Posted on 06/01/2022 5:47:33 AM PDT by MarvinStinson
Former White House national security official Kash Patel called on the U.S. Department of Justice ) to move its Russia hoax trials outside of the Washington D.C. area after a “tainted” jury acquitted Michael Sussmann.
Sussman, former Hillary Clinton Campaign lawyer, was prosecuted on charges of lying to the FBI as part of John Durham’s investigation into the “Russia collusion” hoax. However, a jury acquitted Sussman on these charges after a full trial.
Sussmann gave the FBI data that had been produced by researchers working with the campaign and that purported to link Trump to Russia via Alfa Bank. The accusation was soon found to be groundless, but was part of the overall “Russia collusion” conspiracy theory the Clinton campaign used to smear Trump.
During Sussman’s trial the prosecution used Patel's four-year-old interview with Sussman as evidence. Patel helped then-Rep. Devin Nunes investigate the “Russia collusion” hoax while Nunes served on the House Intelligence Committee. Sussman told the committee he “was working for a client when he went to the FBI claiming that computer evidence showed then-candidate Trump was tied to the Russian government via Alfa Bank.”
“I was the last man who had any faith in D.C. and the Department of Justice. It is now completely gone,” Patel said.
“The D.C. tainted jury pool showed its political stripes and barely deliberated,” Patel said. “Having jury members on a case of this caliber that have donated to such high profile Democrats including Hillary and AOC is beyond unethical.”
“They violated the law and they violated the oaths they took to sit on the jury,” he added.”
Patel also called out Durham and the prosecution for losing a case that “should have been a lock” in light of the “indisputable” evidence.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Patel said:
The lie was shown to them in black and white and the evidence was indisputable. This was a case that should have been a lock for the prosecution as the evidence showed completely clear links and trails of data that linked Sussmann to the Hillary Clinton Campaign including billing the hard drive to the campaign.
He went on to call on the DOJ to remove the hoax cases from D.C.’s jurisdiction.
“The DOJ needs to move these cases out of D.C. as it is 100% impossible to have a fair trial in the city. I am appalled at this verdict and appalled at our justice system,” Patel concluded.
Exactly my first question this morning...Can the trials be moved to another state?
The goateed scumbag from Connecticut got exactly the jury he wanted.
And not a Deep Blue state.
The US constitution specifies the location for criminal trial, “such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed.”
Washington, DC is a sanctuary city for government malfeasors. Like a pirate enclave.
Even a casual, not too bright observer like me knew a DC jury would acquit. I don’t know the requirements, but a change of venue was the only chance.
4 of 5 on the jury donated to Hillary. The judge is married to Lisa Page’s lawyer.
I can only conclude that they didn’t really want a guilty verdict.
Not if the crime is committed in Washington DC. You have to be prosecuted in the judicial district where the crime was committed.
Damn the evidence. Full speed ahead toward Communism!
Gee Kash, finally swallowed that “red pill”?
This may become a useful precedent, which will backfire on the Left.
Maybe but not easily. US Constitution says criminal trials SHALL be conducted in the state the crime took place. Defendant may have the power to remove on account of the local venue being biased.
Citations at Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 18
We no longer have a free country. It is a corrupt banana republic.
Do unto others, but do it first! Kill or be killed. That kind of savagery.
The jury determined that lying to the FBI is no big deal.
This may become a useful precedent, which will backfire on the Left.
Calling General Flynn, pick up the white phone.
Unless, of course, you're a decorated, but conservative, General.
When a trial in a State provides an innocent verdict and THE Beast disagrees, they bring Federal charges. Why can’t a State do the same in a case like this?
You will turn in your AR-15s to ensure "public safety", abandon your suburban homes for "social equity", wear your masks to "bend the curve", get rid of your SUVs and hamburgers to "save the planet", and stop spreading "misinformation" to .... well just do it and be happy !!!
This is true but the bigger problem is people in government both elected and appointed who have violated their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and U.S. laws. When institutions like the AG and FBI, which should be apolitical become political, we become a totalitarian state. This is what has happened. The problem is that the ones who should be prosecuting these traitors are the traitors themselves, e.g., AG Garland.
All individuals in government who have violated/disregarded their Oath of Office need to be removed, pay stopped, arrested and tried as Traitors/Terrorist against we the people and the Nation of the United States of America. This is what needs to be done. Will it be done? It will take a miracle or civil war.
DC is not a State, it is simply the capitol city for the country. As such EVERY state should be able to get a slice of the accused. It is simply how they do it with State cases.
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.