Posted on 05/19/2022 3:41:03 PM PDT by T Ruth
A future ex-lawyer named Michael Sussmann is going to trial next week for his role in feeding the FBI bogus Russian collusion stories.
Those stories are scurrilous and vulgar lies which distracted the nation and the Trump administration for years and for which someone should be held accountable. But Sussmann was not the person who manufactured those lies. He was just the bag man who passed them on to the FBI.
And so those lies are not what Sussmann has been charged with. He’s been charged with a more pedestrian lie – the lie of telling the FBI he was not working for a client when in fact he was. Not just any client, but the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
He’s guilty as hell.
But in a broader sense, this bag man is just a fall guy. The FBI surely knew all along that he, his partner Marc Elias and their firm Perkins Coie ... were Democrat operatives. Everyone knew that.
So, if the FBI knew all along that Sussmann was lying, why did they generate numerous written records – in the form of otherwise irrelevant notes of the lie and Sussmann’s own text message (which may be something the FBI requested for this very purpose) – that he was not working for a client?
Here’s why. The FBI intended to, and did, present Sussmann’s bogus story to the FISA courts in order to obtain authorization and re-authorization to conduct surveillance on the Trump campaign. They knew the story would stink to high heaven if they told the court that it came from Hillary’s lawyers. So I speculate that they invited those lawyers – Sussmann et al – to say they weren’t representing Hillary in connection with the story.
***
(Excerpt) Read more at theaspenbeat.com ...
Where better to hide a criminal conspiracy than inside a ‘premier’ law enforcement organization? BRILLIANT!
The FBI pretending to take him serious, pretending to believe, is not entrapment. FBI active part was taking the known fiction and parlaying it into an offensive against the candidate and the president, even to the point of naming special counsel - all the while pretending the allegation might have merit. It's not Sussman who did the pretending, he just supported his buddies in the FBI being careful to not leave a track that would burn them. They are still all in it together, but need a fall guy. The government is never the fall guy.
Where better to hide a criminal conspiracy than inside a ‘premier’ law enforcement organization? BRILLIANT!
—
And if yo knows the FBI is committing a crime, who you gonna call? The FBI? The FBI is a taxpayer funded criminal organization.
I cannot see a way the fbi can regain the integrity they had in the sixties and seventies. Too corrupt now.
I doubt it had integrity then. They just hid it better, smaller adventures, etc.
Now it's declared war agianst half of the public. Pretty open about it, and never afraid to lie to get the win.
You may be right about the facts, but the commentator’s speculation — “So I speculate that they invited those lawyers – Sussmann et al – to say they weren’t representing Hillary in connection with the story.” — would be entrapment.
The biggest crooks in Special Counsel Durham’s investigation may be at the FBI
The best and funniest part of it all is, that no one ever goes to jail.
I agree with a hypothetical if the FBI overtly suggested “lie to us,” they can’t turn around and prosecute the lie.
If Sussman has evidence he was told to lie, he hasn’t presented it. Following the usual pattern, both sides claim gullibility and forgetfulness.
A book published in 1998:
Tainting Evidence : Behind the Scandals at the FBI Crime Lab
Disgusting and likely illegal or an ethics charge.
Remember, Trump requested this be dealt with and his DOJ and Bill Barr angrily refused and took Trumps complaints as false to the press. They were obstructing justice.
The FBI is an obstruction of justice.
This is SO RIGHT ON TARGET THAT I CANNOT BELIEVE IT.
Bingo, Eureka, Right On and any other exclamation you want.
WILL SOMEONE PAY A PRICE?
If the FBI were interested in Justice, it would use time stamped videos when it interviews anyone. Instead it has two agents take notes and then coordinate (falsify (?) slant (?) ) them after the interview. That may have been a good idea in the 1950’s but certainly not now.
“May” be the FBI? Duh!
That may have been a good idea in the 1950’s but certainly not now....
no excuse for not recording interviews these days especially since the fbi has been apparently making “mistakes” anyone who talks to them without their own recorder is asking for trouble
The ones I spoke to seemed professional and polite. That was a long time ago.
Durham’s main job is to protect the DOJ and FBI.
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.