My work day is highly eccentric these days. My day typically starts at 6:30am, I have multiple meetings through the day, and I’m done for the day at 2:30pm. Then I take Kara for a walk and watch Jeopardy at 3:30pm. Two or three times a week I’ll have meetings at 5:00am. I’ve put my foot down on meetings earlier than 5:00am—if they must have a meeting earlier, I’ll as that it be recorded for me.
One of the things I’ve noticed while watching Jeopardy is how ignorant so many of the contestants are about American history. When they’re knowledgeable about American history it tends to be a consequence of professional development.
Here’s some American history:
“John Durham’s court filing claims that Hillary Clinton’s campaign paid a tech company to hack into Donald Trump’s servers in his residence and in Trump Tower during the presidential campaign. The surveillance continued on into the White House when he became president.
Durham claims that he has evidence that an unnamed tech executive, referred to as “Tech Executive-1â€, exploited an arrangement with the government to monitor Trump’s internet traffic at Trump Tower, at his Central Park West apartment, and continued with surveillance in the Trump White House. There is also surveillance alleged of an unnamed healthcare provider. From previous filings, it is assumed that Tech Executive-1 is Rodney Joffe. Joffe is an internet entrepreneur and data expert.”
The filing, released Saturday, was all the rage on CNN, NBC, AP, NPR, CBS, ABC…………on Sunday. Oh, wait. No it wasn’t. Not a peep.
Let the filing sink in for a minute. Hillary Clinton’s campaign paid for surveillance of Trump not just during a campaign, but after he became president and was in the White House. And the FBI surely knew, as well as the CIA and State.
Does rejection of treason fall under that common culture you were speaking about earlier?
I think they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. It doesn’t surprise me but I grew up surrounded by politicians.
And the FBI? I think it should be abolished—it’s now completely redundant.
Yawn! They had “evidence the vote was stolen, until they didnt. Durham investigation has been going on for what, a decade now? Guess he had to claim something but my guess is like everything else claimed out of the Durham stuff it is nothing.
Workday usually goes from 06:30 A-6:00 P, meetings and call are extra. Jeopardy starts at 7:00 P here so it works out OK. We do OK on history but the modern singers and celebs part usually stumps us as do TV show past about 1990 since we dont watch much.
Steve
It’s amazing how everything is a “yawn†when serious shade is cast on someone connected to Steve’s own political party. Whether it’s election fraud suspicions (unless, of course it was a fraudulent election suffered by the Dems); the slimy Hunter Biden dealings with Ukraine & China, much of it detailed but ignored on his own forgotten “laptop from Hell ;†or the Russian collusion fiction generated through falsified FISA warrants, lies, deceit in the intelligent agencies, and now Clinton surveillance evidence, seemingly much worse than what arose in the Watergate scandal – all categorized under Steve’s column as, “nothing to see here.â€
8 Benghazi investigations jan. 8. All you guys do is investigate. Some day you will find something.
Steve
You are as predictable as Monday following Sunday, Steve, in the responses you give. When all else fails you rattle on about Benghazi. However, as much as I look forward to the day when the subterfuge falls away from covered-up events like Benghazi, my post discussed current scandalous behaviors following Democrats around – ones that discredit your party even more…..
Just as you are also predictable. Every month or so some breathless announcement that THIS TIME Durham or someone has the real evidence of some scandal. Then it never materializes. So until you guys manage to actually find something, I will keep reminding you of all of your false claims. Its just more fun to use Benghazi because I get to debunk so many fake investigations at once. (Given that there actually is a fair amount to corruption in government it is actually remarkable that you guys keep striking out.)
Steve
Drew: John Durham’s court filing claims that Hillary Clinton’s campaign paid a tech company to hack into Donald Trump’s servers
That’s false. No one hacked into a server. The tech is said to have monitored DNS traffic. The tech hasn’t been charged with any crime because it’s standard procedure to monitor DNS traffic.
Steve, you have consistently defined the inept government response behind the tragic events associated with Benghazi as false claims. Despite 4 people being killed (including an ambassador), unanswered pleas for help placed to the WH, NDAs being demanded of those injured in the skirmish, testimonies from people actively fighting to stay alive that differed,180, from those submitted by the government – so much was deliberately muted during those multiple investigations, and negatively impacted because of the WH’s stonewalling evidence from being turned over in a timely manner.
What happens with Durham’s investigation into Hillary’s alleged approval of hacking into her opponent’s servers, remains to be seen. However, if proven to be true, then her act is just as devious as the one committed in Watergate – one exception being Nixon supposedly didn’t know and approve of the physical break-in, like Clinton apparently did with the internet hacking.
As for any delight received in “debunking†fake investigations…..just because an investigation was successfully obstructed doesn’t automatically debunk the inherent charges that drove the investigation in the first place. Powerful governments and powerful people have more often than not escaped accountability or justice. And, no one wins when justice is obscured by finessing the truth.
Jan: Steve, you have consistently defined the inept government response behind the tragic events associated with Benghazi as false claims.
The mistakes were security decisions made *before* the event. There was little that could be done once the event unfolded. An investigation was warranted, but claims that people were left to die are unjustified by the findings of the investigations. It was clear after the first investigation, that the investigations were less about fact-finding and fixing problems, than partisan hackery.
Jan: What happens with Durham’s investigation into Hillary’s alleged approval of hacking into her opponent’s servers, remains to be seen.
No one is alleged to have hacked into a server.
â€In the filing, Durham wrote that the government possesses evidence that an unnamed tech executive “exploited†an arrangement with the government in order to monitor the former president’s internet traffic relative to Trump Tower, Trump’s Central Park West apartment, the executive office of the president and an unnamed healthcare provider.
In court filings, the tech executive was only identified as “Tech Executive-1,†however in previous filings by Durham, that designation referred to Rodney Joffe, an internet entrepreneur and internet data expert.â€
https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/durham-says-clinton-campaign-funded-surveillance-of-trump-tower-white-house/
Jan: an unnamed tech executive “exploited†an arrangement with the government in order to monitor the former president’s internet traffic relative to Trump Tower, Trump’s Central Park West apartment, the executive office of the president and an unnamed healthcare provider.
That’s not hacking into a server, which is a federal felony. The tech had legal access to the DNS traffic.
There was an attempt to blame republicans for pulling back funding that decreased the security needed at that consulate. However, those claims were disputed and proven false. Hillary Clinton appeared to be running the operation, including assigning the ambassador there, and perhaps even designating the degree of security. While the U.K. and Red Cross were getting out of town, because of the extreme danger and risks posed there, we continued to remain with our diminished security in place. Why (?) ,has never been fully answered
The only reason more people didn’t die that night was because some rogue security contractors defied orders to stand down, and instead went ahead to rescue people. These rescuers are the same people who took issue with the narrative released by the higher-up military and government, that pleas for intervention were never turned down. An aide, though, to Chris Stevens testified that he relentlessly tried to call Clinton that night, but both she and Obama were MIA. And, when this aide testified to this fact he was demoted and “whited out†by the administration.
Zach, it’s all going to play out, how legal such an unauthorized, secretive surveillance really was. Also, when trump claimed he was being surveilled, people lied and refuted his accusation.
Jan: Hillary Clinton appeared to be running the operation, including assigning the ambassador there, and perhaps even designating the degree of security.
Clinton had nothing to do with security arrangements. Four career State officials were eventually criticized for having denied additional security prior to the attack. None of the investigations found evidence of actual wrongdoing. As for the tactical response, the investigations found that the military and other government agencies acted properly. The ambassador took extraordinary risks for the benefit of the Libyan people.
Meanwhile, Kevin McCarthy directly acknowledged, “Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, right? But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping.” And you fell for it and amplified it, because you wanted it to be true.
Jan: it’s all going to play out, how legal such an unauthorized, secretive surveillance really was.
So, your original statement was false, and you replace it with “Just you wait and see!” We’ll be happy to revisit the question in the light of any new evidence.
Benghazi!
I see steve and zach are auditioning for their CNN gigs.
Yes, John Durham certainly has a reputation and track record of going off half cocked. (snicker)
Drew: Yes, John Durham certainly has a reputation and track record of going off half cocked.
That would be Drew going off half-cocked, who said, “John Durham’s court filing claims that Hillary Clinton’s campaign paid a tech company to hack into Donald Trump’s servers in his residence and in Trump Tower during the presidential campaign.” But Durham’s motion does not make any claim about hacking.
” Despite 4 people being killed (including an ambassador), unanswered pleas for help placed to the WH, NDAs being demanded of those injured in the skirmish, testimonies from people actively fighting to stay alive that differed,180, from those submitted by the government –”
But lets not pretend that you or the GOP politicians care about the 4 people dying. That was sorted out in the first investigation and confirmed in later ones. You guys did 8! (yes 8) because you were trying link a scandal to Clinton and/or Obama, which wasn’t there. Just like every Durham claim to date. Just like Lois Lerner whom you guys held in limbo for a couple of years then just dropped once you ran the DOJ.
Just keep swimming, swimming! Some day you will get there. (How many years has Durham been investigating now?)
Steve
Zach, my saying “it’s all going to play out,†is a way out of a conversation comprising endless looping. Nothing false about my original,statement.
Steve, linking me with GOP politicians is a mirage constructed by how you label people not on board with your POV. I was affiliated with the democrat party for many years (I now find that relationship repellent). Three years ago I changed to a “declined to state,†becoming an independent. If I were to describe myself today I’m a populist aligned with the working class, not the establishment elites. BTW, the Benghazi story I support is the one coming from the mouths of people there – engaged in the actual fighting, friends of those who died, not the legacy media or the left/right politicians who wove a narrative that made the whole sad event disappear without anyone being held accountable.
Jan: Nothing false about my original,statement.
Jan: What happens with Durham’s investigation into Hillary’s alleged approval of hacking into her opponent’s servers, remains to be seen.
There is no allegation of hacking, a federal crime. Rather, Durham alleges that the tech “exploited” his *legal* access to DNS data.