Posted on 09/30/2021 9:44:30 PM PDT by yesthatjallen
Special counsel John Durham has handed down another round of subpoenas — including one targeting a law firm tied to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign — in his investigation into the origins of the FBI probe into claims former President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russian officials, according to a new report.
CNN reported Thursday that some of the subpoenas, which were issued earlier this month, demand documents from powerful Democratic law firm Perkins Coie — which had close ties to Clinton’s presidential bid.
On Sept. 16, a federal grand jury indicted Perkins Coie cybersecurity attorney Michael Sussmann on a single charge of making a false statement to the FBI.
According to the indictment, Sussmann told FBI General Counsel James A. Baker that “he was not acting on behalf of any client” when he informed Baker in September 2016 of purported ties between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank.
However, the indictment claims, Sussman had been retained by the Democratic National Committee in April 2016 after its email servers were hacked by groups affiliated with Moscow. He was also advising the Clinton campaign “in connection with cybersecurity issues.”
In addition, Sussmann was representing Rodney Joffe, then a senior vice president at Virginia-based tech company Neustar, who claimed that he had been “tentatively offered the top [cybersecurity] job by the Democrats when it looked like they’d win [in 2016].
SNIP
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
He was outed over a week ago. Technofog on twitter is very good, and not a Qook.
What’s this? Durham’s not done after all? Some will be quite shocked.
Recommended reading: The Pit and the Pendulum
Swish, swish, slice
Please let Sussman’s evil partner Marc Elias be indicted.
Durham isn’t gong to do much and the clock is ticking. That is the lawyer from the law firm laundering money for the Russia Collusion Hoax.
He was also behind the vote by mail fraud Rat plan.
We could really use a little justice.
Is there anyone who works for the Clintons who has not been brought down by their association with them?
I am dumbfounded at the long list of people who willingly disgrace themselves to be around them.
Who knows, but Hillary Clinton may now be spending time in front of a mirror practicing different ways of saying with a straight face: "I cannot remember, specifically, but I do not think I would ever do anything like that because it could be illegal."
Not holding my breath. If you are a Clinton you could get the taxpayers to buy you blowj0bs and be proclaimed a hero.
That statute is a dud from the FDR era, poorly written, ambiguous. Durham wouldn’t waste resources with it.
Here’s a good backgrounder on its deficiencies:
https://volokh.com/2011/12/07/did-newt-gingrich-break-the-law-with-his-bolton-promise-no/
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/nancy-pelosi-wrap-up-smear
Did Nancy Pelosi Admit Democrats Use a Tactic Called the ‘Wrap-Up Smear?’
Unreliable sources claimed Pelosi admitted on video that Democrats use such a tactic, but in reality she ascribed it to Republicans.
David Emery, Published 8 October 2018
Origin
President Trump’s second nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court, Judge Brett Kavanaugh, was confirmed by the Senate in October 2018 after a contentious hearing process upended by allegations of sexual assault and a supplementary investigation by the FBI.
Kavanaugh’s accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, testified under oath that he had sexually assaulted her at a party in 1982, an accusation the nominee vehemently denied. The FBI failed to corroborate Ford’s testimony, paving the way for a close, largely party line vote in favor of confirmation on 6 October.
All along, partisan supporters of Kavanaugh had portrayed Dr. Ford as a dupe, at best, in an alleged conspiracy by Democrats to derail the nomination by smearing his reputation. The day Kavanaugh was confirmed, a video clip began making the rounds in which House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California) could allegedly be heard revealing the Democratic Party’s template for such attacks, a tactic she called the “wrap-up smear”:
Shocking video from 2017 shows @NancyPelosi describing the Democrat attack plan called the “Wrap-up Smear” 👀👀👀 (the technique used against Justice Brett Kavanaugh)#movingUSforward 🇺🇸 pic.twitter.com/oVhK4cuoTw
— THE SCOOP (@TheScoop_US) October 8, 2018
A version of the clip also appeared on hyperpartisan websites such as InfoWars.com, where it accompanied an article saying that Pelosi’s description was “eerily similar to what we saw happen to Justice Brett Kavanaugh”:
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi revealed a shady tried-and-true Democrat demonization tactic in 2017 called the “wrap-up smear.”
“We call it the ‘wrap-up smear.’ You smear somebody, with falsehoods and all the rest, and then you merchandise it,” Pelosi said at a press conference last year.
“And then you write it, and then they’ll say ‘See? It’s reported in the press that this, this, this and this,’ so they have that validation that the press reported the smear, and then it’s called the ‘wrap-up smear.’ Now I’m going to merchandise the press’s report on the smear that we made.”
Sounds eerily similar to what we saw happen to Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation process.
The clips are authentic in the respect that they were extracted from an actual C-SPAN video of Pelosi’s weekly press briefing on 22 June 2017, but seriously misleading in the respect that they were trimmed in such a way as to omit their original context.
As a longer clip and transcript clearly show, Pelosi was calling out Republicans for conducting wrap-up smear campaigns, not touting the phenomenon as a go-to strategy for Democrats:
PELOSI: Because, basically, at the end of the day that’s what people are interested in — their representative and what their representative is going to do for their district. Republicans are afraid of that contrast in a race. Because they’re going to go there to be involved in trickle-down economics, shutting down hospitals, and the rest of it. So they don’t want them to see that contrast, so they focus on something else. And it’s a diversionary tactic. It’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
(” You demonize, and then you — we call it the wrap-up smear. You want to talk about politics? It’s called the wrap-up smear. You smear somebody with falsehoods and all the rest, and then you merchandise it, and then you write it, and they’ll say “See, it’s reported in the press that this, this, and this,” so they have that validation that the press reported the smear, and then it’s called a wrap-up smear. “Now I’m going to merchandise the press’s report on the smear that we made.” It’s a tactic, and it’s self-evident.
In fact, this wasn’t the first time Pelosi brought up the term “wrap-up smear” specifically to describe Republican political tactics. In this 6 March 2017 exchange between Pelosi and CNN news anchor Jake Tapper, she claimed President Trump used such a smear tactic against former president Barack Obama:
TAPPER: So, let’s start with President Trump’s allegation, so far evidence-free, that President Obama sought to have him wiretapped during the campaign. You’re part of the Gang of Eight. That’s a group of House and Senate leaders, both the leadership and the leadership of the Intelligence Committees, that would be privy, one suspects, to such information. Do you have any idea what he’s talking about?
PELOSI: Well, the president, you know, is the deflector in chief, anything to change the subject from where the heat is. And, as one who has been engaged in intelligence, a member of the Gang of Eight, for a long time, I can tell that it’s just ridiculous for the president, President Trump, to say that President Obama would ever order any wiretap of an American citizen, any president. That’s just not — we don’t do that.
And, so, this is — it’s called a wrap-up smear. You make up something. Then you have the press write about it. And then you say, everybody is writing about this charge.
It’s a tool of an authoritarian, to just have you always be talking about what you want them to be talking about. Rather than Russia, we’re talking about, did President Obama do thus and so?
Yet the statute remains on the books and would offer a predicate for investigative effort. Indeed, many a questionable criminal statute ends up passing muster in specific cases because the facts as applied fit within constitutional parameters. And a prosecution based on a private promise of employment to Joffe would escape Volokh’s criticism of a prosecution for a public suggestion of post-campaign employment and would benefit from justification as an exemplary anti-corruption measure.
Looks like you’re attempting a shoehorn fit of the statute to Joffe who said he was offered the job by “Democrats” and not by a particular candidate.
It’s a dud Jim.
Joffe is not under indictment but he might be soon but not because of that dud statute but because he lied or manufactured a link between computers in Trump Tower and the Russian controlled Alfa Bank.
True enough, but keep in mind that Durham, like all good prosecutors, will look for all possible grounds of prosecution in order to provide the widest basis for investigation.
Looks to me that he is building a RICO case, one block at a time.
“ Looks to me that he is building a RICO case, one block at a time.”
Really? Because it looks to me like he’s slow walking this thing until it dies.
L
I would say that “indicted co-conspirators”, as listed in Sussmann’s indictment), subpoenas for law firm documents, (can’t get them without breaking the attorney-client privilege, which he seems to have done with the firms billing records), subpoenas alleged in this article and Grand Jury testimony he already has gotten, all points to a RICO case being built.
I agree with you.
Never mind the Eeyores here on FR who let the corrupt system beat them down over the years. They could see Obozo himself perp-walked and would whine about how Hillary was still walking free. Downers be downers
Let's hope Durham takes down the most corrupt political machine since Chicago's Daley (the first)... and all the filth that kept the Clinton machine oiled.
Let's hope Durham takes down the most corrupt political machine since Chicago's Daley (the first)... and all the filth that kept the Clinton machine oiled.
They weren't hacked and Seth Rich was not affiliated with Moscow.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.