John Durham annex released

[beej]

https://www.racket.news/p/another-major-document-release

Just one sample involves a memorandum Russian analysts wrote in March of 2016, saying:

    [The Democratic Party's] opposition is focused on discrediting Trump.... [a]mong other things, the Clinton staff, with support from special services, is preparing scandalous revelations of business relations between Trump and the 'Russian Mafia.

Again, that's from March, 2016, long before the official trigger for the FBI's investigation into Donald Trump.

[neurosis]

You want to talk about contrast in reporting. 

The NY Times just released an article at about the same time.

https://archive.ph/GYWw0

"The information, a 29-page annex to the special counsel's 2023 report, reveals that a foundational document for that theory was most likely stitched together by Russian spies. The document is a purported email from July 27, 2016, that said Mrs. Clinton had approved a campaign proposal to tie Mr. Trump to Russia to distract from the scandal over her use of a private email server."

"And Kash Patel, the F.B.I. director, who has a long history of pushing false claims about the Russia investigation, declared on social media that the annex revealed "evidence that the Clinton campaign plotted to frame President Trump and fabricate the Russia collusion hoax."
In reality, the annex shows the opposite, indicating that a key piece of supposed evidence for the claim that Mrs. Clinton approved a plan to tie Mr. Trump to Russia is not credible: Mr. Durham concluded that the email from July 27, 2016, and a related one dated two days earlier were probably manufactured."

There is a long thread going on about this on another forum I read. I haven't had a chance to sift through it yet.

[neurosis]

I haven't had the chance to read the Fox News version yet.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/soros-alleged-ties-russiagate-exposed-declassified-annex-durham-report

[beej]

In reality, the annex shows the opposite, indicating that a key piece of supposed evidence for the claim that Mrs. Clinton approved a plan to tie Mr. Trump to Russia is not credible: Mr. Durham concluded that the email from July 27, 2016, and a related one dated two days earlier were probably manufactured."

that is clever wording when they say they were "manufactured." When what he actually says is that our best assessment is that these emails are a composite of several emails obtained by Russian hacking of several think tanks, including the Open Society Foundation and Andrew Carnegie foundations and others.

[neurosis]

that is clever wording when they say they were "manufactured."

Don't forget the "probably" part? 

[beej]

Don't forget the "probably" part? 

The NYT piece seems to also be ignoring the fact that Brennan told Obama about the fact that Russian intelligence knew about the plot by the clinton campaign and that they were most worried about how the Russian's had obtained that information rather than the fact that the clinton campaign was actually doing this. That, in and of itself, leads credence to the overall truth of the matter. They have Brennan's hand written notes of that meeting.

[neurosis]

the fact that Brennan

There seems to be some divide between Brennan and some facts.

I haven't done a deep dive in to this yet, I may not. I lost interest in the original "Russian collusion" claims because of the amount of b/s that was being spread. I get the same feeling from this. 

[Incogneeto]

The NYT piece seems to also be ignoring the fact that Brennan told Obama about the fact that Russian intelligence knew about the plot by the clinton campaign and that they were most worried about how the Russian's had obtained that information rather than the fact that the clinton campaign was actually doing this. That, in and of itself, leads credence to the overall truth of the matter. They have Brennan's hand written notes of that meeting.

The fact that another Conspiracy is being exposed as truth. Which most already knew as the truth. Just drops the post in the ground deeper for the deniers to beat their head against.

"Drain Bamage"    

I won't mention names.

[neurosis]

If the conspiracy is true, and there is proof, then it shouldn't be difficult to prove and start convicting people? The DOJ is owned by Trump at this point.

Maybe not an ex sitting president, but whose fault would that be?

[CNCAppsJames]

Since when has the government went after it's own that are high profile? Even WHEN they uncover the truth, he'll end up just like McCabe, Strok, etc... free.

Not since Watergate, and that.... that was a case where the cover up was worse than the crime has the government went after someone at Brennans level. They just don't do it. He knows where too many bodies are buried, who likes to diddle children, which he probably likes to do himself, etc... 

#NothingBurger