Posted on 09/29/2021 2:53:19 PM PDT by lasereye
This is the third in a series of articles analyzing the 27-page federal grand jury indictment charging lawyer Michael Sussmann with making a false statement to the FBI. The second article analyzed the indictment’s detailed factual averments that spelled out how Sussmann and others conspired to concoct a false but “plausible” narrative purportedly demonstrating the existence of a secret channel of internet communications between the Trump Organization, owned by Donald Trump, and the Russian Alfa Bank. The article ended at the point where Sussmann was about to meet with James Baker, the general counsel of the FBI.
At the meeting, Sussmann allegedly delivered to Baker deceptive “white papers,” documents and computer data that were calculated to trigger an FBI investigation of the purported Trump-Alfa Bank connection.
snip
So, what happened when Sussmann met with Baker? The indictment avers some very unusual circumstances.
First, according to the indictment, when Baker and Sussmann met, “[n]o one else attended the meeting.” (Emphasis added)
How did that happen? When interviewing even the lowliest witness, the FBI always works in pairs. One agent does the questioning while the other takes notes.
But here, when a lawyer from a “major international law firm” representing the Clinton Campaign met with the FBI’s top lawyer during the Presidential campaign, no one else was present to document what transpired. Why?
Did Baker know in advance why Sussmann wanted to meet? If so, why wouldn’t Baker require the presence of a witness to document what was to transpire?
Second, why did Baker even agree to the meeting? Doesn’t the FBI have plenty of trained, perfectly competent special agents who gather facts and document their findings?
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
In a just world it would be a final cigarette a blindfold and a firing squad.
100% of FBI employees need to be fired. Sell the building.
Then gut DOJ.
And that b**ch would be brought to justice and I can finally change my tagline. 11 YEARS I’ve had that tagline
Thanks for posting this. I want to go read the three articles.
There is also a really interesting and long article from Real Clear Politics Investigations by Paul Sperry - a Hoover Institute fellow and investigative journalist featured in the NY Post and WSJ among other places. He names the entire crew we all have known - from Sussman to NSA Director Sullivan to FBI honchos Baker and Preibus to Clinton attorney Marc Elias and many others.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3998904/posts
She just trotted off to Ireland.
I think she knew it was only a matter of time before she
became a pariah in the United States, one way or another.
So What!, they all engaged in a Seditious Conspiracy to Overthrow The United States Presidency, If we lived in a Nation of Laws, it might mean something, but we Live in a Nation of Men, and the Law means what we want it to mean when we want it to, got i.
Hopefully her plane gets diverted to Haiti. I know a few Haitians who would love to see her not exactly healthy because of that $3.6 billion the Clinton crime foundation made disappear. It amazes me how the media ignores that.
Would love to see her answer for that one too.
Instead, we live in a country where if you point out their sedition, they accuse you of sedition for pointing out their sedition.
.
Anyone that read one article on this in 2016 knows that Sussman was a partner with the FBi.
Durham is making out that’s not the case, but that doesn’t jive with the disparity of treatment with Hillary and the Podestas.
Strzok even had to lie and say he was overworked to explain why Hillary got all the breaks, while Strzok was traveling to England to get foreign spies to do his bidding on the Get Trump Op.
The Elephant in the room is that Sussman had willing partners in the FBi and DoJ.
.
And when such duplicitousness is portrayed in films, what remedies seem to be the most necessary?
I never understood why the Trump campaign did not make an issue of the Clintons’ handling of Haiti relief in the 2016 campaign. They may not have gotten any black Americans to vote for Trump if they had pounded Hillary on that issue, but they might have persuaded a lot of black Americans not to vote for her.
Uday and Qusay have nothing on how that miscreant will fight to avoid capture.
Numerous fibbers were involved from the start, including Comey and McCabe.
Yeah, they are conspirators.
The smear campaign was laughable until the cia ,fbi, and justice department made it look serious……it wasn’t just the Clinton campaign thvolved in the smear
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.