donald Trump said x, y, and z."

And:

"These sources offer a potential middle that your argument tried to exclude."
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#7,581
#7,581
Orange_Crush said:
Personally, I think that in effect we have a difference between:

"This unnamed source proves that Donald Trump said x, y, and z."

And:

"These sources offer a potential middle that your argument tried to exclude."
Click to expand...
You will now be chided and berated for your insolence.

But in all honesty my curiosity is perked up here. I’d guess Durham is smart enough to pick team members whom he could trust to execute critical thinking without applying bias and his ship has clearly been ran tighter than Mueller’s sieve. The description of her resignation letter seems to indicate no moral grandstanding. I’d like to know why she felt she had to leave this far along. And yeah there are plenty of options available other than “Barr is poisoning the well”.
 
#7,582
#7,582
NorthDallas40 said:
Seriously go read the origin story which is what I did before my first reply. The context of our sister’s tweet reads that Barr is attempting to impose a particular narrative which is her usual schtick. The origin article seems to indicate a desire to get this wrapped the hell up as it has drawn on. The origin article even points to concerns that the whole body of work will be white washed away if Trump loses and that’s from all of Durham’s team supposedly. And without more information from people involved we don’t know. So... nobody gets the benefit of the doubt without more info... right?
Click to expand...

Doesn't sound like she's a bleeding heart lib. Came out of private practice from a defense contractor to work for durham specifically for this investigation. Previously hand selected by conservative a-hole Mukasey to run an investigation. She clearly smells a rat and is making a noisy withdrawal so we all know what's going on here.
Prosecutor resigns from U.S. attorney’s investigation into origins of Trump-Russia probe
By Devlin Barrett and Matt Zapotosky

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...f49890-f466-11ea-b796-2dd09962649c_story.html
 
#7,584
#7,584
evillawyer said:
Doesn't sound like she's a bleeding heart lib. Came out of private practice from a defense contractor to work for durham specifically for this investigation. Previously hand selected by conservative a-hole Mukasey to run an investigation. She clearly smells a rat and is making a noisy withdrawal so we all know what's going on here.
Prosecutor resigns from U.S. attorney’s investigation into origins of Trump-Russia probe
By Devlin Barrett and Matt Zapotosky

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...f49890-f466-11ea-b796-2dd09962649c_story.html
Click to expand...
Yes yes we know that’s your narrative. Thanks for dropping by.


A1CAD75A-9095-4264-A1DD-1B342C2FF9E2.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol and 0nelilreb
#7,587
#7,587
evillawyer said:
Thread
Click to expand...

Did you even read the article the tweet referenced?

You claim she's making a noisy exit to highlight political pressure, referencing a tweet that says she's leaving due to political pressure.

Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, a top aide to U.S. Attorney John H. Durham in his Russia investigation, has quietly resigned - at least partly out of concern that the investigative team is being pressed for political reasons to produce a report before its work is done, colleagues said.

Dannehy, a highly regarded prosecutor who has worked with or for Durham for decades, informed colleagues in the U.S. Attorney’s office in New Haven of her resignation from the Department of Justice by email Thursday evening. The short email was a brief farewell message and said nothing about political pressure, her work for Durham or what the Durham team has produced, according to people who received it.
Click to expand...

The article literally makes a point to say it was a quiet exit that didn't mention any political pressure.

Seriously. WTH is wrong with you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BlackCreekVol and NorthDallas40
#7,588
#7,588
evillawyer said:
And read the thread by Ryan Goodman. DOJ has a 60-day rule about releasing work that may affect an election. We're within those 60 days now.

Bill Barr’s Hidden Truths About DOJ Rule of Forbearance in an Election
Click to expand...

Do you think Barr doesn't know the "rule"? Have you read the rule? What are the specifics?

And what does it say that all of the Democrats (you included) are begging that his investigation not release what they've found since it'll affect an election? You're afraid it'll hurt Trump? Or you know your candidates have feces all over them and your crying here just implicitly admits that you know it, don't care, and just hope voters won't find out so your preferred scum gets elected?
 
#7,589
#7,589
Orange_Crush said:
Personally, I think that in effect we have a difference between:

"This unnamed source proves that Donald Trump said x, y, and z."

And:

"These sources offer a potential middle that your argument tried to exclude."
Click to expand...

Looks like named source, Nora Danehy, being discredited with the “benefit” of “sources,” to me.
 
#7,591
#7,591
RockyTop85 said:
Looks like named source, Nora Danehy, being discredited with the “benefit” of “sources,” to me.
Click to expand...
maybe. Help me out. What does Nora have on record? All I've seen was EL's article that said it was a quiet resignation, with a short letter that didn't mention pressure. Personally I just don't know what she's on record with.

But from what I've seen in what you've taken issue with, there is a difference between "These unnamed sources prove", and "these sources may indicate".

You don't see a difference between those types of logic?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#7,592
#7,592
NorthDallas40 said:
Or... she needed to separate her politics from her job and was unable to do so. I can see you need to plant your spin story girl but from the linked article this could go several ways not all have to do with Barr pressuring.

“Dannehy, whom sources told the Courant is not a supporter of President Trump, was reportedly conflicted between politics and loyalty to Durham, a longtime colleague. The career prosecutor has led high-profile investigations into leaders such as former Connecticut Gov. John G. Rowland (R)”
Click to expand...
I'm just going to leave this here...
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#7,594
#7,594
Orange_Crush said:
maybe. Help me out. What does Nora have on record? All I've seen was EL's article that said it was a quiet resignation, with a short letter that didn't mention pressure. Personally I just don't know what she's on record with.

But from what I've seen in what you've taken issue with, there is a difference between "These unnamed sources prove", and "these sources may indicate".

You don't see a difference between those types of logic?
Click to expand...
Saying she can’t separate her politics from her professionalism is discrediting. Are you really saying it’s somehow not?
 
#7,599
#7,599
HighlevelDetailedFairybluebird-size_restricted.gif
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top