Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: gubamyster

Don’t blame Durham.

He had a biased judge and a biased jury.

Durham Trials Track Trails Through Washington Swamps

https://www.newsmax.com/larrybell/dossier-obama-sullivan/2022/05/25/id/1071483/

The next trial is not in DC.


6,782 posted on 05/31/2022 9:33:18 AM PDT by Lakeside Granny (Vote RED~R.emove E.very D.emocrat~D&S)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6778 | View Replies ]


To: Lakeside Granny

Maybe he could have done something about who was on the jury, don’cha think?


6,783 posted on 05/31/2022 9:34:15 AM PDT by dfwgator (Endut! Hoch Hech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6782 | View Replies ]

To: Lakeside Granny

The next trial is not in DC.


That’s good news.


6,785 posted on 05/31/2022 9:37:32 AM PDT by Jane Long (What we were told was a “conspiracy theory” in 2020 is now fact. 🙏🏻 Ps 33:12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6782 | View Replies ]

To: Jane Long; All

What Durham proved

by Byron York, Chief Political Correspondent
May 31, 2022 11:08 AM

WHAT DURHAM PROVED. The trial of Michael Sussmann is before a jury in Washington, D.C. Sussmann is the Democratic lawyer who, according to special counsel John Durham, lied to the FBI in 2016 when, working on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign, he tried to plant a derogatory story about Donald Trump. The hope was that the FBI would start an investigation and then the campaign conversation would be: TRUMP IS UNDER FBI INVESTIGATION!

There is no doubt Sussmann lied to the FBI. There is no doubt he is guilty. But the trial is taking place in Washington, perhaps the deepest-blue jury pool in the United States. Durham’s prosecutors are “facing a jury that has three Clinton donors, an AOC donor, and a woman whose daughter is on the same sports team as Sussmann’s daughter,” George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said recently on Fox News. “With the exception of randomly selecting people out of DNC headquarters, you could not come up with a worse jury.”

So the jury might reject Durham’s evidence — juries are free to do that. Or it might convict. Whatever it does, though, Durham has already made some important points about the actions of the Clinton campaign in the 2016 election.

Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!

The biggest point Durham has made is that an arm of the Clinton campaign developed a strategy to weaponize the FBI to investigate Clinton’s political opponent. Starting around the time of the 2016 Democratic convention, with the Russian hack of Democratic National Committee emails, the Clinton campaign made a concerted effort to accuse Trump falsely of acting in collusion with Russia. At the Sussmann trial, Robby Mook, Clinton’s campaign manager, testified that effort was focused on feeding information to reporters — the old-fashioned way to spread dirt.

But lawyers working for the campaign went beyond the old-fashioned way. They tried to enlist the FBI in the operation, to spur the investigation. That would turbocharge the story, allowing reporters to say the allegations were so serious that federal law enforcement was investigating.

That’s why, when a team of pro-Clinton researchers came up with a theory that there were suspicious computer connections between a Russian bank, Alfa-Bank, and the Trump campaign, Sussmann took it to the FBI. He did it on behalf of the Clinton campaign. He billed the campaign for the work. Yet he specifically told the FBI that he was not acting on behalf of the campaign, that he was just doing it as a concerned citizen. In September 2016, when Sussmann requested a meeting with then-FBI General Counsel James Baker, Sussmann texted, “Jim — it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss. Do you have availability for a short meeting tomorrow? I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau. Thanks.”

But Sussmann was doing it on behalf of a client — the Clinton campaign.

Besides showing that an arm of the Clinton campaign sought to weaponize the FBI, the Sussmann trial has shown that the FBI was eager to be weaponized. We learned that a senior FBI agent involved in the Trump-Russia investigation, Joe Pientka, sent a note to another agent about the Alfa-Bank tip: “People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server. Reachout and put tools on...it’s not an option — we must do it.” The FBI building’s seventh floor is where top management, including then-Director James Comey, had offices.

So those are two major revelations from the Sussmann trial: Elements in and around the Clinton campaign sought to weaponize the FBI, and the FBI welcomed the effort — all in the name of defeating the Republican nominee for president.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/what-durham-proved


6,786 posted on 05/31/2022 9:39:28 AM PDT by Lakeside Granny (Vote RED~R.emove E.very D.emocrat~D&S)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6782 | View Replies ]

To: Lakeside Granny

Just wait.....we’ll get them next time. For sure. 100% guarantee. Tik Toc.


6,790 posted on 05/31/2022 9:46:04 AM PDT by gubamyster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6782 | View Replies ]

To: Lakeside Granny

And the judge wouldn’t allow a key piece of evidence.


6,835 posted on 05/31/2022 11:43:21 AM PDT by Rusty0604 (" When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat." -Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6782 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson