Will John Durham get the "Kavanaugh Treatment"

[Ana the Ist]

I saw the relevant testimony on TV.

As did I.

I believed his accuser.

That's the danger of false accusations...most people automatically believe the woman to begin with.

The FBI was never assigned to investigating that accusation. (On nominations, the FBI looks into what the White House wants investigated. Nothing more.)

I don't recall them requesting any more time.

There's nothing to really investigate. It's a 30 year old claim, no one there recalls Kavanaugh at the party except for the accuser. There's no evidence to examine.

Oh, and her lawyer admitted it was all politically motivated.

 

[Opdrey]

That's the danger of false accusations...most people automatically believe the woman to begin with.

Ya know, it's actually a fair point. In any given he-said/she-said event it is a good idea to listen to both sides. Instead the GOP lawmakers decided that ONLY Brett was believable.

There's nothing to really investigate. It's a 30 year old claim, no one there recalls Kavanaugh at the party except for the accuser. There's no evidence to examine.

I was mostly convinced when Boofmaster Brett started bawling his eyes. That was how I knew he was the best fit for a dispassionate SCOTUS justice seat.

 

[disciple Clint]

If that were true, you'd think the evidence would have led to actual charges by now. So far, zero, kinda like Donald's and the GOP's previous attempts to manufacture stuff against his political rivals ... Benghazi, Obama not being a citizen, etc, etc, etc. At some point you'd think the people who are the desired audience for these kinds of stories would catch on that they're being taken advantage of.

Although I guess to be fair on the subject of "very real evidence of serious crimes", one of the past attempts did lead to an impeachment trial.

Durham has indited 3 people so far at least one of them is supplying information on others more indictments are expect in the near future.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Ya know, it's actually a fair point. In any given he-said/she-said event it is a good idea to listen to both sides. Instead the GOP lawmakers decided that ONLY Brett was believable.

Perhaps they were just rational....and deciding the evidence was just his word vs hers....they realized that no rational thinking person could deny him based on nothing.

I was mostly convinced when Boofmaster Brett started bawling his eyes. That was how I knew he was the best fit for a dispassionate SCOTUS justice seat.

Funny how the same people who tried to characterize him as a wild party boy brimming with "toxic masculinity" also shamed him for crying...

It's as if they never really believed the very things they said.

 

[Opdrey]

Funny how the same people who tried to characterize him as a wild party boy brimming with "toxic masculinity" also shamed him for crying...

Because he was just like most toxically masculine party-boys...just a little baby overcompensating.

You know, like a bully who cries when someone stands up to him. Suddenly not everyone was giving Little Bretty exactly what widdle Bretty wanted!

Poor guy.

 

[KCfromNC]

Durham has indited 3 people so far at least one of them is supplying information on others more indictments are expect in the near future.

Even the Durham org's web site only lists 2 indictments.
And I strongly doubt you have the inside information required for us to believe the other claims in this post.

 

[disciple Clint]

Even the Durham org's web site only lists 2 indictments.
And I strongly doubt you have the inside information required for us to believe the other claims in this post.

"The background details of Durham’s three indictments so far have assembled an impressive list of “great Democrats” who contributed directly or indirectly to the creation of the Russia collusion scandal. Indeed, the collusion case increasingly is taking on a type of “Murder on the Orient Express” feel, in which all of the suspects may turn out to be culprits." Durham's latest indictment: More lines drawn to Clinton's campaign
"Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said Monday that he expects to see “quite a few more indictments” come out of special counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the FBI probe of claims that former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign colluded with Russia."
"Also Monday, Fox News reported that Durham’s investigation has “accelerated,” with more people “cooperating” and testifying before a grand jury than previously revealed.
A source familiar with the probe told Fox there’s been “much more activity” behind the scenes “than has been visible to the public,” adding: “Durham does this right and keeps it a secret.” “He [Brennan] briefed President Obama and Vice President Biden and other members of the national security team about this specific intelligence, that John Durham now has, about a Hillary Clinton plan to falsely accuse and vilify Donald Trump with a scandal, and the discussion around that and whether or not it was good intelligence,” Ratcliffe said. “So everything that happened after that … is one of the reasons that John Durham is investigating."
Earlier in the interview, Ratcliffe added that he believed Durham had found evidence of “a conspiracy, meaning two or more people in furtherance of a crime; and anyone that was aware that this campaign plan was going to be falsely pitched to the FBI or the CIA or law enforcement or intelligence authorities would be subject to criminal prosecution for any number of criminal crimes — mail fraud, wire fraud, lying under oath, congressional testimony, false testimony to prosecutors, all of those things.
“So it could go broadly and deeply. I think it does, based on intelligence that I have seen and that I discussed with John Durham.” Ratcliffe expects ‘a few more indictments’ in Durham probe
NEXT QUESTION?

 

[KCfromNC]

"The background details of Durham’s three indictments so far have assembled an impressive list of “great Democrats” who contributed directly or indirectly to the creation of the Russia collusion scandal. Indeed, the collusion case increasingly is taking on a type of “Murder on the Orient Express” feel, in which all of the suspects may turn out to be culprits." Durham's latest indictment: More lines drawn to Clinton's campaign
"Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said Monday that he expects to see “quite a few more indictments” come out of special counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the FBI probe of claims that former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign colluded with Russia."
"Also Monday, Fox News reported that Durham’s investigation has “accelerated,” with more people “cooperating” and testifying before a grand jury than previously revealed.
A source familiar with the probe told Fox there’s been “much more activity” behind the scenes “than has been visible to the public,” adding: “Durham does this right and keeps it a secret.” “He [Brennan] briefed President Obama and Vice President Biden and other members of the national security team about this specific intelligence, that John Durham now has, about a Hillary Clinton plan to falsely accuse and vilify Donald Trump with a scandal, and the discussion around that and whether or not it was good intelligence,” Ratcliffe said. “So everything that happened after that … is one of the reasons that John Durham is investigating."
Earlier in the interview, Ratcliffe added that he believed Durham had found evidence of “a conspiracy, meaning two or more people in furtherance of a crime; and anyone that was aware that this campaign plan was going to be falsely pitched to the FBI or the CIA or law enforcement or intelligence authorities would be subject to criminal prosecution for any number of criminal crimes — mail fraud, wire fraud, lying under oath, congressional testimony, false testimony to prosecutors, all of those things.
“So it could go broadly and deeply. I think it does, based on intelligence that I have seen and that I discussed with John Durham.” Ratcliffe expects ‘a few more indictments’ in Durham probe
NEXT QUESTION?

Ignoring all the hype, it looks like this post has documented 1 actual indictment and lots of speculation. We'll just have to wait and see if any of those guesses are correct ... hope springs eternal, I suppose.

 

[tz620q]

Even the Durham org's web site only lists 2 indictments.
And I strongly doubt you have the inside information required for us to believe the other claims in this post.

Here's an AP story that details the 3 indictments.

 

[KCfromNC]

Here's an AP story that details the 3 indictments.

Thanks, seems like a much more balanced treatment.
And kinda weird the last indictment is from Nov, given the promises that more are immediately forthcoming?

 

[durangodawood]

Update, please.

"Kraken" or "bombshell"?

 

[Vylo]

Will Durham scream at senators asking them about beer after crying like a baby?

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Durham Distances Himself From Furor in Right-Wing Media Over Filing

lol

 

[essentialsaltes]

We can watch the thing play out and see what happens.

A Washington attorney with ties to the Democratic party goes on trial Monday for allegedly lying to the FBI weeks ahead of the 2016 election, in the first case from Trump-era special counsel John Durham to be heard by a jury.

The trial, which opens Monday in federal court in Washington, D.C. with jury selection, is expected to last two weeks.

Update, please.

"Kraken" or "bombshell"?

We'll see. No further indictments have come out in the past two months. But he only averages one indictment per year.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Do you think Durham will get raked over the coals by the media the way Brett Kavanaugh was?

Bookmark this post so we can re-visit it later.

So close. In fact, it's Republicans who are raking him over the coals.
(Although I guess it's fair to say I heard about it in the media.)

The much-hyped investigation led by Durham into the origins of the 2016 FBI Trump-Russia report ended with a second trial loss on Tuesday, as Russian analyst Igor Danchenko was acquitted of all remaining charges against him.

The verdict didn’t sit well with Rep. Matt Gaetz, who rushed to Newsmax to express his disappointment.

“Durham has been on this investigation for years, and here we are 0-2, with fewer wins than the Washington generals,” Gaetz said before accusing Durham of “not prosecuting these cases to obtain convictions.”

 

[Brihaha]

So close. In fact, it's Republicans who are raking him over the coals.
(Although I guess it's fair to say I heard about it in the media.)

The much-hyped investigation led by Durham into the origins of the 2016 FBI Trump-Russia report ended with a second trial loss on Tuesday, as Russian analyst Igor Danchenko was acquitted of all remaining charges against him.

The verdict didn’t sit well with Rep. Matt Gaetz, who rushed to Newsmax to express his disappointment.

“Durham has been on this investigation for years, and here we are 0-2, with fewer wins than the Washington generals,” Gaetz said before accusing Durham of “not prosecuting these cases to obtain convictions.”

Gee, Durham's investigation fits the profile of an actual witch hunt. Except poor Trump's witch didn't hunt. He misled his followers once again. And once again it seems Durham is to blame, or the DOJ, or the jury or ........

 

[Ana the Ist]

Will Durham scream at senators asking them about beer after crying like a baby?

That turned out to be a solid strategy with absolutely no chance of Kavanaugh getting back at the left for slandering his name.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I'd like to reply to the question in the title:

No, John Durham almost certainly will not get elevated to the Supreme Court.

 

[DaisyDay]

Do you think Durham will get raked over the coals by the media the way Brett Kavanaugh was? Will that be an indication that he's actually on to something?

If he only arrests Democrats how bad will things get for him? If he arrests both Democrats and Republicans will things be better for him? If he only arrests Republicans how will it go?

Bookmark this post so we can re-visit it later.

Kavanaugh got a documentary! I don't think Durham will get one of those...

Takeaways from Sundance’s secret Brett Kavanaugh documentary

Director Doug Liman announced his new documentary at the festival. Then new tips began pouring in.

“We’re getting more tips,” Amy Herdy announced Friday night after the Sundance Film Festival premiere of “Justice,” a documentary she produced about the sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh.

The film’s existence was a surprise, with the festival only revealing on Thursday, its opening night, that it was making a very last-minute addition to the lineup: the first documentary from “Swingers” and “The Bourne Identity” director Doug Liman. Within half an hour of the news getting out, Liman said in the post-screening Q&A, the film team started hearing from people who had sent the FBI tips before Kavanaugh’s confirmation, which the agency did not further investigate.

 

[Hans Blaster]

How Barr’s Quest to Find Flaws in the Russia Inquiry Unraveled (NY Times)

The review by John Durham at one point veered into a criminal investigation related to Donald Trump himself, even as it failed to find wrongdoing in the origins of the Russia inquiry.

[Me]
Well it looks like the "Durham investigation" was quite the disaster (as we suspected).

Among the more shocking revelations about the probe to explore the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation:

• AG Barr interfered regularly, meeting with the prosecutor as frequently as weekly. (The point of the special counsel regulation is to set the SC as an more independent prosecutor/investigator.)
• The probe expanded into a criminal probe when they got tips from Italian officials about financial dealings of -- Donald Trump (Leaks about the "criminal expansion" to the press were treated like the criminal activity was related to the Trump-Russia probe origins, not the unrelated activities of Trump)
• There were internal struggles in the team including sharp disagreements about whether prosecutions could be brought. These resulted in resignations and prosecutions that the juries effectively "laughed out" of court.)
• Durham used memos taken by Dutch intelligence from Russian servers to target persons associated with George Soros. (Some analysts thought the exaggerated and inconsistent claims in the Russian memos indicated that the Russians may have realized they were being hacked and inserted false info.)

The Durham investigation was the political hack job and distraction machine that outside observers suspected. A final report from Durham is expected soon.