Posted on 05/14/2022 10:12:34 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Special Counsel John Durham appears to have methodically built a case of historic consequence. It’s just not the case he has brought against bigshot Democratic Party lawyer Michael Sussmann.
Jury selection begins in Sussmann’s trial on Monday, in Washington, DC. It will be the first trial to arise out of the Russiagate probe, which began over three years ago. That’s when former Trump Attorney General Bill Barr assigned Durham, a longtime Justice Department prosecutor from Connecticut, to investigate how, in the middle of a heated presidential campaign and based upon scant evidence, the FBI came to suspect one of the candidates of being a clandestine agent of the Kremlin — to the point of opening counterintelligence and criminal investigations targeting Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.
According to court filings in the Sussmann case, Durham has fingered the Hillary Clinton campaign as the culprit. The problem is that Durham has not charged that fraudulent scheme. Yet, he wants to offer evidence of the sweeping scheme in order to prove a comparatively minor and narrow offense — namely, that Sussmann lied to the FBI at a single meeting, on September 19, 2016.
Durham theorizes that the Clinton campaign concocted a political smear that Trump was a Putin puppet, then peddled the tale to a compliant media and to the FBI. This would enable Clinton to tout the “evidence” of corrupt Trump-Russia ties as so serious that the Feds were investigating.
Durham contends that the Clinton campaign left most of the scandal-mongering to its lawyers. Thus did Sussmann become central to the scheme, as did his law partner, Marc Elias. (Both attorneys have since left their white shoe international law firm, Perkins-Coie.) The deployment of lawyers in their schemes and scandals is a time-tested Clinton modus operandi, enabling them to claim attorney-client privilege to cover their...
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
We will finally see Clinton in an orange jumpsuit when she dies of old age and shes in her coffin
I have nothing but respect for Andy McCarthy, who is a great lawyer and occasionally a pretty good writer. But he has a uniquely irritating way of deflating and diffusing his own points to the point where reading his material is inevitably a less than satisfactory experience.
Once Sussman is convicted about lying about not working for Clinton, then the rest of the evidence between Sussmann, Perkins-Coie, Marc Elias, the DNC, and the Clinton campaign become relevant.
I'm sure the DC jury will know this and try to nullify the verdict to prevent Clinton from being connected to Sussmann's scheme.
-PJ
Been waiting and waiting.
Maybe Durham is pulling punches in order to make stepwise progress in the jury room...
I really don’t think Sussman is going to sit back and take the rap, esp if it comes out that he’ll do time, lose his license go to jail etc.
I’m betting he turns on the Clintons. What sense does it make to fight this, when it’s obvious he’s guilty as hell....
Would you prefer that he used a cigar...?
im still digging through the pile of horse manure hoping there is a pony in there :)
Well played!
Sounds like living in horse manure is SOP for you.
The judge won’t let Durham introduce evidence going to the conspiracy because he hasn’t charged conspiracy.
Simple solution: charge conspiracy. Either you get to bring in the conspiracy evidence or you get to expose a Rat judge’s true colors, giving you grounds for appeal if you lose.
Durham has been doing a good job, but he doesn’t seem to understand how to play hardball.
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.