You can read it here

https://www.nationalreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Durham-Report.pdf

But, but, but... MSDNC says there's nothing to see here. And the rest of liberal media is acting like there is no report even released... just ask Google.

This is just more Russian disinformation, disinformationalizing the UltraMaga right!

Ok, this is one where you really have to watch sources.

From what I have seen the tone was critical, but the democrats will take a page from Trumps reading of the Muller report and crow “Total Exoneration” because there no charges or indictments will be forthcoming…

So, it doesn't look like Durham found anything that would cause one to believe that the FBI was wrong to launch the investigation. He is saying they were, but not really offering a reason that I can see. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the purpose of this investigation to find wrong doing by the FBI? Did they? I mean based on a report that Marco Rubio wrote, there was reason to investigate the Trump Russia thing? Are we ignoring that part? If a senator in good standing, and his committee say something is not right, are we saying the FBI shouldn't investigate?

Remember the IG looked at this at the time and found flaws in the FBI actions and the FBI took steps to correct. So what was the value of the Durham investigation? Other than to prolong this so mileage can be gained?

My close republican friends told me to watch out, Durham is going to nail the LIBS and the FBI..

I don't see where that happened.,

I don't like Trump and never voted for him, but anyone with half of a brain knew this Russia & Trump stuff was a clown show from the very beginning. I'm going to have a good laugh looking back at some old posts about this from the past handful of years. I might even post some so we can all laugh together.

I'll accept Durham's report at face value. I think there should be a different set of criteria to launch an FBI investigation than scandalous headlines or circumstantial facts. I wonder how much the Steele dossier that the Republicans initiated and then Hilary then finainced was used as a basis for some of the FBI initiatives and we now know that dossier was largely not credible.

I will say - we shouldn't forget the Russians did interfere and while they had some efforts on disinformation on 'both sides' - their efforts overwhelmingly tried to get Trump elected. We had an unprecedented level of interaction between the Trump campaign and foreign entities. We had multiple Trump campaigners lie about their contacts with Russians - and then some of them lied again after they were caught lying the first time. Clearly none of that reached the threshold of deserving an FBI investigation - and I can accept that.

So our trust level and expectations of Russians trying to influence an election and our own FBI should be about the same??

And these people are still. buying. tickets. 🤣

Precisely. This is so much bigger than people realize. Forget the fact it was about Trump. I don't know how anyone could trust or have confidence in the FBI (or any intelligence agency) in just about anything for the foreseeable future. This is pretty devastating for the country that an agency like this chose to handle a situation in such a reckless and motivated way.

Are you saying the Ruskies didn't interfere?

As for trust in the FBI? I guess I when people say the entire police community can't be trusted because of a few rotten apples you are in agreement?

A whatabout goalpost!

Don't see those everyday.

I know one poster soon to wake from his slumber who will be very jealous!

LOL. I don't understand your first reply. You've become very jaundiced and I rarely see any genuine posts from you at the moment, hard to have a convo like that. Enjoy belittling all the posters you don't seem to agree with.

You can’t forget about Trump when he shouts into a microphone “Russia can you hear me!” and then is mad when he finds out there is an investigation.

His ties to Russia were well known before the election.

More BS muddying of the waters by the far fetched right. Trump is going down, finally, and they are throwing poo at the walls to see what they can make stick politically. Hilarious. Show us facts like we did for you on ALL of Trump’s crimes. Just one damn shred of proof.

They just did. You're blind.

He didn’t say anything meaningful. It just fits your echo chamber. It all sounds like crying baby fascism to me.

Lest we forget......

Mueller finds no conspiracy, but extensive Trump-Russia contacts

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Special Counsel Robert Mueller may not have found evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia, but his report details extensive contacts between the campaign and Russian operatives who sought to influence the election.

Mueller said in his report released on Thursday that he found “numerous links” and that the Trump campaign “expected it would benefit” from Russia’s effort to tilt the ballot in Trump’s favour.

Ultimately, Mueller determined the various contacts either didn’t amount to criminal behaviour or would be difficult to prove in court, even if people in Trump’s orbit sometimes displayed a willingness to accept Russian help, the report showed.

Trump and his allies, who derided the Mueller probe as a political “witch hunt”, portrayed the report as vindication. “No collusion. No obstruction. For all the haters and the radical left Democrats, game over,” Trump tweeted on Thursday.

“The bottom line is the president is exonerated and the campaign is exonerated of collusion,” said Michael Caputo, a former adviser to Trump’s campaign.

Some legal experts and political strategists were more circumspect, saying the report confirmed the Russian government was attempting to help Trump with the election.

“I think that’s a pretty extraordinary finding of historical significance, whether or not there’s a crime,” said Matthew Jacobs, a former federal prosecutor who is now a San Francisco-based lawyer.

Many of the contacts in the report were already known. They included former national security adviser Michael Flynn’s conversations in late 2016 with Sergei Kislyak, Russia ambassador at the time, and former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort’s interactions with Konstantin Kilimnik, a political consultant who the FBI has determined has ties to Russian intelligence.

But the report contained fresh details on the range of official and unofficial dealings Trump campaign advisers and supporters had with Russians before and after the 2016 election.

For example, the report says that Manafort, shortly after he joined the campaign in the spring of 2016, directed his deputy to share internal polling data with Kilimnik with the understanding it would be passed on to Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch known to have close ties to the Kremlin.

Lawyers for Manafort did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Kilimnik did not reply to an email seeking comment.

A Washington-based attorney for Deripsaka said he could not comment. In a statement to Reuters in January, representatives for Deripaska said he has never had any communication with Kilimnik.

The report also says that Manafort told Kilimnik in August 2017 about the campaign’s efforts to win the battleground states of Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Minnesota. Trump ended up winning three of those states in the November election.

Mueller’s investigation did not find a connection between Manafort’s sharing of polling data and Russia’s meddling in the U.S. election or that he otherwise coordinated with Russia.

Frank Montoya, a former senior FBI official, said he was nonetheless bothered by the interactions between Manafort and Kilimnik, especially their talking about battleground states.

“As a longtime counterintelligence investigator it makes the hair stand on the back of my neck,” Montoya said.

The report detailed a meeting in December 2016 between Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and Sergei Gorkov, the head of a Russian state-owned bank under U.S. sanctions. Gorkov gave Kushner a painting and a bag of soil from the town in Belarus where Kushner’s family is from, the report says.

Mueller’s team said it could not resolve a conflict in the accounts of Kushner, who said the meeting was diplomatic in nature, and Gorkov, who said it was business related.

Kushner has said neither sanctions nor his business activities were discussed at the meeting. Kushner’s lawyer did not respond to a request for comment on Mueller’s report.

The report also provided new details about a meeting that campaign advisers Donald Trump Jr., the president’s oldest son, Kushner and Manafort held with a Russian lawyer at New York’s Trump Tower in June 2016. The meeting was set up after the advisers were promised “dirt” on Hillary Clinton, Trump’s Democratic challenger for president.

Mueller’s team considered whether the advisers violated laws barring election contributions from foreigners. But, the report says, they ultimately decided there was not enough evidence to show they “wilfully” broke the law and they might have had problems proving the information offered on Clinton was really valuable.

When news of the Trump Tower meeting broke in July 2017, Trump Jr. issued a statement saying the meeting was set up to discuss adoption policy, not politics, before later admitting he had been expecting intelligence on Clinton.

Such interactions have broadly been referred to by Democratic congressional investigators as examples of possible “collusion”. But because collusion is not a legal term, Mueller’s team examined the Trump Tower meeting and other contacts through the lens of federal conspiracy law.

Mueller said his investigation was unable to establish that such contacts with Russians met the bar of criminality which required that the contacts “amounted to an agreement to commit any substantive violation” of U.S. laws, including those governing campaign finance and foreign agent registration.

Therefore, Mueller said his office “did not charge any individual associated with the Trump Campaign with conspiracy to commit a federal offence arising from Russia contacts.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-...sive-trump-russia-contacts-idUKKCN1RU2MF

Hmmmm.... Rod Rosenstein was appointed by trump who in turn appointed Mueller as special counsel to investigate trump. So maybe it's not the FBI itself that we should be questioning but the nut jobs trump appoints.

This entire Russia probe was all orchestrated and ordered to be carried out by a man trump appointed and now people want to blame the democrats for it?

Time for Pit and the Whatabouts to bang their drums all day...

Echoes the echo of echoes… in his little chamber. Pitiful.

Are you banging that drum because Mueller actually found that there were connections between people in the trump campaign and Russians? Or are you just making more white noise?

Lolz.

Nothing but political posturing like last time that won't really move the needle for anything. Once again, this lessens what an impeachment process is.

Smells like "because they did it, we should do it too!"

What a mess we have in Washington.

All the Nazi turd polishing in the world will never make a criminal case out of this trash ass report. Pffft… NOTHING BURGER.

MTG is an idiot. DO YOU TAKE HER SERIOUSLY? Hope to hell not.

I'm not surprised. Actually I'm surprised she didn't do it sooner.

False equivalence abound.

It's funny - the left wing media got it's act together and responded to the Durham report. A couple of their perspectives that I found most interesting [1] Nothing new in the report. [2] I was wrong - Steele dossier was not used as any basis for the investigation. [3] It was considered a weaponizing of the DOJ by Trump [4] They observed how geared up and ready the right wing media was and how completely over the top Fox and others reaction to it was.

Final comment was that while we've got 34 people convicted based on Mueller's investigations into Russian interference - - Durham came up with .... not very much.

I guess the truth lies somewhere in the middle - but that might not sit well with those that want to believe the Durham report is some cataclysmic "gotcha" moment..... I'll stick with what I said. I'll take it at face value that the report highlights that the investigation into Trump's alleged collusion didn't met a credible threshold. The investigation into Russia's interference in our election was 100% justified.

So let me get this straight. A trump era special console takes years to write a trump favorable report that doesn’t show any new information on an investigation on trump that brought no charges against him. What? That makes the investigation illegal? Really?

Lol you can’t make this crap up.

Remember “Russia If you’re listening”?. Then in less than 48hrs of that very question the DNC computers were hacked into.

The investigation into the Russian connection was legitimately called for.

I think there needs to be clear lines of delineation.

The investigation into Russia's interference was called for. It may have lead to the investigation - preliminary or full - of connections between Russia/Foreign entities and the Trump campaign - ALA Manafort etc .... there may have been grounds for a preliminary investigation into Trump, but I can accept that based on what Durham stated (while not new) is that the basis for a full investigation was not warranted and was influenced by bias and using bad or unqualified intel. That's just M2C.

What is so funny? Something I said?


Note to all: Who do you think will be the first to be indicted?