Democrat attempts to gaslight American public

[Dill]

(08-03-2023, 11:28 AM)Luvnit2 Wrote: The transcript for Archer was released. As far as Dill propaganda, Durham was very clear the FBI had no basis for an investigation. He was clear the FBI never verified the dossier even after offering 1 million dollars to anyone who could verify it.

That is a fact concluded by Durham clearly written in his report. Yet Dill refuses to refer to dossier was a hoax and remove it and no basis for an investigation

Dill "propaganda" comes from the Durham Report, juxtaposed with those that preceded it.

For a guy who sees Dem bias everywhere, you are mighty comfortable with the results of Barr/Trump directed investigation carried about by yet another life long Republican. It was the judgment of the Durham Report that the FBI was justified in opening a preliminary investigation. It disputed whether the evidence warranted a full investigation. The latter is a judgment which could have gone the other way in the hands of another investigator. The previous IG report did not conclude the full investigation should not have been opened. What did Durham add to its factual findings? 

You keep referring to the Steele Dossier as if that were the basis of the Russia investigation. It was not. Whence came the evidence which produced over two dozen convictions? Not from the dossier. You are not disputing that over two dozen convictions resulted from the Russia investigation, are you? You are not disputing that Trump jr met with a Russian agent looking for dirt on HRC, are you? Or that Flynn met secretly with the Russian ambassador and lied about it, do you? You are disputing that the Australians warned us about Papadopoulos, are you? The question was never whether collusion occurred, only whether it rose to a prosecutable level. To know whether it did required an investigation.

You keep claiming this dossier, which was not the basis of the investigation, was not "verified." Who determined that then, if not the FBI, whom you are accusing of bias? Did Hannity do a bias-free job for them? 

Why didn't the biased FBI just claim it was verified then, if their power to bias investigation is that great? What held them back? 

A "hoax" is an intentional fraud. The Steele Dossier was not that. you appear not to notice that two important claims in the "hoax" turned out to be quite true--the Russians had Dem emails and they were hacking the election. You are not going to dispute that the FBI has verified these two points, are you? And the Dossier said it first. How could the dossier have been right about that?  Any intel agent would see that it was worth looking into. 

You appear to trust the FBI when they judge the dossier's provenance questionable, and when they say they did not find enough collusion to prosecute Trump, but you follow Hannity and Fox in calling them untrustworthy--on the points you want them to be. 

It seems you have a rather lower standard for "corruption" evidence against Biden. You want to open a full investigation of him on much less, basically Jordan's say so. And 2 1/2 years of Hannity screaming "scandal" "bombshell" "breaking news."  You listen to hannity breathlessly recounting how "the Biden Crime Family "got money from Ukraine" or "money from China," which keeps turning out to be legal income. "10 million!" Like that was slipping right into Joe's pocket. This is rather like the infamous pee tapes, which the FBI immediately discounted. But if they do in Joe's case you scream "two tier law"!