Former Hillary Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann, charged with lying to the FBI, acquitted

[SunnyinBangrak]

 

Hopefully Durham has better luck with Danchenko's trial in October. It is not being held in DC so the jury will probably not be made up of Clinton donors and other connected people. There is a real chance for justice in the next trial. If guilty Durham can work his way up the chain to Lynch and ultimately Clinton herself. Will be interesting watching this play out.

[metisdead]

A post with unsubstantiated information this is "available online" has been removed.  Please provide a valid link to the source of information when posting. 

[LarrySR]

The accusations were a NOTHINGBURGER.

Turns out, Trump and his campaign staff are responsible for the investigation. 

Over on Fox they are talking about Nancy Pelosi's ice cream freezer......

 

According to the Republican Senates investigation of the Russia interference 1,000 page report . LINK:

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf

 

-Trumps team lied 147 times about their Russian contacts.Trumps campaign manager handed a Russian operative confidential polling DATA that was used to micro target voters thru social media with disinformation and lies.

-Trump asked for Russian help in his campaign.

-Trump lied on his written answers to Mueller.

-Trump ordered witnesses to ignore subpoenas.

-Trump was found to have committed 10 counts of obstruction of justice.

 

...and loads more evidence you can read for yourself in the Senates published report. LINK ABOVE

[SunnyinBangrak]

23 minutes ago, LarrySR said:

The accusations were a NOTHINGBURGER.

Turns out, Trump and his campaign staff are responsible for the investigation. 

Over on Fox they are talking about Nancy Pelosi's ice cream freezer......

 

According to the Republican Senates investigation of the Russia interference 1,000 page report . LINK:

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf

 

-Trumps team lied 147 times about their Russian contacts.Trumps campaign manager handed a Russian operative confidential polling DATA that was used to micro target voters thru social media with disinformation and lies.

-Trump asked for Russian help in his campaign.

-Trump lied on his written answers to Mueller.

-Trump ordered witnesses to ignore subpoenas.

-Trump was found to have committed 10 counts of obstruction of justice.

 

...and loads more evidence you can read for yourself in the Senates published report. LINK ABOVE

From your 1,000 page report. This little gem from page 955.

 

"While this Volume did not find evidence of collusion between President Trump and the Russians, it does detail a stunning accounting of the FBl's sloppy work and poor judgment. In 2016, the Democratic Party, using a series of arm's length transactions, hired a foreign citizen to seek out dirt on a political opponent, provided by foreign sources. This Volume confirms that Christopher Steele used information gained from sources in Russia-some with direct ties to the Russian Government. That unverified, uncorroborated, foreign information was then actively circulated with the press to disparage a U.S. political candidate."

 

So they did NOT find evidence of Trump and Russia having colluded. Is that perhaps because the (what looked like serious) evidence was concocted by Hillary and her team as we heard in court recently?

[placeholder]

2 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

From your 1,000 page report. This little gem from page 955.

 

"While this Volume did not find evidence of collusion between President Trump and the Russians, it does detail a stunning accounting of the FBl's sloppy work and poor judgment. In 2016, the Democratic Party, using a series of arm's length transactions, hired a foreign citizen to seek out dirt on a political opponent, provided by foreign sources. This Volume confirms that Christopher Steele used information gained from sources in Russia-some with direct ties to the Russian Government. That unverified, uncorroborated, foreign information was then actively circulated with the press to disparage a U.S. political candidate."

 

So they did NOT find evidence of Trump and Russia having colluded. Is that perhaps because the (what looked like serious) evidence was concocted by Hillary and her team as we heard in court recently?

What you failed to note is that the Senate Committee found plenty of evidence for collusion between officials of the Trump campaign and the Russians. And that Trump made it very clear the pardons were not off the table for those who could possess knowledge that would incriminate him. And pardoning them is exactly what he did.

[ozimoron]

I'm really hoping that Sussman sues Trump, Barr and Durham. Then there will be a process of discovery of evidence.

[placeholder]

 

Below is a link to an excellent article explaining not just how weak Durham's evidence was, but how it actually contradicted the alleged grounds for launching it in the first place:

 

John Durham Tried to Prove Trump’s Russiagate Theory. Instead He Debunked It.

Trump’s prosecutor face-plants.

Donald Trump and William Barr have spent years alleging that the Russia investigation was a criminal plot by the FBI. The Department of Justice’s inspector general found the Russia investigation was adequately predicated, but Barr disagreed. So he selected a prosecutor, John Durham, who would supposedly uncover this scheme and begin frog-marching its perpetrators to justice.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/05/john-durham-michael-sussman-verdict-not-guilty-russia-alfabank-trump-barr-fbi-clinton.html

[candide]

7 hours ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

 

Hopefully Durham has better luck with Danchenko's trial in October. It is not being held in DC so the jury will probably not be made up of Clinton donors and other connected people. There is a real chance for justice in the next trial. If guilty Durham can work his way up the chain to Lynch and ultimately Clinton herself. Will be interesting watching this play out.

Do you remember the aim of the Durham probe? It was to prove that the Russia probe was not properly predicated. It failed so far, and this next trial will not change anything, because it has already been acknowledged that the Steele dossier was no at the origin of the Russia probe. So even if this trial can convict an informant of the Steele dossier, it will not show that the Russia probe has been wrongfully predicated.

So in brief:

- the only guy convince so far has altered an email after the start of the Russia probe so nothing to do with predication

- the Sussman case: not only not guilty, but the data he provided had been rejected by the FBI anyway

- Donshenko: nothing to do with the predication anyway.

 

So the Durham probe is a fail, a waste of taxpayer money ($3.8 million) during 3 years. Actually, as this article explains, instead of proving that Trump was right in denouncing the Russia probe, Durham actually debunked Trump's claim that it has been a hoax, a witch hunt!. ????

 

"In the reality-based world, Durham actually has undermined Trump and his bogus narrative. He has failed to demonstrate that the Russia investigation was a witch hunt or hoax cooked up by Trump’s enemies........Durham has provided a valuable service. His inability to uncover evidence of a hoax confirms that Trump’s denials and diversions have been the real hoax all along. "

 

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/06/how-john-durhams-probe-has-exposed-trumps-russia-con/

 

Edited June 2, 2022 by candide

[placeholder]

8 hours ago, candide said:

Do you remember the aim of the Durham probe? It was to prove that the Russia probe was not properly predicated. It failed so far, and this next trial will not change anything, because it has already been acknowledged that the Steele dossier was no at the origin of the Russia probe. So even if this trial can convict an informant of the Steele dossier, it will not show that the Russia probe has been wrongfully predicated.

So in brief:

- the only guy convince so far has altered an email after the start of the Russia probe so nothing to do with predication

- the Sussman case: not only not guilty, but the data he provided had been rejected by the FBI anyway

- Donshenko: nothing to do with the predication anyway.

 

So the Durham probe is a fail, a waste of taxpayer money ($3.8 million) during 3 years. Actually, as this article explains, instead of proving that Trump was right in denouncing the Russia probe, Durham actually debunked Trump's claim that it has been a hoax, a witch hunt!. ????

 

"In the reality-based world, Durham actually has undermined Trump and his bogus narrative. He has failed to demonstrate that the Russia investigation was a witch hunt or hoax cooked up by Trump’s enemies........Durham has provided a valuable service. His inability to uncover evidence of a hoax confirms that Trump’s denials and diversions have been the real hoax all along. "

 

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/06/how-john-durhams-probe-has-exposed-trumps-russia-con/

 

Actually, the goal was to prove that the probe was a corrupt endeavor by high officials in the govt, including in the FBI, to stop the election of Donald Trump. Instead, in the case he brought against Sussman, Durham was claiming that the FBI was duped by the lawyer.

[placeholder]

On 6/3/2022 at 6:54 AM, SunnyinBangrak said:

 

First of all it's not about Hillary Clinton's lawyer getting charged with lying to the FBI, it's about Hillary Clinton's lawyer getting acquitted.

 

And if you're going to call Sussman Hillary Clinton's lawyer when he was actually working for an election committee, then how much more closely tied is Trump to  criminals like Manafort and Stone with whom he regularly conversed and are actually convicted of crimes? Criminals who could have provided evidence against them but whom he pardoned.

 

Also, contrary to your assumption, there is no proof that Hillary Clinton or anyone else on the committee believed that the Steele report was a hoax. Or that they had any role in creating it.

[metisdead]

Some troll posts of an off topic nature have been removed as well as the replies. 

[placeholder]

Andrew Mccarthy, a strong supporter of Trump and the Durham investigation had this to say about the Durham investigation:

 

“The further we get into the trial, the more I can’t understand why Durham brought this case. ... I’m just really surprised especially with everything riding on his investigation and his final report that he would take a chance like this with a case like this. ... I just wonder if it was worth it.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/06/03/pressure-for-durham-to-ditch-russia-probe-00037225

[onthedarkside]

A post portraying opinion pieces as factual news reports has been removed.

 

[placeholder]

On 6/2/2022 at 7:35 AM, SunnyinBangrak said:

From your 1,000 page report. This little gem from page 955.

 

"While this Volume did not find evidence of collusion between President Trump and the Russians, it does detail a stunning accounting of the FBl's sloppy work and poor judgment. In 2016, the Democratic Party, using a series of arm's length transactions, hired a foreign citizen to seek out dirt on a political opponent, provided by foreign sources. This Volume confirms that Christopher Steele used information gained from sources in Russia-some with direct ties to the Russian Government. That unverified, uncorroborated, foreign information was then actively circulated with the press to disparage a U.S. political candidate."

 

So they did NOT find evidence of Trump and Russia having colluded. Is that perhaps because the (what looked like serious) evidence was concocted by Hillary and her team as we heard in court recently?

It did not find evidence of Trump having personally colluded. However, as the Mueller report concluded, there was plenty of evidence of obstruction of justice on his part. Trump actually pardoned those who might have been able to provide evidence of his collusion. What a sleazy character he is.

Edited June 16, 2022 by placeholder