That assumes guilt going in.
Well I can see the problem of proving he lied about the pee tapes when the judge won’t allow the pee tapes to be mentioned.
I’m not sure how you determine the significance of a lie if you don’t know what the lie was.
He wasn’t charged with lying about the pee tapes.
That is why the judge is not allowing it.
It has nothing to do with the charges brought.
Check out paragraph 58 of the indictment. All of this has to do with the significance of the defendants lies. If the things that were lied about aren’t significant and would change nothing, then the lies aren’t important. How do you determine this if you don’t even know what the lies are?
I read the indictment.
Danchenko is charged along very narrow lines.
The pee tapes have nothing to do with the charges.
The fact that Durham has become obsessed about it kind of shows the investigation has gone off the rails.
Paragraph 13 of indictment: all of Danchenko’s lies were material to the FBI because, among other reasons….
Paragraph 58. Lays out the pee tapes as one of those lies.
If you don’t know what the lies were, how can you determine materiality?
The charges brought against Danchenko are for lying about a conversation with Dolan on August 22 2016 and Dolan being the source of the information about Manafort leaving the campaign. That is count one.
Counts 2-5 are about lying about talking to Sergei Millian. Millian is not testifying… so those are going to be tough to prove now.
None of that has to do with the pee tapes.
That is why the judge said that Durham can’t talk about the pee tapes because by the actual charges that he filed against Danchenko they are not material.
The fact that they are in the indictment is bizarre.
The source of what information? If that information was not in itself significant, then what difference does it make whether he lied about to whom he talked?
The information that Dolan was the source for Manafort leaving the Trump campaign. Dolan told Danchenko that he had a buddy in the GOP and was passing on inside information… he wasn’t… Dolan passed on public reporting. So that makes the Aug 22nd conversation with Dolan the only verifiable true thing in the Steele Dossier.
I don’t think that Durham can get Danchenko on counts 2-5 because there is no witness to testify.
Count 1 is what involves Dolan and that charge is predicated on the same flimsy notion that the Sussmann trial was predicated on that the FBI “may” have acted differently if they knew the connections. But here is the problem… Count One places the lie on June 15 2017… the only thing that it could have affected was the last Carter Page FISA renewal on June 29 2017. Would it have? It might have… but I think that it is doubtful. By that time the FBI was already ignoring exculpatory evidence already in their possession and the information in question had nothing to do with Carter Page I think it would be hard to connect those dots. Plus I don’t see how someone as squirelly as Danchenko would tip those scales on that last application.
Danchenko may still face legal jeopardy for count one… two through five are likely DOA.
OJ Simpson agrees with this statement.
Personally I don’t see a DC area jury where the entire pool is made up of Trump hating libs caring about the facts.
But that’s just me.
3 Likes
FISA warrant is only part of the alleged effect. Paragraph 13. The FBI ultimately devoted substantial resources attempting to investigate and corroborate the allegations contained in the company reports, including the reliability of Danchenko’s sub-sources…
No it’s not just you.
It isn’t Danchenko’s fault that the Steele dossier got into the hands of the FBI.
The earliest date that Danchenko is charged with lying to the FBI is in March 2017… long after the election was over and that is count 2… where Durham is going to have a tough time proving that Danchenko lied… so… we are left with the lie in Count one which is days before the third FISA Renewal on Carter Page. One would have to prove that if the FBI knew that Dolan was the source for a bit of information on Manafort that that would have sent the FBI into questioning that particular renewal… I think that that is a stretch of an argument to make.
Of course not it’s anyone with a persecution complex. You guys can only be failed
1 Like
It’s all appeal to authority with the libs when it’s something that confirms their bias. Some kind of evil “ist” when it doesn’t. 
2 Likes
The continued spending of resources trying to track down Danshenko’s lies is a little difficult to deny. Especially when one considers that Danshenko was being paid as an informer by the FBI into late 2020…after the 2020 election. That is all the material effect to his lies one needs.
An appeal to authority and if you question that authority you are a threat to our democracy. Except, of course, the Supreme Court now that there is not an ultra left majority. It is ok to question their legitimacy. That is not a threat to our democracy…somehow.
2 Likes
The same folks who raised zero fits over the SCOTUS justices being physically threatened for doing their jobs.
Well, the ones they don’t like anyway. Imagine that. 
1 Like
He is charged with two lies.
That he spoke to Sergei Millian and that he didn’t speak to Dolan.
The first lie I don’t think Durham will be successful in proving… the second he may be able to prove but I don’t think that he will convince anyone that it was material for the same reason that Durham couldn’t get a conviction on Sussmann.
Have the lefties here finally found a Russian they can support?
