Two key articles from Salon
with this major headline (both formatted to fit the blog):
“Insanely corrupt: Despite failure, Bill Barr brags that John Durham
boosted Trump’s Clinton smears”
Also from Salon with this headline:
“This is what
collusion looks like: GOP-led Senate report far more devastating than the Mueller
probe”
Report finds Trump's campaign chief, Paul Manafort, worked with a Russian
intelligence officer, it and details Stone's WikiLeaks contacts
Major extract re: Paul Manafort’s efforts to corrupt the
2016 campaign in Trump’s favor – and then recall that Trump would later pardon Manafort and Stone.
[I surmise that was
to keep both of them quiet and not blow the whole thing up in Trump’s face.]
That Senate Intelligence
Committee's final report (dated Tuesday, August 18, 2020) on its bipartisan
Russia investigation revealed even more numerous contacts between Trump's
advisers and Russian operatives than former special counsel Robert Mueller's
report showed.
That committee was chaired by Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) released its fifth and final report which totals nearly 1,000 pages follows their three-year bipartisan investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election.
The report documents the
extent to which Russia sought to influence the election — and members of
Trump's team welcoming their assistance.
At the time Politico's Kyle Cheney wrote: “The
Senate report — even more extensive than the Mueller investigation — paints a
far more devastating picture of Russian intelligence operatives' access to the
Trump campaign, describing far more insidious connections than even Mueller did
in his report.”
The Rubio report, like
Mueller's, did not conclude that Trump's campaign coordinated with Russia,
but it found that Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort: “Worked with a Russian
intelligence officer and even handed him internal campaign data.”
The Rubio report also
suggested that Manafort might also be linked to Russia's hack of the
Clinton and DNC campaign and website to obtain documents and emails.
Now the current Barr BS part tied into the Durham 3-year
investigation of Hillary Clinton claiming she was corrupt and that her effort
was to smear Trump – as it relates to Durham’s “big
bombshell case” designed to nail Hillary Clinton and her role.
John Durham in September 2021 indicted former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman, alleging he lied to the FBI about his ties to the campaign while discussing his suspicions about Trump's ties to Russia with former FBI general counsel James Baker.
Sussman's attorney
argued that the charge was a circus full of slideshows as
Durham used the proceedings to stoke Trump-world conspiracy theories.
A jury recently acquitted Sussman
in a major blow to the investigation, which Trump and his allies had hyped for
years.
Barr's claims and Durham's probe are yet another attempt
by Trump allies to make the former president out to be the victim of the Russia
investigation, a narrative Trump has successfully pushed
in some parts of the Republican Party.
But the narrative ignores the fact
that numerous Trump campaign officials and allies actively worked with or solicited
help from Russians or Russian agents during his 2016 campaign.
Along with Russia's hack
of the Democratic Party and a top Clinton campaign official, as well as its
efforts to influence the election on social media, Trump's campaign operatives
were repeatedly targeted in Russian efforts.
The Washington Post's Philip Bump explained it this way writing: “People like Paul Manafort, his campaign manager and consultant to Russia-linked actors; and like Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser who had previously been identified as a target for Russian intelligence efforts and who traveled to Moscow in early July 2016; and like George Papadopoulos, another adviser who had been told by a guy who was helping him set up a meeting between Trump and Russia's president that Russia had some of Clinton's emails. That Russia had hacked the Democrats was known by mid-June 2016 and the Russia probe was opened by the end of July.”
Legal experts slammed the Durham probe as “incredibly weak and
a roaring waste of money and time”
for example:
Stephen Gillers, a
legal ethics professor at NYU told The New York Times:
“The case wasn't a nothing-burger, but it was very thin, and it's hard to
understand why it was brought other than to support Trump's allegation that the
Clinton campaign falsely alleged a Trump-Russia connection. That motive is
unacceptable. The government's only legitimate goal in bringing this case was
conviction.”
Conservative attorney
George Conway (Kellyanne’s husband), a prominent Trump critic, called on the
Biden Justice Department to shut down the probe telling MSNBC:
“I hope it's headed into the trash can. The Justice Department should put an
end to this ridiculous investigation now. This case was a joke. There was
nothing here to begin with.”
Former federal
prosecutor Renato Mariotti tweeted: “Barr
suggests that the value of Durham's case against Sussman was that it brought
out evidence against the Clinton campaign. Making evidence public is not a
proper reason to charge someone with committing a crime. Sussman's life was
turned upside down before he was acquitted.”
Former FBI counterintelligence chief Peter Strzok, who was fired after being targeted by Trump for his involvement in special counsel Bob Mueller's probe even though he was cleared of any wrongdoing by the DOJ, also hit out at Barr on Twitter tweeting: “Barr brazenly saying the quiet part out loud: Durham using criminal prosecutions to get out a false Russia narrative is far more important than actually achieving convictions.”
Former GOP strategist
Tim Miller called out Barr tweeting: “It doesn't matter that
Barr and they failed in an utterly frivolous prosecution because they succeeded
in smearing the Clinton campaign. An insanely corrupt and politicized DOJ, right
out in the open.”
Read more:
Right-wing media's latest bombshell
— the Durham report — is a nothing burger
You all look like idiots now: Legal
experts mock Trump after John Durham's “big fat loss” in court
My 2 Cents: Very good stuff in this long post – I hope you
agree.
The B/L: The Durham investigation by all
accounts is a flop — but Trump just can't quit that conspiracy.
That “Russia-Russia thing”
that Trump calls it is just like the 2020 election conspiracy claim that he can’t
drop.
Trump’s DNA simply will
not allow him to admit nor accept failure about anything – been that way is
whole adult life handed down from his father, Fred.
Background on why Trump won’t run in 2024
— based on personality traits rooted in two words “fear” and “fight.”
We begin with “fear,”
indirectly drilled into young Donald Trump’s psyche by Fred, his authoritarian
father, who demanded that his son always win and show strength but never
weakness.
Fred taught Donald that he
could lie or twist the truth but never back down. Consequently, Trump developed
an unnatural fear of losing or being called “a loser.”
Those grueling family dynamics were chronicled in Mary Trump’s book “Too Much and Never Enough,” subtitled “How my family created the world’s most dangerous man.”
She is a
Ph.D. clinical psychologist whose best-seller was published in July 2020. Then, during a television appearance on December
3, 2020, Mary explained: “It’s impossible for Trump to
believe that he lost the election.”
That inability is why Trump can’t let go of 2020 and will tease a 2024 run for as long as possible. But, ultimately, Trump’s fear of losing is likely stronger than his willingness to take the risk.
Moreover, during a second reelection campaign, the former
president would be hard-pressed to use the same predictive excuse first
heralded in a May 25, 2020, Politico headline:
“Trump sees a rigged election ahead. Democrats see a constitutional crisis in
the making.”
And again, on August 17,
2020, a Hill headline quoted
the president’s losing rationale: “Trump: The only way we’re going to lose this
election is if the election is rigged.”
I know this is a rather long
post today but I believe it has very good and hopefully informative information.
Thanks for stopping by.
No comments:
Post a Comment