- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: John Durham's Legacy
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:03 pm to UncleFestersLegs
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:03 pm to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
note that this was all completely ignored
I specifically covered it. Clinesmith was prosecuted.
Presenting intel reports based on subjectivity and opinion isn't "lying" to a court. It's just not. Opinions can't lie.
1
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I never claimed it was "able to establish objective facts". That's the flaw in your argument.
quote:
Intelligence is subjective, and it was established Russia did hack/interfere.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:06 pm to Flats
I literally already clarified that. In terms of intelligence standards, it was established (see the memo Tulsi released, specifically the part I posted).
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:06 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You may want to try again.
So when Tulsi says the information they had was not released during the 2016 election, because the intel says that, she's lying? But Durham was telling the truth?
Everything she has released has proven Durham didn't do jack schit and his investigation should have found it.
The fact Adam Schiff hasn't been removed from Congress is mind blowing.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:08 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'll accept your MAGA red meat as gospel, and still state, convictions will be unlikely if not impossible. That's the point I keep making.
You framed this as a matter of “opinion,” but conveniently ignored the suppression, omission, and altered evidence propping up that narrative. Now you mock anyone who calls out the corruption and celebrate that no one will be convicted, like that somehow proves innocence.
You throw around “MAGA red meat” like a gotcha, but you’re cut from the same cloth. You beat the “Russia collusion” and “dossier” drum for years, took lies as fact, and now run for cover when the truth shows up.
And here you are, playing the all-knowing lawyer on this site until the facts get uncomfortable, and tribal loyalty wins out. Keep dying on that hill to defend your corrupt system. Just don’t pretend it’s about truth or justice.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:10 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I specifically covered it. Clinesmith was prosecuted
"prosecuted". Clinesmith is a perfect example of the frickery surrounding all of this
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:21 pm to riccoar
quote:
Everything she has released has proven Durham didn't do jack schit and his investigation should have found it.
As my initial post pointed out, he understood what the memo Tulsi released just said, and acted accordingly.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:25 pm to bstew3006
quote:
You framed this as a matter of “opinion,” but conveniently ignored the suppression, omission, and altered evidence propping up that narrative.
Opinion guides the final product, and I explained this.
quote:
Now you mock anyone who calls out the corruption and celebrate that no one will be convicted, like that somehow proves innocence.
I never said they were innocent. Why lie?
quote:
. You beat the “Russia collusion” and “dossier” drum for years
Uh..objectively incorrect. Why lie? Or are you just projecting ignorance?
I always was critical of Russiagate and dismissed the reports about Trump and Putin.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:34 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
As my initial post pointed out, he understood what the memo Tulsi released just said, and acted accordingly.
Oh, so Durham knew the intel was garbage, understood what Tulsi’s memo confirmed, and still ran with it and your takeaway is “he acted accordingly”? Got it. Nothing says integrity like knowingly advancing false intel because it fits the narrative. Really inspiring stuff.
And let’s be clear, what you’re defending is a blueprint. By your logic, Trump and Team, after his second term, can suppress, omit, and falsify intel on the next administration, and you’ll be cool with it. Because, it’s there “opinion” as long as he understands the intel, and acts “accordingly,” we’re good, right? Just wow
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:35 pm to bstew3006
quote:
Oh, so Durham knew the intel was garbage, understood what Tulsi’s memo confirmed, and still ran with it and your takeaway is “he acted accordingly”? G
No. That strawman is not what I posted.
quote:\
And let’s be clear, what you’re defending
I'm not "defending" anything, scholar.
quote:
By your logic, Trump and Team, after his second term, can suppress, omit, and falsify intel on the next administration, and you’ll be cool with it
I wasn't cool with Russiagate. Why would I be cool with that?
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:40 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Opinion guides the final product, and I explained this.
Oh, now it’s “opinion guides the final product”? Cute pivot. When it was convenient, you framed it as a neutral process, now you’re defending the result as subjective judgment. And still ignoring the core issue: that opinion was built on altered intel and suppressed facts. That’s not “analysis.” That’s propaganda.
quote:
I never said they were innocent. Why lie?
And saying “I never claimed they were innocent” is such a weak dodge. You mock anyone demanding accountability, cheer that there won’t be convictions, and pretend that’s some noble stance. It’s not. It’s moral cowardice dressed up as legal nuance.
You posture like you’re above it all, but your whole act is just partisan absolution with a thesaurus. You’re not analyzing corruption, you’re laundering it.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:42 pm to bstew3006
Manipulation of facts to get the outcome you desire is what slow fanni pro is spinning as the correct course if action to take
Clown
Clown
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:42 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:How did this factual statement asserting any Russian effort was not conducted to help Trump get >90DVs?
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:46 pm to SlowFlowPro
Ah yes, the classic retreat: “That’s not what I said,” “I’m not defending anything,” and “I wasn’t cool with Russiagate.” You’re running from your own logic like it’s radioactive.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:48 pm to bstew3006
quote:
Ah yes, the classic retreat: “That’s not what I said,”
It's a truthful assessment, in this case.
quote:
“I’m not defending anything
I'm not. Where am I defending anything done?
quote:
“I wasn’t cool with Russiagate.
Factual statement with 9-ish years of unflinching support.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:49 pm to Jbird
quote:
Manipulation of facts to get the outcome you desire is what slow fanni pro is spinning as the correct course if action to take
Where did I say anything close to "correct"?
Not prosecutable =/= correct.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:50 pm to SlowFlowPro
Lol
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:52 pm to Jbird
Didn't think you had a response.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:53 pm to SlowFlowPro
Says the guy that says facts and Intel are opinion based.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 2:57 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Where did I say anything close to "correct"?
Ah, the classic slowfanni shuffle: defend the behavior, justify the outcome, spin it as reasonable then pretend you never called it “correct.” But let’s be real, you spent half this thread defending Obama, Brennan, and Clapper’s “opinion” which just happened to contradict the intel while conveniently ignoring the suppression, omission, and manipulation that was used to prop it up.
You don’t have to say “this is correct” when your entire posture screams it. You’ve excused every abuse of power as long as it came wrapped in the right tribal label.
You’re not arguing in good faith you’re just trying to sound smart while defending a lie.
And the only thing slower than your logic… is the walkback when your own words corner you.
Page 6 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News