Below is a slightly expanded version of my column in the Hill on Sussmann trial and what it revealed about the role of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the combined Russian collusion investigations. It also looks down the road at whether Special Counsel John Durham will be allowed to write the same type of public report that concluded the Mueller investigation.
Here is the column:
With the jury out in the trial of former 2016 Clinton campaign counsel Michael Sussmann, the usual odds-takers appeared on cable news, rating the chances of a conviction. Despite the seemingly overwhelming evidence against Sussmann, the jury’s makeup seems strikingly favorable for the defense.
One verdict, however, appears to need little deliberation. It concerns the Department of Justice, and particularly the FBI. The trial confirmed what many have long alleged about how top officials eagerly accepted any Russia collusion claim involving Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign. Special counsel John Durham’s investigation, which led to Sussmann’s trial, is an indictment of a department and a bureau which, once again, appeared willfully blind as they were played by Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Despite the trial judge’s rulings imposing strict limits on the scope of the trial evidence, Durham’s case still revealed new information on how the Russia collusion theory was pushed into the FBI and the media by the Clinton campaign. Perhaps the most ironic moment came when Sussmann’s defense team outed Clinton as personally approving the campaign’s effort to spread a baseless claim that the Trump organization maintained a secret channel to the Kremlin through Russia’s Alfa Bank.
That claim was a real tinfoil-hat conspiracy theory without support. Durham previously disclosed how researchers tasked with supporting the claim were afraid it was so unsupported that they would be mocked. They argued, according to Sussmann’s indictment, that anyone familiar with analyzing internet traffic “would poke several holes” in the theory. One researcher warned: “Let’s assume again that they are not smart enough to refute our ‘best case scenario.’ You do realize that we will have to expose every trick we have in our bag to even make a very weak association.”
Yet, the Clinton campaign did not seem remotely concerned about even minimal inquiries that might expose the lack of proof. The researchers were told to just worry about creating a “very useful narrative.”
During the trial, Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias and campaign manager Robby Mook both said the campaign trusted the media to push the story. They were right: Slate quickly ran it, and then Clinton and one of her aides, Jake Sullivan (now President Biden’s national security adviser), released statements expressing alarm about the claim as if it were news to them.
The Clinton campaign similarly pushed the infamous Steele dossier into the news, too, after secretly helping to fund it. And both the Steele dossier and the Alfa Bank claim was pushed to friends in the FBI.
Regardless of what the jury decides regarding Sussmann, the combined record of the Steele dossier and the Alfa Bank claim makes the FBI look like an unindicted co-conspirator.
On the witness stand in Sussmann’s trial, for example, FBI general counsel James Baker was asked why it took him so long to turn over the most damaging evidence — a text message to him in which Sussmann said he was not representing any client in pushing the Alfa Bank claim to FBI officials. Baker explained that Sussmann was his friend and told prosecutors that “this is not my investigation. This is your investigation.”
In other words, there was no reason for the Justice Department to expect that Baker, a former top Justice lawyer, would help to make the case against Sussmann. It did not help the optics when Baker left the Justice Department and joined Brookings Institution, liberal think tank linked to key figures who framed the early Russian collusion claims. For some, it seemed like not just friends but “friends with benefits.”
Later, the supervisory agent for the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe, Joe Pientka, sent a note to FBI special agent Curtis Heide, stating: “People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server.” Pientka then messaged Heide: “Did you guys open a case? Reach out and put tools on?”
That description of the apparent eagerness of then-FBI Director James Comey and others only magnifies concern over the bureau’s alleged bias or predisposition on the Trump investigation. It was the same eagerness that led the FBI to pursue the Russian investigation for years despite being warned early by American intelligence that the Steele dossier contained not just unsupported allegations but possible Russian disinformation.
When FBI investigators were given Sussmann’s allegation, they were told by supervisors that it came from the Justice Department, not Sussmann. Even with that framing, however, investigators found what the Clinton campaign researchers feared — in Baker’s words, that there was “nothing there.”
The FBI, however, went on to pursue the other Russia collusion claims. That effort would result in a conviction of FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith for making false statements by altering key evidence to obtain secret surveillance orders against Trump associate Carter Page. Another trial witness, the FBI’s Heide, admitted he is under investigation for allegedly withholding exculpatory information contradicting the premise of the Russia investigation.
Previously, of course, another special counsel, Robert Mueller, never found any basis for criminal charges related to Russia collusion. But what is now even more striking is how so much of this information about “fired up” FBI officials and the role of the Clinton campaign mysteriously escaped Mueller and his team.
The question now is whether Durham will be given the same opportunity as Mueller to write a report on his findings. All of these disclosures were made despite limitations placed on Durham by the court. Clearly, Durham is sitting on more information about how the collusion claims were packaged and pushed to eager friends in the media and the FBI.
Before Mueller declined to press criminal charges on any Russia collusion allegations, Democrats in Congress insisted that he should not just issue a report but that the report should be released unredacted, including ordinarily secret grand jury material.
There is no such hue and cry for a similarly unredacted report by Durham.
If Durham does not issue such a report, much of the true story behind the Russia collusion scandal could be buried. Indeed, even if control of Congress were to flip to Republicans in November, the Justice Department could refuse to turn over investigatory material and information. That is precisely what many in Washington undoubtedly would like to happen.
Yet, after the glimpses offered in Sussmann prosecution of still undisclosed evidence, the public deserves to have a full Durham report on how these scandals were conceived and crafted among “friends.”
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley.
Here is the crux of the overall matter. “It also looks down the road at whether Special Counsel John Durham will be allowed to write the same type of public report that concluded the Mueller investigation.” Those who are in the positions to acknpwledge and disclose the DT attempted coup de’tat believe if disclosed, it will destroy the System. By not disclosing, is what will soon about destroy the System, as disclosures will leak out.
Believe AG MG will keep it screwed down as tight and as long as possible. I would allege they knew Oct 2020> It is corrupt. Selah
Do you even have a clue what “Selah” from the Bible means? Biblical scholars aren’t even sure, but the consensus is that it either signals a point for a refrain when a verse is sung or it is an instruction to musicians.
Hunter Thompson used it as a point of emphasis or inflection.
Most of the actual facts have been well known for years.
With a few interesting exceptions the Sussman Trial proved very little we did not already know.
The NEW revalations are that the Steele Dossier and the Alpha bank claims were a HOAX – they were manufactured from the start.
The Sussman trial filled in details, but you had to be an idiot to fail to grasp FROM THE START that the entire claim was ludicrously stupid.
The Trial revealed that the great fear of the Clinton Campaign was that the FBI would Laugh at what they had as stupid – because it was.
But aside from lying to the FBI – or more accurately FALSELY reporting a crime. Thje conduct of the clinton campaign was IMMORAL, but it was not ILLEGAL.
There was an attempted Coup – but that was by FBI/DOJ – this was FAR worse than watergate. But there will be no consequence for the only effort I am aware of in US history by those in government to take out a president.
You’re so willfully confused that you believe Sussmann alleged a crime. He did not.
The FBI investigates Crimes.
You do not go to the FBI to report information that might embarrass someone else.
The FBI may not conduct an investigation of a US person absent a credible allegation of a crime.
That isthe meaaning of the 4th amendment.
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
Govenrment may not investigate people for the hell of it.
Was the FBI really exposed? I mean, doesn’t anyone with half a brain understand that all facets of big government are corrupt? I thought it was just assumed. I mean it’s certainly nothing new. Inherently all governments are corrupt. It’s always been that way and it always will be.
So Anonymous, should we just throw our hands up and do nothing. The government of England was corrupt and some brave men stood up and said give me liberty or give me death which has allowed you to sit in comfort and publish your opinion. You may want to say “Oh well” but thankfully our founding fathers had no such attitude. On this day we can be thankful that those men who died on the battle field for our nation didn’t just say “Oh well.”
So are you saying 1776 was a one-off and what came from it is immune from corruption and decadence and that never would come a time when it is necessary again?
Many of you have read a number of my earlier advisories to the corrupt individuals who deal in ‘beltway’ shenanigans of the most hurtful kind: wear Kevlar for the foreseeable future — someday, someone is going to have you in their ‘sights.’ Of course, I’m just speculating — but I wouldn’t want to be Sussman, Elias, any Clinton, Baker, and the list is very lengthy…..
Let’s remember on this Memorial Day the men and women who served this country with Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity — which is what the F B I was supposed to do…..and didn’t.
Thank you, Professor. Very true. If James Baker had simply asked the questions he was supposed to ask at the outset, Alfa Bank would have died in the first meeting.
Baker destroyed his career in federal law enforcement and damaged his estimable reputation and for what? Essentially political hatred.
If we really want to heal these institutions of their corruption, we need to face the facts. Our federal system evolved with a major omission regarding federal elections — there is no powerful, neutral referee to act fast when allegations of misconduct are presented. Everyone can see in retrospect that Comey-McCabe-Baker commandeered control over the Trump-Russia accusations rather than delegate it out to the NYC Field Office. Why? Obviously, to steer it against Trump, who the FBI leadership detested (read Andy McCabe’s book “The Threat”).
If there were a standing, neutral body of crack investigators at the ready to rapidly respond to all election-candidate-related accusations of misconduct, the 7th Floor would not be able to corrupt such investigations. And, instead of finding out the facts 6 years after the fact, voters deserve to find out the facts of campaign cheating BEFORE they cast their ballots. This calls for a special body with privileged access to the chief counsels of the various campaigns.
We need an independent unit within DOJ that is an Election Integrity Rapid Response Office. Each election campaign would have to appoint its lead lawyer as an official liaison to EIRRO, and support rapid investigation processes (on a 24-hour response cycle).
If we want to have a future as a superpower, it’s time to get back to a mindset of improving our institutions in specific, actionable ways.
Realistically, what is the alternative? It’s a complete fantasy that “your side” will run the table and gain complete control of federal government, and then act accountably and ethically when in such a powerful position. It doesn’t work that way. The people have to erect controls to degame “the system”. This requires the mindset of a neutral referee, not a partisan seeking advantage. To abandon that powerful referee’s perspective is to give up on democracy.
“ Our federal system evolved with a major omission regarding federal elections”
There is no such thing.
Only state elections to fill the House and Senate. Plus State elections choosing electors for office of Presidents.
That is true of the vote counting, but what about the campaigning? Who is supposed to police it for cheating? You can’t be serious to insist that state governments (up to 50 separate investigations) is the best way to deal with cheating. Nor is there any purchase in the idea of diffusing the responsibility for investigating.
I was thinking primarily about Presidential Campaigns and Candidates in arguing for an EIRRO at the federal level. The campaigns are run informationally as national campaigns, not as 50 separate informational campaigns. We’ve seen twice now the Clintons covertly craft an “October surprise”. The first one worked — they shot down George H.W. Bush with deceptive infowarfare about him being so out of touch, he didn’t even know what a bar-code reader was (1992). That was begun through deceptive video editing, and then parroted by the corrupt media. As Durham has proven beyond any doubt, Hillary tried to smear Trump as a Russian puppet — we’re fortunate it failed to win her the Presidency, although we all paid a price in having those lies wound DJT’s four years in office.
I honestly can’t believe you think having the 50 states clean up the campaign infospace will work. They would not be vetted for neutrality, nor have the jurisdictional reach to rapidly referee a national campaign.
That is true of the vote counting, but what about the campaigning?
Now you are in First Amendment territory. We all know lying in political campaigns cannot be prosecuted.
Your faith if the Federal Govt is astounding given the content of this post, and the evidence the FEDERAL govt across a handful of cabinet level agencies conspired to sabotage a President. Washington DC is controlled by the Democrat Machine. Like Daley’s Chicago, or Tamany Hall. Only more powerful and much more corrupt.
You have to keep going back six years now and try to figure out the FBI’s theory of the crime(s) allegedly committed by Trump. Apparently Comey thought Trump and Putin agreed at a beauty contest in Moscow in 2013 that Trump would run against Clinton three years later and Putin would help Trump (while there, they urinated on a bed to seal the deal).
But then rather than just calling each other up subsequently on secure lines in order to further their conspiracy, Trump and Putin
— Agreed to send messages back and forth between a private Russian bank’s server and a private Michigan hospital’s server housed at a third private Martech company in Ohio along with a Trump hotel server. Two pings meant “by land” and one ping meant “by sea”
— Then in the unlikely event that that hotel-to-hospital ping-based bank shot failed as an adequate communications channel, Putin and Trump agreed in 2013 to communicate via a Russian spy named Carter Page (who Putin knew was actually a double agent for the CIA and had worked with the FBI to put two real Russian spies in jail and who worked out of a cubicle in a building beside Trump Tower, which Page reached every morning via Metro North because he was living in his father’s basement in Poughkeepsie). To turn Page into a triple cross in 2016, Putin agreed in 2013 to give Page a $13,000,000,000 bribe
— As further back up, in 2013 Putin and Trump agreed that Trump would send his fixer Michael Cohen to Prague in August 2016 for final instructions. To keep this meeting secret, Putin arranged a cover story with all the documentation of how Cohen’s son (who was in the 8th grade in 2013) supposedly visited UCLA on a college look see at the time Cohen was really in Prague
Then — unbeknownst to Comey –John Brennan and Krapper were doing their own thing during those years, “wiretapping” all the 2016 GOP candidates (you don’t think Brennan and Krapper “wiretapped” only the GOP candidate least likely to win the nomination do you?). Getting no results, they sent two of their agents Stefan Halper and Professor Misfud (in the dining room with the candlestick) to meet some 20 something Greek American to tell him some lies about Trump and then a month later sent two more of their agents, the Australian ambassador to Britain and a Turkish FBI undercover honey named Natasha, to meet with the Greek American kid to see if he repeated the lies they had fed him a month earlier (he didn’t, even after getting it on with Natasha).
When everything in the first two paragraphs turned out to be nonsense, Comey used the Brennan/Krapper nonsense to kick off Operation Hurricane
If this wasn’t so true, I’d be howling with laughter. It IS/IS NOT that funny —- idiotic —–absurd —-Keystone Cop-like —–and yet, the vindictive leadership at the controls including the mainstream media sold lots and lots of media ad space because their leadership hated the Donald and loved the ratings resulting from beating him to a pulp — and yet, he’s still standing. Thank you for the morning jolt of humor.
Brilliant post, Dennis. The Russian collusion hoax was always silly and absurd, even by the standards of oppo research.
“When FBI investigators were given Sussmann’s allegation, they were told by supervisors that it came from the Justice Department, not Sussmann. Even with that framing, however, investigators found what the Clinton campaign researchers feared — in Baker’s words, that there was “nothing there.”.
FBI Supervisors (which one’s…and why…) LIED to the Case Agents DOING the investigation….let’s get the answers to that shall we……how high up does it go?
Kiinesmith FALSIFIED documents…..why…who approved his work….let’s get the answers to that.
Within Days….the “Nothing to this!” was known by the FBI Senior Management but yet they (the Seventh Floor) converted the investigation from a criminal one to a counter-intelligence investigation with the exact same targets…..Who on the Seventh Floor and Why?
Baker withheld evidence….despite having a DUTY to provide any and all evidence he held….as he was the FBI’s General Counsel….and it was the FBI’s Investigation…..and his smart assed comment in Court under Oath should have had the Judge reminding Baker of what Contempt of Court is all about.
Any Boot NCIS Special Agent could do a better job than did the FBI.
Ralph Chappell,
“ Baker withheld evidence….despite having a DUTY to provide any and all evidence he held….as he was the FBI’s General Counsel….and it was the FBI’s Investigation…..and his smart assed comment in Court under Oath should have had the Judge reminding Baker of what Contempt of Court is all about.”
He was under no legal obligation to provide anything to Durham. That’s not how the law works and Turley knows that the judge knows that. It’s Durham’s job to have sought all the evidence before trial. Turley is blaming Baker for not doing Durham’s job. Turley is trying to deflect from Durham’s incompetence.
Nobody is required or has a duty to provide any and all evidence to prosecution.
“Nobody is required or has a duty to provide any and all evidence to prosecution.”
Let the Jan 6 Dem committee know this piece of law
Iowan2,
“ Let the Jan 6 Dem committee know this piece of law”
The J6 committee IS doing its job. It’s issuing subpoenas for information and interviews. It’s doing what Durham was too inept to do itself.
They are not sitting around waiting for volunteers. They CAN and DO issue subpoenas as the law requires.
The Jan. 6 Committee isn’t prosecuting anyone, and people have a legal obligation to turn over material that’s been legally subpoenaed.
If Sussmann can be prosecuted for “lying to the FBI about a material fact”, why aren’t the honcos on the 7th floor of the FBI held to the same standard? Whoever knowingly hid Sussmann as the source of the Alfa Bank accusation, instead pointed to DOJ as the source, lied to FBI case agents. And, it was material to their investigation. It was a bum steer. Durham promised to go wherever the evidence led him. Clearly crimes of investigatory misdirection were committed by FBI leadership.
They broke the same law as Sussmann. Is Durham going to ignore this brazen criminality within the FBI?
“Baker withheld evidence….despite having a DUTY to provide any and all evidence he held”
No, Baker turned the evidence over within days of having been asked to search his communications for evidence. Put the blame where it belongs: on Durham, who never bothered to ask Baker to search his communications until March of 2022, even though Durham has an obligation to have asked Baker to search for Jencks material long before that.
Durham is incompetent.
Turley is being a disingenuous liar. He knew Durham didn’t have a strong case against Sussman. He’s a lawyer. Marcy Wheeler pointed out exactly why Durham’s case is so weak and why Judge cooper limited Durham’s use of his “evidence” which consisted of unsupported conspiracy theories of his own making.
Then there’s the laughable assumption that Baker should have given the FBI the “damaging” information to Durham’s team. Turley, a lawyer, fails at the most basic principles of law noting that Baker is under no legal obligation to help the investigation at all. It’s Durham’s JOB to make the requests, not baker’s. Durham was being incompetent and Turley is accusing Baker of not doing what Durham is supposed to have asked a long time ago. Nobody is required to volunteer anything to prosecutors, nobody.
What Turley is doing is setting up blame for an acquittal on the jury and the FBI instead of admitting that Durham’s case was weak from the beginning. Durham has spent 3 years investigating with nothing to show for it, except one line charge of making a false statement.
Turley is being a disingenuous liar and it’s a it’s a grotesque stain on his credibility as a lawyer.
Very ‘brave’ of you to call Professor Turley a liar, a disingenuous liar at that, which is easy to do at the typewriter keyboard—but I don’t think if you were face to face with Mr. Turley you’d be so loose with your words —–you are saying Turley willfully lied —- Many of us here on this site would strongly disagree with you — and your previous additions to this blog haven’t been quite this brazen — which is too bad —
Well stated, Richard Lowe!
I would have no problem telling Turley he is a disingenuous liar to his face. Turley is a law professor and when he is complaining that Baker didn’t do his duty to provide evidence to the prosecution he is being disingenuous and knows that he was not legally obligated to do so is perpetuating a lie to his gullible fans on his blog.
Any first year law student would recognize that. Turley is being deliberately disingenuous and lying to his deluded fans.
“Baker didn’t do his duty to provide evidence to the prosecution he is being disingenuous and knows that he was not legally obligated to do so is perpetuating a lie “
Outrageous boneheadedness. Baker is a lawyer working for the FBI that is supposed to provide the truth not hide behind legalisms. Your brain functions like a sieve.
Nope. He’s not legally obligated to help Durham in any way unless Durham specifically requested the information. Nobody is obligated to volunteer anything to prosecution.
You don’t know how the law works.
You are thicker than one wishes to imagine. Read what was said above again. All understand the legal rights of Baker.
What is missed by you is that Baker worked for the FBI and was chief counsel. You do not have any moral or ethical values, so one can easily understand your lack of support for Baker to reveal the facts, despite the lack of legal obligation.
FBI personnel holding back the facts demonstrate what you have chosen not to believe. The FBI is corrupt and not doing its job. Its focus is self-serving and political. One has to be a moron not to realize that Baker should have told everything to Durham, whether or not Sussman was his friend. His duty is to the law, not the FBI or his friend.
When GOP wins in a Landslide…remove McConnell, Graham, etc
Fire the top 1000 DOJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc Executives!
cur 75% of federal Government, more 75% Of remaining DC Federal Government to the Heartland!
Yikes!
and NO ONE will go to JAIL!
Welcome to your Fascist Government!
They simply don’t fear consequences…Why would they look at this Judge and jury. Some soccer kid will thank or hate a team mates’ parents. Multiple relationships within the jury Judge and defendant. That is amazing to us outside the beltway. Perhaps that is where this trial belonged.
Friends with Benefits: Nancy Pelosi is using a new weapon for Memorial Day.
Paul Pelosi, “age 82” the husband of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, was arrested Saturday in Napa, California, for allegedly driving under the influence, according to county records.
A booking report shows Paul Pelosi, 82, was arrested at “11:44 p.m. PT” Saturday, booked at 4 a.m. Sunday and charged with misdemeanors for allegedly driving with a blood alcohol content of 0.08% or higher.
Nancy Pelosi was not in California at the time of her husband’s arrest. She was in Providence, Rhode Island, where she received an honorary degree from Brown University and delivered the commencement address to the graduating class.
This stopped being a political dirty trick as soon as President Trump was elected, thereafter it became a conspiracy to overthrow our government. Of course nothing will be done our government has become a corrupt apparatus of the left wing elite crazies.
Explain how the one you adore “became president” when he LOST the popular vote. Explain how the one you love WON the Electoral College vote. Can you do this without going into how his campaign used Russian hackers to help? Who directed them where to launch their attacks on Hillary Clinton by lying about her? The only one who conspired to overthrow our free and fair elections is the one you love. Desperate because polls predicted he would lose, his campaign came up with a strategy to find districts in key swing states where support for Hillary Clinton was soft enough that voters could be swayed. So, Russian hackers started lying about her on social media. The lies worked. This has been proven via hard evidence. No Sussman trial or anything else will change these facts. They are the truth. Dan Coats, appointed by Trump to be head of US Intelligence agencies, says it’s the truth. Trump fired him for telling this truth, but that doesn’t change the fact that most Americans never wanted him. It also doesn’t change the reasons WHY most of us never wanted him: he’s all fluff and bluster: a chronic, habitual liar, womanizer, racist, xenophobe, a failure a business, a braggadocious blowhard desperate for attention, praise and adulation. He decimated the successful economy inherited from Barak Obama, he botched the pandemic, which allowed it to get out of control so that the country was mostly shut down for 2 years, kids are behind in their schoolwork, factories closed, the supply chain was disrupted, unemployment was north of 10%, and because he started a trade war when China couldn’t be bullied, we have a shortage of computer chips. Because people weren’t driving for vacations, to work and because school buses weren’t running, petroleum production went way down and hasn’t caught up yet. We have inflation now because the supply chain hasn’t caught up, computer chips are still in short supply and petroleum production is still lagging. All of this is Trump’s fault, but alt right media blame Biden, even though he turned around unemployment from 10+% to 3.9%, wages are higher and people now want to start traveling again. Trump was never part of “OUR” government.
Honesty, Integrity, Probity, and Honor should define the code of our government and law enforcement. These antonyms better describe certain actors within these institutions: Deceptive, Debased, Disgraceful, Evil.
Richard Nixon did some bad things but I have gained respect for him (I never thought I would say this in a million years) when he finally accepted responsibility and resigned his presidency for the good of the nation.
This is an excerpt from the departing speech he gave the WH staff. “But you are getting something in government — and I want you to tell this to your children, and I hope the Nation’s children will hear it, too — something in government service that is far more important than money. It is a cause bigger than yourself. It is the cause of making this the greatest nation in the world, the leader of the world, because without our leadership, the world will know nothing but war, possibly starvation or worse, in the years ahead. With our leadership it will know peace, it will know plenty.
We have been generous, and we will be more generous in the future as we are able to. But most important, we must be strong here, strong in our hearts, strong in our souls, strong in our belief, and strong in our willingness to sacrifice, as you have been willing to sacrifice, in a pecuniary way, to serve in government.
There is something else I would like for you to tell your young people. You know, people often come in and say, “What will I tell my kids?” They look at government and say, sort of a rugged life, and they see the mistakes that are made. They get the impression that everybody is here for the purpose of feathering his nest. That is why I made this earlier point — not in this Administration, not one single man or woman.”
Unless these smug and disgraceful actors are brought into the spotlight and truthfully judged, the American people will not have faith in any pandering bloviating politician nor will they have trust in corporate and legacy “news” agencies. Their poor choices have stained all those who have sacrificed their social lives and have stepped up to the plate to serve at the local, regional, state and national level, the ones who take their oaths and jobs seriously. To them I say thank you!
Well said – thank you.
Despite facts, all the leftists commenting here, believe the Russia scam, created by the FBI, CIA, DOJ, and The State Dept. is a legitimate path if inquiry.
It was no scam. There was legitimate reason to pursue investigations into allegations of collusion and interference with the Russians.
The Russians did hack into the Hillary campaigns emails and Trump did ask very publicly for them to do so. The FBI is obligated to investigate any allegations that may threaten the government. It’s directly in the name of the agency, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.
Trump was using absurdly, to illuminate absurdity. Trump was asking Russia to produce the 30,000 emails the SOS, had misplaced. Because HRC communication was so horribly compromised, all knew exactly the content of the emails HRC lost.
There is zero evidence the DNC were ever hacked. The head of crowd strike testified they never had
Evidence of a hack The FBI never wrote an independent report.
In short, there was far less reason to think Trump worked with Russia, than the ample evidence HRC, did work with Russia.
“ There is zero evidence the DNC were ever hacked. ”
Yes there is.
“ While U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia was behind the email thefts, the AP drew on forensic data to report Thursday that the hackers known as Fancy Bear were closely aligned with the interests of the Russian government.
The AP’s reconstruction— based on a database of 19,000 malicious links recently shared by cybersecurity firm Secureworks — shows how the hackers worked their way around the Clinton campaign’s top-of-the-line digital security to steal chairman John Podesta’s emails in March 2016.
It also helps explain how a Russian-linked intermediary could boast to a Trump policy adviser, a month later, that the Kremlin had “thousands of emails” worth of dirt on Clinton.”
https://apnews.com/article/technology-europe-russia-hacking-only-on-ap-dea73efc01594839957c3c9a6c962b8a
Svelaz,
2017 called and they want their debunked talking points back. There is zero evidence that the Russians hacked the DNC.
At this timenearly all of the details about the DNC hack, as Well as George Papadulis are not only well knon but have all been testified to by the relevant parties UNDER OATH.
You claims are BOGUS – the the AP is saying what you claim – they are Full of Schiff – but that would not be the first time the Press was full of Schiff.
Fancy Bear is NOT a hacker, it is a Russian hacking Tool that is widely available. Myriads of hacks have been done using one version or another of Fancy Bear by non russians. Hackers in Turkey and Pakistan commonly use it. The French Telecom network was hacked using it BEFORE the DNC and that hack was eventually established as from Pakistan.
The Fact that Fancy Bear was used is USELESS.
In fact it is highly unlikely the Russians would have used Russian hacking tools. They would have deliberately used other tools – such as the CIA tools which are also public, to point the finger at the CIA.
It is well known that StuxNext hacked the Iranian Nuclear program and caused them no end of greif and delays. What was not known at the Time was that Stuxnet came from the US.
Stuxnet was written by US intelligence to LOOK like it was an israeli tool, it cncorporated code signatures that were known to be Israeli.
And the Israeli’s refused to comment – because even though StuxNet was not from them – they were perfectly happy to have the Iranians beleive it was.
You can not tell the origen of a hack from the tools used. PERIOD,
The DNC was hacked -Twice. But we have no idea who by – The FBI did NOT have access to the DNC servers and relied on CrowdStrikes report.
But even if they had – the only way to KNOW the source of a hack is to have an admission by the hackers – and even that is not actually certain. ‘
Regardless Crowd Strike Testified under oat that:
They did not know that the DNC emails were exfiltrated via a hack
And the did not know who actually hacked the DNC despite the clai0m in their report it was russia.
It is amazing how people say different things under oath.
Finally, it is more likely that not the DNC emails were leakered rather than hacked. Time stamps on the files indicate a transfer speed that is nearly identical to USB speed, and not possible over any internation network and highly improbable domestically.
The AP and SecureWorks are full of Schiff. The DNC servers have NOT been provided to anyone. There is little forensic information actually available.
The Servers do not exist anymore and have not for years.
All the Tracing you claim was done was attempted at the time – in fact CrowdStrike had real time access and observation fo the 2nd hack while it was ongoing and still could not trace it as you claim.
There were not “19,000 malicious links” – this is just a wild ass stupid claim. There is and has been shared by crowdstrike evidence of the hackers moving through the systems at the DNC looking for interesting infomartion. There is ZERO evidence that they removed anything from the DNC. It is probable that they did – but their actions were only being tracked for 2 weeks and the first hack of the DNC occured almost a year earlier and the 2nd about 5 months earlier.
Further it is highly likely that the two hacks were independent – i.e. NOT the same hackers or country.
Regardless, if they exfiltrated anything – it was BEFORE the Crowdstrike was tracking what they were doing.
Further the DNC security was by CROWDSTRIKE – which is why they were called in. It was NOT top of the line. Podesta responded to a pretty trivial fishing email and that is what allowed the 2nd hacker in.
Nor was the breach limited to Podesta – the hackers during the 2 weeks they were being observed wandered all over the DNC servers.
What they did NOT do was exfiltrate emails or anything of consequence.
No one boasted that the Russians had thousands of emails of dirt on the clintons. Carter Page was told by Mifsud – who is almost certainly a FBI or MI6 agent and definitely not a Russian, that The Russians had the State Department Emails from Clinton’s basement bathroom email server. This is almost certainly true – but Mifsud had no special knowledge that it was True and George Papadulous had none either.
Further Papadulous was actually toldby the Trump campaign to SHUT DOWN enquires regarding the Clinton State Department emails – specifically because that might involve pre election contact with a hostile foreign power.
The FBI has already testified that the Clinton State departmmet emails were being accessed in real time by a hostile foreign power.
But thatis more likely China than Russia.
Sussman will walk, either through an acquittal or a hung jury. If it’s the latter, will Durham try again? And if he does, will he be allowed to introduce more evidence of how the “narrative” was created? Hard to know.
Whatever the outcome, the Danchenko trial is next, and that should produce more revelations about the Steele dossier, the Clinton-linked sources for it, the campaign’s efforts to seed it with the media and FBI, and connivance by the DOJ and FBI.
The statute of limitations may prevent further indictments, unless Durham can show acts in a conspiracy, or stand alone criminal conduct, in the second half of 2017 and/or beyond.
I hope Durham does get to write a report and that it is released largely unredacted. The Special Counsel regulation requires a report explaining his charging decisions. I hope Durham writes in detail about what happened and why he was able to charge only Clinesmith among all the government officials who transformed campaign opposition research into multi-year investigations without any factual basis, with knowledge that the information they were provided was false, and having been warned that the Clinton campaign was engaged in a conspiracy to link Trump to Russia to distract from her own problems.
I’m not holding my breath.
If and only if Durham can convict sussman – and I agree with you that is unlikely with a DC jury.
Maybe we need some “mostly peaceful” protests to egg the jury along.
With a conviction Durham can prosecute the conspirators.
Daniel, the only eye witness to the meeting was Baker, and Baker isn’t certain about what Sussmann did/didn’t say about the charged statement.
In addition, the FBI was aware that Sussmann had represented HFA and the DNC on other matters and that this info came from tech researchers (see the evidence here: https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/05/27/the-staples-receipt-and-fbis-description-of-michael-sussmann-sharing-a-tip-from-hillary/ ), so even if Durham could prove a false statement beyond a reasonable doubt (which I question), why do you think that it’s material?
Seems to me that Sussmann *should* be acquitted in light of the combined trial evidence.
Sussman’s texts indicate he lied. That’s in writing not in his biased and feeble memory.
Perhaps if you were paying better attention, you’d know that Sussmann wasn’t charged with knowingly making a materially false statement in a text on 9/18. He was charged with knowingly making a materially false statement in person on 9/19.
Also, even if you were correct that he lied in the meeting itself (which I don’t think the prosecution has proved), that’s actually not a crime unless it’s **materially** false. Do make your case for why it was material, given the evidence here: https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/05/27/the-staples-receipt-and-fbis-description-of-michael-sussmann-sharing-a-tip-from-hillary/
Anonymous, you have been full of cr-p in several other responses, but I let them go. Now your pushing M Wheeler (empty wheel) again. As I demonstrated more than once, her opinions are frequently empty and off balance.
Sussman is guilty, but will likely be found innocent. There are a lot of guilty folk that should be serving a number of years, but we are talking about DC, so I don’t think the Durham investigation will mean much of anything. I wonder if his report, if permitted to be written, will be released before 2024. I don’t know that it was the intention that he clean up the mess Hillary and the FBI made.
The best we can hope for is a big victory for the Republicans and that the Rino’s get quickly squeezed out, making room for those that believe in the rule of law and individual freedoms. I recognize that rule of law and individual freedom are not something you are hoping to see.
You’ve never demonstrated anything about Marcy Wheeler, you only claim you’ve done it, while not presenting even a shred of evidence for having done anything. Which is why you cannot link to a single comment of yours showing that you ever did it: because your demonstration only exists in your imagination.
Notice that in your comment above, you haven’t presented any evidence that anything in the column I linked to is false. And for the record, she actually reads and responds to comments, and when people point out mistakes, she corrects the mistake and often thanks the person. So if you actually found a mistake, the grown up thing to do would be to point it out to her.
You posted Wheeler, and I went over some of her comments. That was good enough to show she wasn’t the one to ride to an intellect to victory. She is selective in her choice of information. In many ways you are similar to her but a lot worse. She is a typical leftist pundit who frequently is way off from the truth.
Do I need to point out your faulty commentary? Everyone is already aware of your deceit, so there is no value in doing so again with the Sussman case. The trial should have taken place outside of DC. The FBI should have been more forthcoming. Likely he will be found innocent. If guilty, there will be another slap on the wrist.
You can keep dancing. Try posting a comment to Wheeler’s site that sounds like it comes from the right. Let me know how she handles it. I’ve been on sites like hers before, and most leftists won’t tolerate civil and polite differences.
“You posted Wheeler, and I went over some of her comments.”
Prove it. Link to what you said, and let’s see if you were truthful or lying.
ATS, you had a chance when the responses were posted but you didn’t take the opportunity. She has a right to say what she wishes and so do you, but when you print garbage, don’t expect people to fall for it and tell you how brilliant you are. They have a right to think the opposite.
You like to search, go search.
You’re the one with the burden to prove your claim.
You can’t prove it.
This shows why it was a good thing that President Trump fired James Comey, a person almost as reprehensible as Robert Muller, Mark Elias, John Brennan, and Peter Strzok.
Someone in the workings of this case should have recognized that the best thing to do when you’re digging yourself a hole is to stop digging. But no one wanted to stop, no matter how incredible the evidence was.
Mr Biden says he wants to raze the school in Uvalde and build another. Maybe he should leave the school alone and let the people there decide what to do. On the other hand, it would seem that it was time to have “mostly peaceful demonstrations” at the Hoover building, blowtorch the interior so as to remove the taint of lawlessness, then remove all the personnel, reassign them to non law enforcement jobs, and rebuild the institution. Once complete then move to the Dept of Justice, followed by the Education Dept. If successful, pause and then consider the next targets for renewal and rehabilitation. It could almost be a religious experience since it would undoubtably be good for the soul of the nation and useful in relearning the meaning of humility and truly serving the people and the Constitution.
I can see Biden’s point on this one. How can we expect the children and teachers to return to that building? Uvalde is a low-income community, so the federal government could provide the funding for a new school with protective architecture – steel doors and bullet-proof glass. It could be a model for other schools to follow in attractive, yet secure design features. As well as fencing that can’t be easily scaled! But first let the locals decide if they want a new school and whom to name it after.
The school was hardened. The community is suffering from assault fatigue. Almost daily high speed chases through town, and school lock downs twice a week. The were desensitized to the constant alarms and stopped using the protocols put in place.
A deadly consequence of Biden refusing to police the border.
Why wouldn’t Texas provide the funding to rebuild the school? It is after all Texas who is currently advocating for “hardening” THEIR schools. Texas can pony up the money. They talk a lot about these measures but are silent who how they will pay for them.
Aside from the injustices apparent in the system, and the obvious meddling in the election process by government bureaucrats, and the obviously biased trial, there is a greater problem.
DOJ, the FBI, and the Clinton campaign attacked the foundations on American democracy.
They have destroyed our belief that though imperfect, the system is fundamentally fair.
Damn them for damaging the country.
Monumentcolorado says:
“They have destroyed our belief that though imperfect, the system is fundamentally fair.”
You are suffering from a bad case of ADS.
America Derangement Syndrome.
Take it from Tucker Carlson who says that Hungary is the place you ought to be, so load up your truck and move to Hungary.
Jeff
You are always telling people what to do.
Turley what to write.
Now telling me to move.
Suggestion – STFU occasionally.
Very few people care what you think, but you do engender a lot of contempt.
Monument,
I was simply relaying Carlson’s advice that Hungary is a model country. I was doing you a favor. No thanks needed.
I don’t tell Turley what he should write. I criticize him for what he doesn’t. To you, it may seem to be a distinction without a difference. Turley likewise does not tell MSNBC or CNN what they should write, but he does criticize them for largely ignoring the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. Can you see that?
Considering that 98% of this blog whistles the same Trumpist tune, it can handle my 2 cents. Neither you nor I know how many people who read what I write and care what I think. Be that as it may, I write for the few people who do care- not ugly, soulless Trumpists like yourself.
Durham is prosecuting Sussman for the wrong crime. He should be charged with false reporting a crime.
Then conspiracy charges should be filed against actors in the clinton campaign who were involved in reporting this.
The creation of the Steele dossier is despicable, but it is not a crime.
We should not go were democrats have gone and convert politics into a crime prosecuted against those out of power by those in power.
All that said – Durham has uncovered a massive problem with the FBI – frankly they should be disbanded.
Barring that lots of people should be fired.
But the3 most important consequence – which is unlikely – is that we should cease to beleive democrats, the FBI, DOJ, the Press – that is the valid response to a hoax.
Sussmann didn’t report a crime — only anomalous data — so he could not possibly be charged with falsely reporting a crime.
Of course he reported a crime.
You do not go to the FBI to report inconsistencies in last months sales figures.
You go to the FBI to report a crime.
I would note that the “anomalous data” was not “anomolous” – IT WAS A HOAX.
Bring a HOAX to the FBI is a crime.
The British have a more accurate crime – wasting police resources.
And Sussman did that BIG TIME.
No one in US history has Ever done so so egregiously.
BTW that directly addresses “materiality” – Whether the FBI “knew” or did not know that Sussman represented Clinton – They Acted on his informaton and they massively WASTED government resources doing so.
I would further note that as a consequence of Sussman’s conduct – many many many innocent people were put in jeophardy of loss of property or liberty. They were forced to pay enormous legal bills.
Sussman, the DNC, Perkin’s Coi, Clinton owe THEM and the Country hundred’s of millions of dollars.
It is inarguable that their conduct caused GREVIOUS harm to lots and lots of people – the entire country in fact.
The most basic defintion of CRIME – the social contract justification of government, is the unjustified use of force by an individual to harm others.
Shooting someone is one form of crime.
Using the government aka FORCE is another FUNDIMENTAL crime.
It is always a crime to use force without justification to take from others what is theirs. Including their life, their liberty, their time, and their property.
It is beyond any doubt at all that occured.
The only Question is WHO did it. Sussman is one of MANY culprits.
This was one massive dirty trick – on par with Watergate. After the first, I had hoped never to see another, but HRC just had to release her inner Nixon. I hope Durham outs all of them, just like I did almost 50 tears ago when Cox and Jaworski were at the helm.
Wate3rgate was a small pimple. This is a gigantic festering tumor.
No this was a Massive Criminal Conspiracy using OUR Government!
This and the Russian Hoax are Biggest Crime in American History!
Watergate is a joke by comparison.
Nixon wanted to weaponize federal agencies – the FBI, IRS against political enemies. He failed.
Clinton was not even in office and managed to weaponize the FBI, DOJ, CIA against a political rival – even after ing theelection.
This is much worse than watergate.
John B Say suffering from Clinton derangement syndrome. Seek help. Pronto.
I have not accused Clinton of anything that it is not WELL KNOWN that she actually did.
Nothing I accuse her of is not PROVEN beyond any doubt.
But if you wish to add evil acts that are more probable than not – we can multiply the list of misconduct of Hillary Clinton by an order of magnitude.
It is deranged to hate someone for things they have not done – hence Trump Derangement Syndrome.
It is not derangement to inform people of theproven even that Clinton has done.
But if you wish – we can add the list of suspected evil.