6 Comments

What a mess. Except for the obvious damage this is meant to inflict on the Democratic Party, Hillary Clinton, FBI, DOJ, and Durham’s weird obsession with trying to make Trump look like the Virgin King…. what’s the BLUF?

We know the Steele Dossier was just just raw HUMINT, right?

Do you think this somehow proves that the FBI based it’s investigation of Trump campaign ties to Russia on the Steele Dossier?

Haven’t they already proved they did not?

Expand full comment
author

According to the DOJ-OIG the initial investigation had a sufficient predicate the issue here is Danchenko lied to the FBI -repeatedly and those lies created the FBI allocate substantial resources to figure out what was true and what wasn’t

Expand full comment

Did he lie to the FBI or did he lie to Horowitz?

See LM’s thread please. Xxoo

Expand full comment
author

I don’t understand the premise of your question - he was indicted via five counts of lying to the FBI. The DOJ-OIG report doesn’t disclose that Horowitz or his team interviewed DANCHENKO — hence why I don’t understand your question…

Expand full comment

I understand that. But LM is saying her lied to Horowitz, not the FBI. And that Horowitz didn’t go back and interview Steele or Comey to clarify. So I guess I’m asking if you think Durham is wrongly charging Danchenko for lying to the FBI rather than lying to DOJ-OIG. It probably doesn’t matter I guess.

Expand full comment
author

That’s my point he was indictment (five counts) for lying to the FBI during several interviews. If he lied to Horowitz (or his team) then my assumption would be DOJ-OIG makes a criminal prosecution referral back to DOJ but as I noted in the OIG report there’s no indication that he was questioned by Horowitz

Expand full comment