Special counsel John Durham loses, again, with an acquittal in the Igor Danchenko prosecution. https://t.co/k65zUQZbvY pic.twitter.com/uWhX4KA730
— Orin Kerr (@OrinKerr) October 18, 2022
Set a special counsel upon a case and they will work diligently to find someone to prosecute on something. The exception to this rule was the investigation and foiled prosecution of Iran/Contra. It is the exception that proves the rule.That doesn't mean that Durham is a bad lawyer or that his team has bad lawyers.
— IEndorsePopehat (@Popehat) October 18, 2022
It more likely means that the goals of supporting a narrative and the goals of investigating and prosecuting winnable cases are not consistent.
Today: Durham loses Danchenko case.
— Bill Grueskin (@BGrueskin) October 18, 2022
May 2022: Durham loses Sussman case.
Past year on the WSJ edit page: ⬇️⬇️⬇️ pic.twitter.com/4bqDHhJGi5
A jury on Tuesday found Igor Danchenko — a private researcher who was a primary source for a 2016 dossier of allegations about former president Donald Trump’s ties to Russia — not guilty of lying to the FBI about where he got his information. https://t.co/KDDtS0IkNK
— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) October 18, 2022
Along the lines of the late Sec. Raymond Donovan's famous question—"Which office do I go to to get my reputation back?"—I'd like to ask, where do we taxpayers go to get our money back for Durham's frivolous, ridiculous, and politically motivated frolic and detour? https://t.co/2g8k29EhkN
— George Conway🌻 (@gtconway3d) October 18, 2022
No comments:
Post a Comment