Oww, things went dark awfully fast… 
1 Like
Are you saying it was a rye sandwich? Or even pumpernickel?
1 Like
More like - “This thread is toast”…
2 Likes
Update to story; the headline was changed (I added the bold highlighted text):
Gov. Greg Abbott said on Thursday that he directed state troopers and the Texas National Guard “to shut down six points of entry along the southern border” at the request of U.S. Customs and Border Protection — then reversed himself shortly after, blaming the Biden administration for flip-flopping in its request for state help.
These work better - I just changed my chair & they are so quiet & smooth.
3 Likes
Are attorneys not allowed to speak as private citizens, file their own complaints? That seems to the gist of Durham’s indictment?
2 Likes
What about Idaho, eastern Oregon, South Dakota?
They want FreeDumb too!
I tell you the ratio of weird stories to not weird stories is increasing over time. On the other hand, so is the ratio of weird goings-on to not weird goings-on. I reckon the proportion is roughly constant, averaging 1.
2 Likes
Seems to me a simple misunderstanding about what “are you representing a client?” means. It could mean “is there a client that you are currently representing?” Or it could mean “are you coming to me right now in representation of a client?” Two very different questions and good luck proving that it wasn’t just an honest misinterpretation.
5 Likes
If there ever was such a thing as a “retribution” indictment … this would be one.
But seriously, Durham’s intentions were known from the outset and an objective examination of the events and associated facts was NEVER any part of his plans.
Durham is like the dirty cop who has already determined the guilty party … and one way or another, when he goes to get this “guilty” party … it is guaranteed that they will be shot while “resisting” and never make it to the the formal arraignment.
1 Like
Reminiscent of the way they went after Anthony Weiner’s records. Pounce on trivia because it is all they have, magnify it into grievance and prosecute to the full extent of the law, even as more-guilty right wingers continue to flout the law.
There is the entire history of the modern Republican Party.
Accuse their adversaries over trivial matters and commit profound violations in the chaos.
1 Like
Keeps him employed and continuing to investigate to see if anything sticks to the wall.
1 Like
For sure…don’t want the cow scuffing up the wooden floors, after all…
1 Like
And he is very fond of that mirkin! See how carefully he has combed and fluffed it!
1 Like
Not to mention their Bush-league anthrax investigation.
1 Like
That point addresses more Durham’s claim that Sussmann was representing Hillary’s campaign.
Agrred.
Durham is basically saying, “you were representing someone - Hillary!” and this shows that even if it was about someone specific (compared to “no one” which, of course, he wouldn’t be there if there was no one with a concern), it wasn’t her or her campaign, and it wasn’t even formal in representing the cybersecurity expert.
It was a “heads up.”
2 Likes
Yep…lawyers represent multiple clients all the time, so it’s important to keep straight who they are representing on a certain matter. If Sussmann said “I am not representing anyone on this matter”, and he wasn’t retained by the tech person, then it’s irrelevant if he was currently representing Clinton, the DNC, or whoever else in some other matter at the same time. It really feels like Durham is trying to claim that Sussmann was lying simply because he had other clients who may have had an interest in the information…that’s just not going to pass muster, without proof that Sussmann was actually representing someone on that specific matter and lied about that representation there is no case, and circumstantial nonsense doesn’t change that.
4 Likes
Her full name is HILLARY!! BENGHAZI!! EMAILS!!
This does seem so flimsy - it seems akin to claiming a lawyer can be responsible for a partner’s misconduct. It’s very Whitewater-ish.
1 Like
Just saw this on Emptywheel – obviously Marcy has been following this pretty closely. I have not, but wanted to share:
3 Likes
I’m going to suggest that has less to do with justifying Durham’s use of taxpayer funds on a snipe hunt, and more to do with discrediting any discussion of the bizarre communications between a Trump server and Alfa Bank. These communications were first brought to light by Paul Vixie, a widely respected computer scientist.
3 Likes