Posted on 09/30/2021 9:20:13 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I reported on September 16 that the Durham investigation into the Russia probe finally came in with a second indictment and this one touched someone of substance – Michael Sussman, a partner in Perkins Coie, the law firm for both the DNC and Hillary Clinton. Sussman later resigned from the firm after the indictment came down.
The charge was that he made a false statement to the FBI, telling the FBI that he wasn’t representing the Clinton 2016 campaign when he was spreading the false stories about the Trump Organization and a Russian bank when actually he was working the Clinton Campaign.
“Sussmann’s statement to the FBI General Counsel that he was not acting on behalf of any client was knowingly and intentionally false. In truth and in fact, and as Sussmann well knew, Sussmann acted on behalf of and in coordination with two specific clients of Law Firm-1, i.e., Tech Executive-1 and the Clinton Campaign, in assembling and conveying these allegations. In particular, and as also alleged above, Tech Executive-1 consulted and relied on Sussmann as his lawyer to assist in disseminating the Russian Bank-1 allegations,” the indictment says.
That indictment was big – finally touching the Clinton world, something we all knew, but making it official.
So the question was would there be anything more? Would there be other big names? The indictment suggested they might be more coming.
Now there’s some more information on the case and yes, it definitely indicates that Durham thinks there is more.
According to National Review, there was a new set of subpoenas issued earlier this month, after Sussman was charged.
Durham is seeking more documents from Perkins Coie. So the question is are they looking into more charges or issues with Sussman or in regard to someone else
Additionally, what has come out since is the identity of “Tech Executive-1” who has been identified in reporting as Rodney Joffe. Fox is reporting that Joffe has also gotten a subpoena.
Special Counsel Durham has issued at least one more subpoena, this to Perkins Coie, a law firm connected to Clinton 2016 campaign, according to sources familiar. Tech exec Rodney Joffe also received a subpoena. A source says he was mentioned in Sussman’s indictment, not by name.
— Jake Gibson (@JakeBGibson) September 30, 2021
Durham noted Joffe initially hired Sussmann in February 2015 “in connection with a matter involving an agency of the U.S. government,” and Sussmann “frequently served as outside counsel to Internet Company-1, which was a significant source of revenue” for himself and Perkins Coie. Durham said Joffe served as Sussmann’s “primary point of contact at Internet Company-1” during the relevant 2016 and 2017 time frame.
Durham said a computer researcher who goes by the moniker “Tea Leaves” — dubbed “Originator 1” in the indictment — was a “business associate” of Joffe’s and “assembled purported DNS data reflecting apparent DNS lookups between” Alfa Bank and an alleged Trump Organization email domain, with data spanning early May to late July 2016. Durham said Joffe “and others” were in possession of the “Russian Bank Data” by July 2016.
Joffe alerted Sussmann about the Alfa Bank claims by July 2016, Durham said, and “over the ensuing weeks, and as part of their lawyer-client relationship,” Sussmann and Joffe “engaged in efforts with Campaign Lawyer-1” — identifiable as former Perkins Coie lawyer and Clinton campaign general counsel.
“Individuals acting on behalf of the Clinton Campaign to share information about the Russian Bank Data with the media and others, claiming that it demonstrated the existence of a secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russian Bank-1,” according to the report.
Christopher Steele’s ‘research’ was funded by the Clinton campaign through Fusion GPS which had been hired by Marc Elias, who worked for Perkins Coie and was the general counsel for Clinton’s presidential campaign.
Hillary Clinton and Jake Sullivan (who is now Joe Biden’s National Security Adviser) both promoted the fake Alfa-Bank smear that Clinton had allegedly set in motion.
Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank. pic.twitter.com/8f8n9xMzUU
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) November 1, 2016
The billing is where they are getting Sussman. Like a lawyer, he billed for everything, according to the indictment.
Sussman billed the Clinton Campaign for a meeting with Joffe and Elias on Aug. 12, 2016, as well as for a conference call they had later in the day.
Sussman met with Elias on Aug. 19 for a “meeting with Rodney” and that was also billed to the Clinton campaign.
The indictment showed other billing to the campaign based on “disseminating” the Alfa Bank allegation on Sept. 17 and 18, 2016. Then perhaps most significantly, he even billed the Clinton Campaign for his meeting with the FBI’s James Baker to weaponize the claim to the FBI, billing it as “work and communications regarding the confidential project.”
Can I dare to even hope that finally the “confidential project” will suffer some consequences even after all this time and under the Biden Administration? This is looking very positive.
Shades of Al Capone.
Like a lawyer indeed.
P
I sense the Clintons are all alone. Obama's progressive faction, with Biden on strings, want the Clintons gone. Cuomo has been taken down. They're taking down the Clintons now.
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?
“Confidential Project” ……..conspiracy……..RICO????
Hillary Clinton backs ending filibuster, says GOP ‘does not respect the rule of law’
Bueler, Bueler, which law firm was behind almost every one of the 2020 lawsuits to get states voting laws changed and the post election challenges? Perkins Coie. Scum of the earth and evil.
I think you're right PGR - making a false statement to the corrupt FBI ONLY matters if white liberal 'elite' thugs WANT it to matter. So maybe finally (God Willing) and the Sun don't shine - the scum of the earth Clintons will end their reign of filth...
Post 4 - Liz
Where is the link to the quoted transcript?
Thanks, ptsal
See post #6 for link.
Time for Biden to step in and stop this witch hunt. The Clinton are untouchable.
Criminal activity is NOT PROTECTED by Attorney Client privilege.
The fur will start to fly when the subpoena of documents are contested on evidentiary grounds. They can’t use atty/client privilege but they CAN say that the documents are not related to the facts alleged and are sspurious. If the objections to the subpoena come before a Clinton.Obama appointed jusge, like say, Sullivan, the this is going to be a very slow walk indeed as the evidentiary issues are appealed all the way to SCOTUS.
Too bad the FBI is now a leftist agency, or Sussman would be in solitary confinement after a 4 am arrest like Trump supporters endured, with CNN present, all for minor infractions.
It’s all coming together. Red October.
Thanks, Liz, for both the short and long version of Pelosi explaining how they destroy reputations in politics. Someone once named it “a high tech lynching”.
High tech lynching describes it well.
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.