Skip to comments.Former DNI Ratcliffe says he's given Durham 1,000 intel documents he thinks support more charges
Posted on 10/13/2021 7:14:00 PM PDT by bitt
Ratcliffe said former Justice official Michael Sussmann just "the first of what I would hope would be a number" of others charged in Russia probe.
Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe says he's given John Durham, special counsel investigating the Russia collusion probe, a trove of documents that he thinks support charges beyond those recently filed against cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussman.
"Sussmann's is the first of what I would hope would be a number" of additional people charged, he told Fox News on Sunday.
Ratcliffe made the argument on what he said was "1,000 intelligence community documents" that he thinks support additional charges that he would "expect" Durham to bring, in addition to the declassified documents he's provided.
Durham, a former U.S Attorney for the District of Connecticut, was appointed by the Trump administration to look into the origins of the federal investigation into whether the 2016 Trump presidential campaign colluded with Russia to influence the outcome of the election.
A grand jury recently indicted Sussmann, a former federal prosecutor, for lying to the FBI.
Ratcliffe, who oversaw the country's 17 intelligence agencies in the latter part of the Trump administration, announced in October that he handed over the roughly 1,000 pages of materials to the Justice Department to assist with Durham's investigation, according to the Washington Examiner.
Ratcliffe has also declassified two heavily redacted Russia-related documents, including handwritten notes from former CIA Director John Brennan showing he briefed then-President Barack Obama in 2016 on an unverified Russian intelligence report claiming former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton planned in July 2016 on tying then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia's hack of the Democratic National Committee to distract from her improper use of a private email server, the Examiner also reports.
Rosenstein, Papadopoulos set to give closed-door testimony to House committees this week
“For more than a year, congressional panels investigating Russian interference have wanted to speak with Papadopoulos about his outreach to two Russian nationals during the campaign, as well as his interactions with a London-based professor, Joseph Mifsud, who told him in April 2016 that the Russians had dirt on then-Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of her emails.”.....
h/t Ymani Cricket
Durham is in a difficult position with almost no support from the DOJ. He has to figure out a way to start taking down the deep state and half of America muttering "It'll never happen! Aint ginna happen, etc!" and pretty much no support from the pubbies or the judiciary who want to protect their buddies who will get them their high paying Law firm partnerships someday!
BREAKING NEWS!!! EARTH SHATTERING!!!
Seriously (seriesly), doeas anyone REALLY believe anymore that there’s an honest, unbiased, fair justice system in this country anymore?
Is there a democrat anywhere in this country that could be prosecuted for anything? Certainly not with a guilty or the defendant ever be held for consequences of their actions?
Durham’s odd strategy of letting everyone claim memory issues after 6-7 years.
Lois Lerner - over 7 years and they closed the investigation quietly on a Friday afternoon.
“Durham is in a difficult position with almost no support from the DOJ.”
Bull hockey. He’s “independent” with an unlimited budget. He’s already let one guy walk with a slap on the wrist. The best indicator of future behavior is past behavior.
And we have seen Durham past behavior.
Still subject to DOJ oversight and firing if the Ds want to take the heat and be obstructionists. The JUDGE, an Obama appointee, not Durham, let Clinesmith's go with a slap on the wrist. A Leftist supporting a Leftist.
"U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia James Boasberg on Friday during Clinesmith's sentencing hearing said Clinesmith had suffered by losing his job and standing in the eye of a media hurricane.
Boasberg gave him 12 months probation, 400 hours of community service, and no fine.
Government prosecutors had been asking for Clinesmith to spend several months in jail, but Clinesmith's defense had been advocating for probation only.
"[He] lost his job, and his government service is what has given his life much of its meaning," Boasberg said Friday. "He was also earning $150,000 a year and who knows where the earnings go now. He may be disbarred or suspended from the practice of law, you may never be able to work in the national security field again. These are substantial penalties."
Boasberg added: "What is more, he went from being an obscure career government lawyer to standing in the eye of a media hurricane. He has been threatened, vilified and abused on a nationwide scale."
Umm. Poor baby!
"snip....In sparing Kevin Clinesmith incarceration, the Presiding Judge of the FISA Court has set a standard: government officials who lie and alter evidence in pursuit of secret warrants against U.S. citizens will not be imprisoned."
This is the kind of enviornment Durham has to work in.
“The JUDGE, an Obama appointee, not Durham, let Clinesmith’s go with a slap on the wrist.”
Did Durham object? Pound the table? Appeal?
Nope, nope, and nope.
“He may be disbarred or suspended from the practice of law,…”
He wasn’t and Durham didn’t even try to make it happen. Not even a complaint to the Bar. Nothing.
“In sparing Kevin Clinesmith incarceration, the Presiding Judge of the FISA Court has set a standard: government officials who lie and alter evidence in pursuit of secret warrants against U.S. citizens will not be imprisoned.”
And Durham didn’t make this point at any time. Not once.
Pinning hope on Durham is foolish.
I’m sure Merrick Garland will get right on it. 🙄
"Kevin Clinestmith, a former FBI lawyer who was convicted of altering an email in connection with the surveillance of former Trump aide Carter Page, will lose his law license for one year.
The D.C. Court of Appeals on Thursday approved the suspension, which was approved and recommended by a legal disciplinary committee as part of a negotiated settlement last month.
In the order, the Court of Appeals judge said they “agree the proposed sanction is not unduly lenient or inconsistent with dispositions imposed for comparable professional misconduct,” Reuters reports.
Clinesmith was sentenced to 12 months of probation and 400 hours of community service on Jan. 29 for altering an email used to seek the continued surveillance of Page. The email suggested that Page was not a source for the CIA, even though he had a relationship with the agency.
In June, Clinestmith agreed to the one-year suspension of his law license. The suspension is retroactive to start in August 2020.
Clinesmith faces a two-year suspension as part of a separate disciplinary deal in Michigan.
Last month, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility noted that Clinesmith showed remorse and had no prior disciplinary history.
“All of the evidence regarding respondent’s intent supports the contention that he did not act with fraudulent intent,” the committee said"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Pinning hope on Durham is foolish." I see your anger at the liberal judge's left side blindness and non-sentance. Who on FR isn't? Does everyone on FR have to denounce Durham to avoid being called foolish?? (in your eyes??) I don't know anyone here who doesn't pretty much fall in the category of observer.
“Does everyone on FR have to denounce Durham to avoid being called foolish??”
Only if they want to be taken seriously, I guess. Durham could have raised holy hell about it. But he didn’t. He acquiesced to a plain and in our faces double standard of “justice”.
Let’s see if any of those folks who have been languishing in the DC jail over January 6 get such deals.
And her boss, Eric Koskinen, lied his a$$ off to Congress.
Sometimes you need to choose your battles. His attorney may have to go to trial in front of this judge again and that trial might be the hill to die on. We will see what happens.
“Sometimes you need to choose your battles.”
This is the one he should have chosen. It established a precedent.
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.