I dunno, mang.

Watching the Durham thing. Just skipped shitts whole spiel but it got me thinkin. I did notice in there that Schiff asked a Q and Durham responded in such a way it made Schiff scoff. The answer Durham gave was even out of character. Essentially Schiff asked Durham if he respects Muller and Durham answers that he does hold Muller in high regards, but, then he threw something out of character in there. He also added a quick bit about how Muller is a true patriot but did so slightly after Schiff accepted the answer. It seemed that Muller threw that in there intentionally, to see Schiff's reaction. Schiff, after processing the last thing Durham said, which was about Muller being a patriot, scoffs at the thought. It seems Durham was there to do more than just be heard. I think he was there to get certain answers or reactions out of certain DS politicians. Certain reactions that are now forever stored on the interenet for everyone to see. Could it be used as evidence? It's deffinitely recorded as an "official statement" under oath, right? Doesn't that hold true for the politicians that asked questions? Aren't their statements being recorded as "True", too?

>>19050027

**It seemed thatDURHAMthrew that in there intentionally, to see Schiff's reaction

>>19049879

>>19050156

Mr. Mclintock: Mr Jordan referenced the Clinton plan intelligence. Exactly what was the Clinton plan?

Durham: Based on declassified documents on public record there was intelligence information that was received at virtually the same time that the information came from the austrailians, within a day or 2. That intelligence included information that there was a purported plan designed by one of Mrs. Clintons foreign policy advisors to create a scandal tieing Donald Trump to the Russians. That's the essence of the intelligence as contained in the declasified information.

>>19050054