Jump to content

The Michael Sussman Trial: Special Counsel Durham's Probe Into The Origins of Russia Collusion Hoax.

BillsFanNC
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 318
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

All_Pro_Bills
All_Pro_Bills

First, even if those things were true, none of them absolve the Clinton campaign and the DNC from criminal conduct.  Lying to federal agents.  Feeding disinformation, known to be false about a politic

ChiGoose
ChiGoose

It is truly amazing that Hillary Clinton is so powerful that she controls all of Washington DC, the Democratic Party, the FBI, the Deep State, and other governments agencies to be named later. And she

BillsFanNC
BillsFanNC

To echo a refrain from my former non ghost "self"...   She wasn't supposed to lose.   If Hillary wins all of this massive corruption never sees the light of day. Trump shocks the w

Posted Images

ChiGoose Veteran

ChiGoose

Posted
Posted

From a former GOP oppo researcher: https://www.thebulwark.com/the-alfa-bank-hoax-hoax/

 

Quote

...testimony from Clinton 2016 campaign manager Robby Mook in which he revealed that the candidate was briefed on the potentially dubious Alfa Bank accusations and was fine with the campaign’s decision to share the information with reporters. (Point of fact: Many in the Trump orbit have stated that Clinton approved the Alfa Bank oppo’s dissemination, but Mook testified that he told her only after the campaign had shared it with a reporter.)

 

This rather mundane bit of opposition-research dissemination was treated as a bombshell in the conservative press, where it has been presented as the long-yearned-for evidence that when it comes to Russia’s involvement in the 2016 election, it was Hillary who perpetrated a scheme on poor innocent Donny Trump, not the other way around.

 

Quote

As this reporting was underway, [NYT reporter Eric] Lichtblau was called by an FBI official who asked him to come to the bureau’s headquarters. During that meeting the FBI asked Lichtblau to delay his story about the servers, as it might interfere with their ongoing investigation into the potential relationship between the Russians who were interfering in our elections and domestic contacts possibly associated with Trump.

 

The Times decided to honor this request after what executive editor Dean Baquet described as “a really intense debate,” since the paper had not determined the underlying reason for the server connection.

 

Quote

So throughout the final month before the 2016 election the paper of record sat on evidence of potential ties between Trump and Russia, doing nothing with it at the FBI’s behest—yet it reported extensively on the emails resulting from the Russian operation and how they were harming the Clinton campaign.

 

Meanwhile, the same FBI that had pressured the Times to avoid making public any information relevant to their investigation of ties between Trump and Russia did not show that same circumspection when it came to Clinton. The Comey letter to Congress about reopening the investigation into Clinton’s email server was published on October 28.

 

Sure doesn’t seem like all the players in this pro-Hillary cOnSpiRaCy were on the same page.

 

Conclusion:

Quote

So here’s the output from the elite media and deep state’s supposed plot to frame Donald Trump.

 

Clinton’s campaign was materially damaged, day in and day out, by stories about emails that had been hacked by Russia. At the same time, Trump’s campaign repeatedly used these stories to brand Clinton as “crooked,” lied about its attempts to coordinate with the Russians, defamed a dead DNC staffer who had nothing to do with the leak, and suffered no consequences for being the dissemination arm of a cyberattack by America’s enemies.

 

Also: The Clinton campaign’s attempts to push back on this through their supposed allies in the press and the deep state were completely rebuffed. Not only did the FBI refrain from using the Alfa Bank information to try to take down Trump—they went out of their way to block the New York Times from reporting the story. And then the bureau provided sourcing that the Times used to preemptively exonerate Trump.

 

Meanwhile, the FBI publicly announced the reopening of its investigation into Clinton, which the Times giddily covered, alongside every development from the leaked emails.

 

One would think that if the FBI and mainstream media were working to make up stuff to hurt Trump, the FBI would not have told the NYT to sit on the Alfa Bank story until after the election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
B-Man Hall of Famer

B-Man

Posted
Posted

 

VICTORIA TAFT: Sussmann Trial Week 2: It Was Hillary, In the Back Room, With the Chardonnay Bottle. 

 

“The institutions of the DOJ, FBI, and CIA and a special counsel appointment were put in the service of Hillary Clinton, undermining their reputations just to look good for the boss.”

 

 

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/victoria-taft/2022/05/23/sussmann-trial-week-2-it-was-hillary-in-the-back-room-with-the-chardonnay-bottle-n1599896

 

 

 

.

 

 

harm.jpg.22673c654ea2294c90d2221aa2d894f

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
All_Pro_Bills Veteran

All_Pro_Bills

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:

 

 

Regardless of all the damning evidence, I'd be surprised if any of this results in a conviction as the Judge has put tight guardrails around areas the prosecution can cover and question, what evidence can be submitted, and add to that a DC jury composition being highly favorable to political positions of the defense team and their client.  Either way half of the country will be happy and the other half unhappy with the result. 

 

In any event what it does is implicate the Clinton campaign in the fabrication and origin of the Russia hoax. Given this it's a mystery anyone can still believe in it. 

Edited by All_Pro_Bills
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillsFanNC Hall of Famer

BillsFanNC

Posted
  • Author
Posted
8 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said:

Regardless of all the damning evidence, I'd be surprised if any of this results in a conviction as the Judge has put tight guardrails around areas the prosecution can cover and question, what evidence can be submitted, and add to that a DC jury composition being highly favorable to political positions of the defense team and their client.  Either way half of the country will be happy and the other half unhappy with the result. 

 

I agree, Sussman has an all star defense team and a hugely favorable DC jury. All it takes is one activist juror, and that's highly likely in DC.

 

Danchenko will of course have the same favorable venue, but won't have the same resources as Sussman for his defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Orlando Tim All Pro

Orlando Tim

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, Doc said:

OJ was acquitted. 

This is why I have little trust in the conviction, with the amount of excluded evidence proving this to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt would be difficult. OJ was guilty but his lawyers made a compelling enough case

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Hall of Famer

Doc

Posted
Posted

The argument by the defense that the information would have been investigated (if Sussman had told them he was working for Hilly, like he should have) anyway is bull####.  I'll bet the FBI gets hundreds of "tips" on public figures and needs to weed-out what is possibly real or not.  But since it's the cesspool that is DC, he'll likely walk.  But still be guilty of helping foist one of the worst fake scandals in American history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillsFanNC Hall of Famer

BillsFanNC

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

In DC a lawyer for a political campaign can bring evidence to the FBI on a thumb drive purchased and billed to that very same campaign, literally bringing evidence to the FBI on behalf of a client, and then claim that he was not bringing the evidence to the FBI on behalf of a client.

 

That's like having the OJ glove that actually fits like a glove.

Edited by DRsGhost
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Hall of Famer

Doc

Posted
Posted
22 minutes ago, DRsGhost said:

In DC a lawyer for a political campaign can bring evidence to the FBI on a thumb drive purchased and billed to that very same campaign, literally bringing evidence to the FBI on behalf of a client, and then claim that he was not bringing the evidence to the FBI on behalf of a client.

 

That's like having the OJ glove that actually fits like a glove.

 

And saying "it wasn't meant to fit so well."

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Doc Hall of Famer

Doc

Posted
Posted

 

But the facts are that ultimately it turned out to be a lie and Sussman worked for the Clinton campaign.  The evidence is clear.  But since it's a trial by jurors, some of whom are Clinton supporters, he'll likely walk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...