Durham's filing actually negates the statute of limitations.
He didn't file until after the statute of limitations expired, doof.
Why you asking me what he filed if you know he did it after the statute of limitations ran out?
I see you're too lazy to read a 4-page thread in which the question I asked you was already answered.
I've read it.
Here's the link to the post, since you're too lazy to look for it or not smart enough to notice it:
Yada yada yada.
Nope. Statute of limitations (5 years) expired a week prior to Durham's filing. You cannot magically extend a statute of limitations after it has already expired.
Good luck with that. Keep dreaming.
If that was the case he wouldn't have been able to file you twit.
You don't even know what was in Durham's filing, so how could you have a clue of what you're talking about?
I'm talkin' about the implications comin' down the road.
Implications of what exactly?
You people are forever kicking the can down the road.
There's a train a comin'.
Whatever you have to tell yourself.
I've never been on the David Icke forum.
No? My bad. Someone was there with a similar moniker. Same persona as well. Some 10-12 years ago.
How blind does a person have to be to not know that Obama officials obtained illegal warrants to spy on Trump?Maybe it did, I don't know. But one thing we know for certain is that Durham has yet to make that charge, despite Trump's assertion that he did. Durham even issued a statement saying as much:
Durham Dismisses Crazed Fox Reporting on Trump Spying Claims
Fox News wrongly cited a Durham motion as evidence that the Clinton campaign spied on Trump.www.thedailybeast.com
