YO! Haters! So, GAW rolling with the Danchenko trial verdict is "moving the goalposts," is it? Like Danchenko was our big end goal or something? That's your big 'gotcha' for us? That's *retarded*. LOOK INTO MY EYES:
(media.greatawakening.win)
🧠 These people are stupid!
What i found most fascinating during the denchenko trial, was that durham went after the fbi more than denchenko. This leads me to believe, like sussman, these trials were solely to get info out to the public and on record…. The verdict doesnt suprise me…
It's plausible, but wouldn't it be more effective if convictions occurred? The same "get[ing] info out to the public and on record" would occur with convictions. Moreover, the convictions would provide more leverage for individuals to come clean in return for leniency.
If it's proven in court that no one lied to the FBI, then the FBI will be accountable for the lying. Durham is eliminating scapegoats.
This.
I haven't really read any evidence of this. It doesn't mean it's not so, and could actually be a possibly, but I think we're left with only speculation at this point.
Your premise would also suggest the FBI, or members thereof, would be contenders for indictment. I hope you are right. Nevertheless, a conviction of Danchenko and Sussman would normally leave them in peril of spending time behind bars, and set the stage for leverage for leniency. This would allow revelations for opening more criminal cases. Yet, we are not dealing with normal judges within the beltway and sentencing could be as little as a slap on the wrists with some probation and a fine.
To be honest, I really don't know where this is heading. And no one else knows, except perhaps for Durham himself. And even with that, Durham's chess game hasn't even taken any of the Deep State's pawns yet. The strategy seems to be recognizable. He is positioning, but will he be able to make his move for a checkmate?
My statement was taken entirely from my (hopeful) Imagination. I should have specified that, but your response is spot on.
On the surface it appeared that way to me as well. However I am slowly coming to understand that if we simply arrest and convict their puppets we can never get to those pulling the strings.
Exactly. This is why you don't arrest the drug dealer until their source is identified. But even then, you don't want to move until you can undermine the entire network.
Most of us didn't know who the Denchenko guy was until very recently. Is that who we've been chanting "lock her up" for? No.
Normally, convictions are great for leverage in getting the convicted to talk. However, we aren't dealing with normal judges in Washington DC. The sentencing could be as little as probation and a fine. That's not very leverageable. It may well be, Durham knows this and is flanking the judge to set up other avenues. Who knows? I don't. It's a very slow game of chess. Durham is positioning, but hasn't so much as taken a pawn yet.
He's releasing evidence into the public and showing how the court systems are corrupt and cannot be relied upon. There are other entities following these trials. Most other actions should be exhausted to help the public understand what is coming and why it has happened. No convictions in the regular court system with that much evidence proves there is no system left that can be salvaged. It has to be torn down to build a new uncorrupt system.
The only way has always been the military. There is no other way to solve this worldwide problem.
You're absolutely correct. I have no doubt Durham shined a spot light on the FBI. This is all very good. Your premise would also suggest the FBI, or members thereof, would be contenders for indictment. I hope you are right. Nevertheless, a conviction of Danchenko and Sussman would normally leave them in peril of spending time behind bars, and set the stage for everage in getting them to talk for leniency. This would allow revelations for opening more criminal cases.
Yet, we are not dealing with normal judges or a normal court within the beltway and because of this, sentencing got a conviction (vis. Danchenko, Sussman) could be as little as a slap on the wrists with some probation and a fine.
To be honest, I really don't know where this is heading. And no one else knows, except perhaps for Durham himself. And even with that, Durham's chess game hasn't even taken any of the Deep State's pawns yet. The strategy seems to be recognizable. He is positioning, but will Durham be able to make his move for a checkmate? From the beginning, we have been left with very little. It doesn't mean it's not happening though.
It's first and goal on the three yard line. Coach- "let's take the field goal".
Updoot for a fellow footballsplainer.
Continuing with the football theme, I’m from TN and we threw our goal post in the river this past weekend.
Good ‘Ol Rocky Top. Congratulations on the big win!
Lmao
Figured I would try to stay on topic 🤣🤣
Except in this analogy the play stops after the field goal, where it wouldn't have to stop with a Danchenko conviction
But the ball is given to the other team
It was presented as taking the easy 3 points (Danchenko), or the touchdown (FBI).
I'm saying that it's not an or proposition, and it's possible to get both real world outcomes. Maybe the and-one in basketball where you get the free throw (Danchenko) in addition to the basket by dunking over a moving defender in the key rather than going around for the layup (basketball fans??)
Not even sure Danchenko could be considered a field goal. Most people probably didn't know who he was before the trail. Most people probably don't even know about him now.
A personal foul against the opposing team, by a rookie sub.
Truth.
Down by two points with five seconds left in the fourth quarter, hell yes :)
Haha I totally eas going to go there, but thought I would make it short and sweet 🤣🤣
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory! ---speaking as a former Redskins fan.
Clearly the purpose here was not to claim a pawn, but, via evidence presented, to place (not a king, but a bishop - think 4D chess), in check. That bishop being the DOJ/FBI.
Could that not have been accomplished while at the same time claiming the scalp of an obviously guilty defendent and flipping him; therefore making it easier to go after the big fish?
They will collapse the financial system and everyone will be far too distracted just trying to stay alive to pay any attention to more secret evidence and classified behind door hearings supposedly bringing criminals to justice.
This ^
The possible fly in that ointment is that if we nailed the punk in lying to the FBI, this might spoil our chances to catch the big fish since the FBI leadership could plead ignorance, claim that they didn't know that the information are lies and that they acted in good faith on all other points. This might give them enough wiggle room to slip away, sacrificing the pawn while preserving the king and queen.
I'm not a lawyer, so take this with a grain of salt, but in this day of age, we can not let our bloodlust spoil our chances of real victory.
From what I understand, the FiSA court was lied to. Everyone knew the info in the Steele Dossier was false. Sussman didn't lie to the FBI. Now Danchenko didn't lie to the FBI. The FBI still used this info in the FISA Application. They are running out of scapegoats.
It's not like he didn't try to claim the scalp; the jury found the fucker not guilty
It was said elsewhere:
thus there is a higher likelihood that FBI won't interfere and obfuscate.
Durham is getting damaging testimony and evidence on record to be used in future trials. Eventually, the accepted testimony and evidence will be overwhelming in order to convict people higher up the chain on up to the top. He is a very smart lawyer.
Somebody gets it.
That could've been done in a deposition instead of a trial. Durham would get his info, Danchenko would walk away, and we wouldn't see another loss in court.
If you read the court transcript, you will see that things came from various places, including the back and forth between Durham and the judge. A deposition doesn't contain all that. A deposition also doesn't have a judge refereeing the questions or answers. I once did a transcription of an oral deposition in which the defendant in question was a used car dealer and, based on the deposition, had no idea in the world how many cars he sold, or if he sold any, or how much money he made. He "didn't recall" or "didn't know" on most of the questions.
So no, just a deposition wouldn't accomplished much at all.
With all the accepted evidence and testimony from the earlier trials. The lowest level people are almost worthless. None of them know the big picture. Remember that with a lot of low level trials, things can build up exponentially so that the highest ones will be convicted sooner that you might imagine.
Also, we don't really know how many of the "big ones" have already taken their dirt naps. No Name and Bush for sure, and possibly Hillary and Bite Me.
Just keep your drawers on and prepare for more short term things, like this extra hard winter coming up and food shortages. I'm ready, but still buying more while the stores still have stuff.
If you can’t convict the low level criminals, how the hell do you expect justice at the upper levels? The normies aren’t getting the “FBI lied” narrative. To them this is further evidence the FBI did nothing wrong going after DJT.
It doesn't matter about the normies right now. What matters is the evidence and testimony that's now accepted on the record that can be used to later get people who really do matter.
Why do so many that don't know how RICO investigations work think this?
It's the same pattern, gaslight that month, get everyone excited, and when it doesn't happen, everyone complains 🤣
That's the fault of the people hyping things up and those who smoked the hopium.
Denchenko was never a goal to begin with.
Very little was exposed that was not already known. Attempts at any higher-level prosecutions are off the table. Macabe, Comey, Struzk, Clinton, Obama, Brennan,... off scot free with pensions intact. Criminals rule the roost.
Both Danchenko and his sub-source were suspected of being Russian spies once so I think it would be good to get them in the end. Why are democrats privileged to use alleged Russian spies disinformation and push it through mainstream media and FBI and declare it as absolute truths? While projecting that their enemies are Russian agents. Lol.
Obviously theres much more to uncover than this.
I like you.
But those are the eyes of Tucker...wait...are you saying...?
This isn't the end of Durhams investigation, correct? So what's with the fuss? I see pieces moving, that's all.
I thought we were waiting for the Military to save us
I have been following all of this for years and honestly I didn't follow the Danchnko angle very closely. I never thought it was that important to the big picture. Maybe I am wrong about that but, whatever...