Did Attorney General Barr just name John Durham as a Special Counsel?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,425
136
There are such a thing as conservative Democrats, or socially liberal, fiscally conservative, but you knew tha......well now you do.

Think about what you wrote for just a second and see if you can figure out why your comment is laughable as it relates to the original comment you made.
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,238
136
There are such a thing as conservative Democrats, or socially liberal, fiscally conservative, but you knew tha......well now you do.

Now you are mixing up temperament and political parties.

Being more centrist doesn't turn you into a republican.

(Esp when the R party is turning into a party of wacky conspiracy theorists and cult followers with no overriding principles or mission...)
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
Think about what you wrote for just a second and see if you can figure out why your comment is laughable as it relates to the original comment you made.
You seem to think there's only 2 parties in this country, instead of the 8 or 9 that exist. You also seem to think that conservative = Republican
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
Back on topic, the special counsel appointment is on shaky ground because Barr didn't adhere to the regulation that the SC must be selected from outside of the United States Government.

Reposting this for you since it seems Professor Turley disagrees with you.
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,238
136
About half the voters in this country vote Republican.

The country as a whole leans conservative.


I'm sure the Authoritarian left is attracting supporters though.
You seem to think there's only 2 parties in this country, instead of the 8 or 9 that exist. You also seem to think that conservative = Republican

Well Taji has finally found a debate partner he can actually win against.




Is like watching the dumb, unfunny version of Colbert's point-counterpoint bit.

cr_04059_04_v6.jpg
 
Last edited:

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
7,695
8,095
136
Well Taji has finally found a debate partner he can actually win against.




Is like watching the dumb, unfunny version of Colbert's point-counterpoint bit.
AI must be bugging out with the minute-ly set of talking points being sent out.
 

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,147
4,847
136
Well Taji has finally found a debate partner he can actually win against.




Is like watching the dumb, unfunny version of Colbert's point-counterpoint bit.
What he fails to mention is that while there might be more than two parties there are really only two categories in which they fall into to: Deplorables and everyone else. :p
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Bitek

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
It seems that Professor Turley disagrees with you.




"Durham is now authorized to investigate anyone who may have “violated the law in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns, individuals associated with those campaigns, and individuals associated with the administration of President Donald J. Trump, including but not limited to Crossfire Hurricane and the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III.” The list of the names of people falling within that mandate is a who’s who of Washington from Hillary Clinton to James Comey to . . . yes . . . Joe Biden. "

.....................


"Complicating Sally Yates' nomination
The move also complicates the nomination of Sally Yates, who is widely cited as a front-runner for the position of Attorney General. Yates would be placed in an even more precarious position than Jeff Sessions who recused himself to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest at the state of the Trump administration. Yates has a clear and obvious conflict. She played a role in the earlier Russian investigation. That investigation was based in part on the “Steele dossier,” a report by a former British spy which has been shown to be unreliable and flawed. American intelligence warned that Steele’s main source was a likely Russian agent and the dossier may have been used for Russian disinformation. While the Clinton campaign repeatedly denied funding the dossier during the election, reporters later showed that it lied after finding a money trail through Clinton’s campaign legal counsel. Most recently, it was disclosed that President Obama was briefed on an American intelligence report that Clinton had ordered the creation of a Russian collusion story to take pressure off her own scandal involving her private server. Yates testified recently that she has no recollection of these warnings and does not recall knowing about the funding of the Steele dossier.
Yates would have no choice but to recuse herself in dealing with the Durham investigation. However, if the Biden administration used her designated deputy to scuttle the investigation or the report, the Biden administration will have done what Trump never actually did. All of those columns and speeches contorting the language of the obstruction statute would come back to haunt the Democrats.
Trump and Barr:As Trump and Barr ramp up executions, Biden must rally America to end the death penalty
It is, to use the words of fired Special Agent Peter Strzok, the ultimate "insurance policy" that Durham will be allowed to complete and release the facts of his investigation. Worse yet, the Democrats themselves made the case for him to do so."

So what? As a govt employee, Durham is not eligible for appointment as a special counsel. See post #52, above.