Get ready for another round of the media telling you why John Durham�s
investigation doesn�t matter. After all this, isn�t this just a case of
lying to a federal agent? The Times, Washington Post, CNN, et al. will
rush in to say it�s nothing.

It�s everything � and here�s why.

If Hillary Clinton or one of her spokespeople went to the media in 2016
and said Donald Trump was a Russian agent, yes, they would have gotten a
half-hour on MSNBC, but others would have been asking for proof, curious
that this wasn�t just the fantasy of a political opponent.

Ah, but what if you could get the FBI to open an investigation? That would
give this whole enterprise a veneer of credibility. Then you have someone
leak it to the press and, voila, you�ve weaponized the nation�s justice
system and no one is the wiser.

And the best part is you don�t even need any real evidence! Just lie a
lot.

Which is exactly what Clinton�s campaign did. Michael Sussmann claimed to
be just an ordinary concerned citizen when he was really a Clinton lawyer.
Christopher Steele claimed to be a worried ex-spy when he was really a
Clinton opposition researcher. They met with the FBI and fed investigators
a bunch of hooey about Russian banks and pee �tapes.

These vicious rumors swirled around before the 2016 election, but after
Trump�s surprise win, an angry media latched onto them fiercely. And so
opposition research, paid for and directed by Hillary Clinton, caused an
attorney general to recuse himself, a special prosecutor to be appointed,
talking heads to bluster every night, and half a presidency to be
hijacked.

Clinton�s people are desperate to make this go away. They paid more than
$100,000 to the Federal Election Commission because they lied about
spending money on opposition research. Sussmann puts up objection after
objection even as Durham methodically lays out his case that the lawyer
lied to the FBI.

Russiagate is a political smear of Nixonian proportions � worse because it
used the government itself to throw the mud. There�s a great story here.
If Hunter Biden is any indication, the rest of the media will get around
to telling it in about three years.

https://nypost.com/2022/04/06/why-john-durhams-investigation-matters/

In news:XnsAE73E1FC923FFF1104@0.0.0.2, buh buh biden <drooler@gmail.com> typed:

> Get ready for another round of the media telling you why John Durham's
> investigation doesn't matter. After all this, isn't this just a case of
> lying to a federal agent? The Times, Washington Post, CNN, et al. will
> rush in to say it's nothing.

> It's everything - and here's why.

> If Hillary Clinton or one of her spokespeople went to the media in 2016
> and said Donald Trump was a Russian agent, yes, they would have gotten a
> half-hour on MSNBC, but others would have been asking for proof, curious
> that this wasn't just the fantasy of a political opponent.

> Ah, but what if you could get the FBI to open an investigation? That would
> give this whole enterprise a veneer of credibility. Then you have someone
> leak it to the press and, voila, you've weaponized the nation's justice
> system and no one is the wiser.

> And the best part is you don't even need any real evidence! Just lie a
> lot.

> Which is exactly what Clinton's campaign did. Michael Sussmann claimed to
> be just an ordinary concerned citizen when he was really a Clinton lawyer.
> Christopher Steele claimed to be a worried ex-spy when he was really a
> Clinton opposition researcher. They met with the FBI and fed investigators
> a bunch of hooey about Russian banks and pee �tapes.

> These vicious rumors swirled around before the 2016 election, but after
> Trump's surprise win, an angry media latched onto them fiercely. And so
> opposition research, paid for and directed by Hillary Clinton, caused an
> attorney general to recuse himself, a special prosecutor to be appointed,
> talking heads to bluster every night, and half a presidency to be
> hijacked.

> Clinton's people are desperate to make this go away. They paid more than
> $100,000 to the Federal Election Commission because they lied about
> spending money on opposition research. Sussmann puts up objection after
> objection even as Durham methodically lays out his case that the lawyer
> lied to the FBI.

> Russiagate is a political smear of Nixonian proportions - worse because it
> used the government itself to throw the mud. There's a great story here.
> If Hunter Biden is any indication, the rest of the media will get around
> to telling it in about three years.

> https://nypost.com/2022/04/06/why-john-durhams-investigation-matters/

Does the name "Martha Stewart" ring any bells?