So, the company that allegedly spied on the Trump campaign and White House--to collect dirt on behalf of the Clinton campaign--received $2 million from Becciu? It seems public knowledge Becciu likes spying on people in order to collect dirt on them, and so a connection between the payments and the spying would seem plausible.
So, the company that allegedly spied on the Trump campaign and White House--to collect dirt on behalf of the Clinton campaign--received $2 million from Becciu? It seems public knowledge Becciu likes spying on people in order to collect dirt on them, and so a connection between the payments and the spying would seem plausible.
John Durham, the Trump-era special counsel scrutinizing the investigation into Russia’s 2016 election interference, distanced himself on Thursday from false reports by right-wing news outlets that a motion he recently filed said Hillary Clinton’s campaign had paid to spy on Trump White House servers,
I was referring to Durham's filing, not to reports. You can find the filing by googling "US v Sussmann - Durham Probe - Friday Filing (Docket 35)".
Besides, his supposed "distancing" statement: "If third parties or members of the media have overstated, understated, or otherwise misinterpreted facts contained in the Government’s Motion, that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the Government’s inclusion of this information." To me that's not distancing, as the sentence started with "if", and he didn't specify what claims were understated or overstated. Rather, that's Durham arguing that his earlier filing shouldn't be thrown out because of what any 3rd party says about it. Calling it distancing is what I call New York Times spin.
So, the company that allegedly spied on the Trump campaign and White House--to collect dirt on behalf of the Clinton campaign--received $2 million from Becciu? It seems public knowledge Becciu likes spying on people in order to collect dirt on them, and so a connection between the payments and the spying would seem plausible.
John Durham, the Trump-era special counsel scrutinizing the investigation into Russia’s 2016 election interference, distanced himself on Thursday from false reports by right-wing news outlets that a motion he recently filed said Hillary Clinton’s campaign had paid to spy on Trump White House servers,
I was referring to Durham's filing, not to reports. You can find the filing by googling "US v Sussmann - Durham Probe - Friday Filing (Docket 35)".
Besides, his supposed "distancing" statement: "If third parties or members of the media have overstated, understated, or otherwise misinterpreted facts contained in the Government’s Motion, that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the Government’s inclusion of this information." To me that's not distancing, as the sentence started with "if", and he didn't specify what claims were understated or overstated. Rather, that's Durham arguing that his earlier filing shouldn't be thrown out because of what any 3rd party says about it. Calling it distancing is what I call New York Times spin.