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.