I hope I’ve made it clear why I’m just not much interested in the Danchenko trial. IMO, Danchenko should be a witness rather than a defendant, and the defendants should be the FBI and DoJ personnel who were involved in ginning up all aspects of the Russia Hoax—Crossfire Hurricane, the FISAs, and the Mueller Witchhunt.
My cynicism takes a backseat to no one's, not even at this site, so all I'm about to do here is go straight devil's advocate:
The most positive spin I can think of putting on Durham is that MAYBE he would do much more if he could, but since Garland (et al) won't let him touch anything that actually gets to the heart of the matter, he's revealing as much government malfeasance as he can under the guise of prosecuting Sussman and Danchenko, hoping it will keep some small flame alive that can be stoked when different people are in power.
I realize there are excellent arguments against this and that probably those arguments are also correct. Only time will tell, of course, and I for one am simply left hoping against hope that Durham's report and his post-report behavior will turn out to be things that work against my and so many others' well-founded cynicism.
The fundamental problem was that the FBI never had a good reason to suspect that Carter Page was involved in some plot to help Russian Intelligence to use e-mails hacked from Hilary Clinton to affect the USA's 2016 Presidential election.
Especially in retrospect, we know that no such plot ever was carried out. Election Day 2016 came, and there was no embarrassing revelation of Clinton's e-mails. Donald Trump won the election without any such "October Surprise" happening.
If we look back a few weeks before that Election Day, the FBI (and CIA, etc.) could speculate plausibly that such a plot was underway. There were some indications that many Clinton's e-mails had been stolen. There were some indications (e.g. reports from Mifsud and Downer) that some Trump campaign-staff members might be involved in such a plot. In principle, Crossfire Hurricane was valid at least as a preliminary investigation. (I am not sure about the distinctions of various FBI investigations.)
However -- as far as I know -- there never was any real evidence incriminating specifically Carter Page (or Paul Manafort or George Papadopoulos or Michael Flynn).
Mainly, the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was based on the memo that Australian diplomat Alexander Downer wrote about his wine-cafe conversation with Papadopoulos. The public still has not seen more than a couple sentences of that memo.
When Peter Strzok read Downer's memo, he jumped on an airplane and flew to London and interviewed Downer. The public has not seen the memo that Strzok wrote about that interview. It's likely that Strzok's memo was very tendentious, distorting what Downer actually told Strzok
FWIW, this thing makes my eyes glaze over. I certainly agree that the issues surrounding this whole fiasco cut to the core of the republic but, given all that is going on right now I just don't think JQ Public gives a hoot. It's all just part of the Swamp. In a righteous world, the entire FBI/DC leadership would be ****canned, prosecuted then tarred and feathered on that rail you always read about. Ain't gonna happen. They've dragged this thing out, obscured it with mud and made it indecipherable for the average American. JQP looks at it and thinks, "Ah, they're all corrupt BS artists anyway..."
I once subjected myself to an oral board interview for the FBI. They actually flew me to NYC from the Boston area. Boy, did I think I was something. Looking back now, I'm happy I bombed the thing. Even making it to the oral board was an accomplishment for an enlisted Army, non-pilot, non lawyer, non accountant like me.
My cynicism takes a backseat to no one's, not even at this site, so all I'm about to do here is go straight devil's advocate:
The most positive spin I can think of putting on Durham is that MAYBE he would do much more if he could, but since Garland (et al) won't let him touch anything that actually gets to the heart of the matter, he's revealing as much government malfeasance as he can under the guise of prosecuting Sussman and Danchenko, hoping it will keep some small flame alive that can be stoked when different people are in power.
I realize there are excellent arguments against this and that probably those arguments are also correct. Only time will tell, of course, and I for one am simply left hoping against hope that Durham's report and his post-report behavior will turn out to be things that work against my and so many others' well-founded cynicism.
The fundamental problem was that the FBI never had a good reason to suspect that Carter Page was involved in some plot to help Russian Intelligence to use e-mails hacked from Hilary Clinton to affect the USA's 2016 Presidential election.
Especially in retrospect, we know that no such plot ever was carried out. Election Day 2016 came, and there was no embarrassing revelation of Clinton's e-mails. Donald Trump won the election without any such "October Surprise" happening.
If we look back a few weeks before that Election Day, the FBI (and CIA, etc.) could speculate plausibly that such a plot was underway. There were some indications that many Clinton's e-mails had been stolen. There were some indications (e.g. reports from Mifsud and Downer) that some Trump campaign-staff members might be involved in such a plot. In principle, Crossfire Hurricane was valid at least as a preliminary investigation. (I am not sure about the distinctions of various FBI investigations.)
However -- as far as I know -- there never was any real evidence incriminating specifically Carter Page (or Paul Manafort or George Papadopoulos or Michael Flynn).
Mainly, the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was based on the memo that Australian diplomat Alexander Downer wrote about his wine-cafe conversation with Papadopoulos. The public still has not seen more than a couple sentences of that memo.
When Peter Strzok read Downer's memo, he jumped on an airplane and flew to London and interviewed Downer. The public has not seen the memo that Strzok wrote about that interview. It's likely that Strzok's memo was very tendentious, distorting what Downer actually told Strzok
This actually seems more interesting to me:
https://twitter.com/RetroCoast/status/1580922958410752001
Update: Newly released 302 forms show that Jeffrey Epstein served as a paid informant of the FBI for two decades
No idea whether it's true or not.
FWIW, this thing makes my eyes glaze over. I certainly agree that the issues surrounding this whole fiasco cut to the core of the republic but, given all that is going on right now I just don't think JQ Public gives a hoot. It's all just part of the Swamp. In a righteous world, the entire FBI/DC leadership would be ****canned, prosecuted then tarred and feathered on that rail you always read about. Ain't gonna happen. They've dragged this thing out, obscured it with mud and made it indecipherable for the average American. JQP looks at it and thinks, "Ah, they're all corrupt BS artists anyway..."
I once subjected myself to an oral board interview for the FBI. They actually flew me to NYC from the Boston area. Boy, did I think I was something. Looking back now, I'm happy I bombed the thing. Even making it to the oral board was an accomplishment for an enlisted Army, non-pilot, non lawyer, non accountant like me.
What / Who else did Danchenko touch that can be revealed in the trial?
Such treachery.
Totally agree!! Durham is DS too. Hope he proves me wrong. I should say pray he proves me wrong.