>Who is John Durham? Do you have any idea?

I know they don't cover it during the daytime talk radio about John Durham and the actual sham investigation he is running, and how he is zero for two in federal criminal trials while the legitimate federal prosecutor's bar has a 99% conviction rate, but let's get real.

It seems like it's you who doesn't know who John Durham is or what he's charged with investigating, because it is not relevant whatsoever to the undisputed findings of the Mueller report.

Anyone who says otherwise is simply lying, as was the disgraced former attorney general and political hack, Bill Barr, who made Durham's sham appointment from the get go.

Actual, career investigators with DOJOIG (who is that? do you have any idea?) and not political yes men, investigated the bullshit conspiracies you heard about on the radio, and what did they find?

>. We did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the FBI's decision to seek FISA authority on Carter Page.

>. The FBI opened Crossfire Hurricane...after its receipt of information from a Friendly Foreign Government (FFG) reporting that...Trump campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos "suggested the Trump team had received some kind of suggestion from Russia that it could assist this process with the anonymous release of information during the campaign that would be damaging to Mrs. Clinton (and President Obama)." [B]ased on the FFG information, "this investigation is being opened to determine whether individual(s) associated with the Trump campaign are witting of and/or coordinating activities with the Government of Russia."

>. We did not find information in FBI or Department ECs, emails, or other documents, or through witness testimony, indicating that any information other than the FFG information was relied upon to predicate the opening of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. Although not mentioned in the EC... FBI officials involved in opening the investigation had reason to believe that Russia may have been connected to the Wikileaks disclosures that occurred earlier in July 2016, and were aware of information regarding Russia's efforts to interfere with the 2016 U.S. elections. These officials, though, did not become aware of Steele's election reporting until weeks later and we therefore determined that Steele's reports played no role in the Crossfire Hurricane opening.

>. We concluded that the FFG information, provided by a government the United States Intelligence Community (USIC) deems trustworthy, and describing a first-hand account from an FFG employee of a conversation with Papadopoulos, was sufficient to predicate the investigation. This information provided the FBI with an articulable factual basis that, if true, reasonably indicated activity constituting either a federal crime or a threat to national security, or both, may have occurred or may be occurring. For similar reasons, as we detail in Chapter Three, we concluded that the quantum of information articulated by the FBI to open the individual investigations on Papadopoulos, Page, Flynn, and Manafort in August 2016 was sufficient to satisfy the low threshold established by the Department and the FBI.

>. The fact that the FBI believed Steele had been retained to conduct political opposition research did not require the FBI, under either DOJ or FBI policy, to ignore his reporting. The FBI regularly receives information from individuals with potentially significant biases and motivations, including drug traffickers, convicted felons, and even terrorists. The FBI is not required to set aside such information; rather, FBI policy requires that it critically assess the information. We found that after receiving Steele's reporting, the Crossfire Hurricane team began those efforts in earnest.

>. We found that, while Lisa Page attended some of the discussions regarding the opening of the investigations, she did not play a role in the decision to open Crossfire Hurricane or the four individual cases. We further found that while Strzok was directly involved in the decisions to open Crossfire Hurricane and the four individual cases, he was not the sole, or even the highest-level, decision maker as to any of those matters.

>. Steele explained that it was his firm's practice to faithfully report everything a reliable source provided and not to withhold information because it was controversial. He denied "tailoring" his reporting to meet the needs of his clients and explained that doing so ultimately was not a good business practice because it would result in loss of reputation. We also asked Steele whether his research was "opposition research" and biased. He provided a similar response and explained that his firm would not be in business if it provided biased information. 216 Steele called the allegation that he was biased against Trump from the start "ridiculous. "217 He stated that if anything he was "favorably disposed" toward the Trump family before he began his research because he had visited a Trump family member at Trump Tower and "been friendly" with [the family member] for some years. He described their relationship as "personal" and said that he once gifted a family tartan from Scotland to the family member.

And my dummy friend, this whole trash controversy is about discrediting the whole investigation by discrediting the wiretap warrant.

You are so gullible, you don't even realize that even if the warrant application was total bullshit and politically motivated, once they got the warrant, they heard Trump's team doing a bunch of crimes.

They were charged. They pleaded guilty or were convicted. They did do those crimes. It's undisputed.

Again, way unlike Durham's special minority select prosecution status, which is zero for two with juries.