Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gatormonk, Apr 5, 2022.
Yawn, the one prominent crooked political hack that gets convicted of anything will be the first.
So Durham spends a ton of government money to charge a lawyer in private practice on a questionable lying charge. I have not followed the details, but here’s what it sounds like. The guy is working for the Clinton campaign and DNC. He comes across information that he believes needs to be reported to the FBI because of possible Russian interference in the U.S. presidential election. However, he has an ethical obligation to inform his clients. He lets the clients know, and they say go ahead. He then tells the FBI that he is submitting the information in his individual capacity, not on behalf of a client. That sounds correct to me. Not guilty.
Are Batman and Superman involved?
I’ll never understand why citizen Trump has not been charged with obstruction. Mueller detailed incidents of it!
If it isn’t Trump, it will never be anyone.
Would it shock you to learn that Sussmann had already tried to feed these allegations of an Alfa Bank Trump link to the NYTimes in order to get them to publish the story before approaching the FBI? And that Sussmann was trying to get the FBI to contact the NYTimes to hold off on the story so they could look at allegations, knowing that the NYTimes would then run a story about how the FBI was looking into the allegations? That way the story was not the allegations but the fact the FBI was investigating them?
Manafort, Gates, Flynn, Papodopoulous, etc...
More from Fox:
Michael Sussmann acquitted by a jury of Hillary Clinton's peers
It is sad in this country that people will be manipulated by this. When Trump campaign was being investigated by the GOP appointed special prosecutor, he repeatedly referred to the angry democrats. As if there is a political litmus test. Flip the point: is membership in a political party a disqualification for service on a jury in an investigation that touches politics? Should the jury have just been Republicans? Under that level of scrutiny, the Defendant would complain he did not get a fair trial because the jury was Republicans. So, a free pass for everyone. Bear in mind, too, that there were 12 jurors on Sussman’s jury. Shame on Fox. But that is what draws in their viewers and readers. Read the article. It doesn’t even discuss the charge against Sussman— which was that Sussman lies about who he represented in connection with Alfa bank. Jarrett presents the trial as a referendum on the Clinton campaign’s use of the information.
I think they have long demonstrated they are immune to shame.
Just for the record, if anyone is still asking "how much longer are some posters going to be obsessed with Trump?!"
The answer seems to be, "for at least 6 years after his political career dies."
This political prosecution idea of Barr's was part of a concerted effort that has largely failed so far to erase the Trump/Russia 2016 link.
No one lied to the FBI. Most of the FBI investigators interviewed about this stated that they knew Sussman was a DNC lawyer, though ironically some didn't know what the DNC was.
Why am I not surprised? By the way Gregg Jarrett apparently decided that since he was indicted by Durham (technically the indictment of Sussmann was issued by a grand jury but as that famous legal scholar Joe DiGenova once observed (paraphrasing) a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich if so instructed by a prosecutor) he must be guilty. Although perhaps not technically Durham was a political appointee of Bill Barr and he was appointed to indict and prosecute.
Hilarious title and whacko write up. It was under Opinion section though.
Because SORE LOSER Donald won't just go away like other losers. He'd rather tear this country apart, LIE incessantly about nonexistent voter fraud, rile his deluded followers into a violent assault on Congress, try to overturn the legitimate election of his opponent, prepare to overturn the 2024 election by replacing honest election officials with MAGA sycophants, and turn the U.S into his own authoritarian third world country than admit that he LOST the election fair and square.
Would it shock you to know that Trump himself started the Russia Russia Russia story when he publicly asked Russia to interfere in the election on his behalf?
Would it shock you to know that Trump LIED to the American people about his financial ties with Russia?
Would it shock you to know that there were numerous ties between the Trump campaign and Russia throughout the 2016 campaign and that the Trump people consistently LIED about those ties, resulting in several convictions. (The list below leaves out the part where Manafort gave campaign info to a Russian operative.)
Trump has only himself to blame for the Russia Russia Russia story and subsequent investigations.
Short, layman's overview of yesterday's verdict:
The Humiliation of John Durham
I bothers me that Durham was tasked to find improprieties in the investigation into trump/Russia and tangible outputs seem to be limited to investigation of crimes during the investigation of the investigation (?). What a waste.
"Durham could have departed then, too, and saved himself further embarrassment. After all, the month before, Durham had obtained his one and only conviction, a guilty plea from then-FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith for lying to investigators in June 2017.
Still, a low-level FBI agent’s lie, nearly a year after the Trump-Russia investigation began, did nothing to prove that the FBI had launched the investigation illegitimately."
"The supposed lie for which Durham indicted Sussmann occurred in mid-September 2016—again, after the Trump-Russia investigation started on July 31. Sussmann went to a friend in the FBI—the bureau’s general counsel, James Baker—with a tip, allegedly saying that he was not offering the information “on behalf of any client.”"
Since the mods love editing in this thread, can they change the completely incorrect thread title also?