Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Durham reveals Clinton lawyer lied to the FBI (Update: He was acquitted.)

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gatormonk, Apr 5, 2022.

  1. gatormonk

    gatormonk GC Hall of Fame

    2,597
    1,724
    1,953
    Apr 3, 2007
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. buckeyegator

    buckeyegator Premium Member

    72,654
    1,779
    3,383
    Oct 29, 2007
    gainesville, florida
    liberal heads exploding in 3,2,1...
     
    • Off-topic x 2
    • Like x 1
    • Dislike x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Winner x 1
  3. luvtruthg8r

    luvtruthg8r Premium Member

    530
    94
    1,708
    Apr 3, 2007
    The Russian collusion allegations were proven years ago, and since then we have seen a huge amount of factual evidence that provides even more proof. And yes, multiple parties in and out of government who are loyal Americans, not the traitorous Republicans who support Putin and Russia, DID conspire to protect our country from Putin's and Trump's treacherous attack on our democracy.

    The collusion between Trump, Putin, Fox News, and other anti-American actors continues. You can repeat your false assertion about the PROVEN Trump/Putin/Russia collusion thousands of times, but that would not make your false assertions true.
     
    • Funny x 5
    • Come On Man x 3
    • Disagree Bacon! x 2
    • Winner x 2
    • Agree x 1
    • Informative x 1
  4. pkaib01

    pkaib01 Premium Member

    3,212
    594
    1,963
    Apr 3, 2007
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  5. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    7,942
    716
    2,118
    Jan 6, 2009
  6. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    7,487
    551
    1,468
    Apr 8, 2007
    Is it really a crime — a conspiracy — to report suspicious activity uncovered for further investigations?

    He says he reported on his own accord, and not for a client, can Durham PROVE otherwise?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    7,942
    716
    2,118
    Jan 6, 2009
    Hold on, I’ll reply after I reassemble my exploded head.
     
    • Funny Funny x 7
    • Like Like x 1
  8. CaptUSMCNole

    CaptUSMCNole Premium Member

    3,382
    242
    343
    May 23, 2007
    NCR
    It is not exactly a bombshell. Durham had already charged Sussman with lying to the FBI and up until this filing, it had been assumed that Durham had been relying on Baker's account of his conversation with Sussman and contemporary notes of FBI agents made after their conversation. This filing states that Durham has copies of text messages that Sussman sent to Baker the night before they met that he was coming in and doing so not representing anyone.

    Sussman's lawyer has been arguing that who Sussman was working for or not working for is not material to him not telling the truth to Baker.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    Apr 8, 2007
    Lying to the FBI is a crime, that's obvious. And if he did, he should pay the price. But is this illegal?

     
  10. CaptUSMCNole

    CaptUSMCNole Premium Member

    3,382
    242
    343
    May 23, 2007
    NCR
    I'll leave it up to the lawyers about a conspiracy being illegal but what the GaTech Researchers did using their access to a DARPA contract to do an off the books political project for Jaffe, and then billing their time to the government for it very likely would be. The billing their time for it would be time card fraud, which is something that government contractors can be charged with if they lie about what they worked on or how long they worked on it. Also just because the government grants you access to privileged information, it does not mean you get to data mine it for your personal, political project.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2022
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. AgingGator

    AgingGator GC Hall of Fame

    2,223
    437
    1,988
    Apr 24, 2007
    This is even more intense mental mastrubation than river did the other day on the Waters thread.

    Don’t hurt yourself there, big boy!
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  12. pkaib01

    pkaib01 Premium Member

    3,212
    594
    1,963
    Apr 3, 2007
  13. WarDamnGator

    WarDamnGator GC Hall of Fame

    7,487
    551
    1,468
    Apr 8, 2007
    That's what I'm thinking ....it's probably hard to prove whether he was or wasn't working for a client, and either way, a smear campaign against a politician doesnt really sound like a crime.
     
  14. BLING

    BLING GC Hall of Fame

    6,083
    276
    2,843
    Apr 16, 2007
    How many times has this same thing been re-used as a “bombshell”. Good grief.

    Also: John Solomon. LOL.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  15. Trickster

    Trickster Premium Member

    6,774
    1,683
    3,203
    Sep 20, 2014
    The very same people who ignored/excused the Trump mountain of daily bullshit are now trying to make a mountain out of a little turd. It's laughable at best, dishonest at worst.
     
    • Winner Winner x 5
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  16. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    10,728
    4,370
    3,208
    Nov 25, 2017
    I am sure that part of his defense is that he was not representing the campaign with respect to the Steele memos. Except I recall reading that he billed the campaign for this work. He may have a factual materiality defense, too, because it is very likely that Baker knew he represented the campaign. So, the trial will be interesting. Don’t lie to the FBI.
     
    Last edited: Apr 5, 2022
  17. duchen

    duchen VIP Member

    10,728
    4,370
    3,208
    Nov 25, 2017
    More accurately, the same people who excused: 1) convicted liars like Flynn, Stone and Papadopolous as process crimes and celebrated their pardons; and b) excused Trump for the three matters Mueller determined had sufficient facts to satisfy each element of the crime of obstruction of justice, are now inconsistently celebrating this charge. I disagree that this charge is not serious. If guilty, this is a big deal.
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2022
    • Winner Winner x 2
  18. Trickster

    Trickster Premium Member

    6,774
    1,683
    3,203
    Sep 20, 2014
    You've got me stumped on the meaning of these.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. l_boy

    l_boy 5500

    7,942
    716
    2,118
    Jan 6, 2009
    There most definitely was collusion loosely defined. Trump called for Russians to hack DNC servers, and the Russians did within days. Trumps kid met with Russian representatives about the potential for dirt on Hillary. Manafort had clear Russian ties and conflicts of interest Russian hackers put pro Trump disinformation on social media. Putin was quite clearly in favor of Trump vs Hillary, and Trump often spoke glowingly of Putin. Not to mention a long history of business ties (legal and potentially illegal ) between Trump and the Russians.

    So there was a clear pattern of loose collusion. But collusion per se is not a crime. What there was not was sufficient evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy to commit election fraud with a foreign power.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Wish I would have said that Wish I would have said that x 1
  20. GatorNorth

    GatorNorth Premium Member Premium Member

    14,207
    7,179
    3,203
    Apr 3, 2007
    Atlanta
    process criMes

    BIg deal

    try to keep up :):)
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1