This article is amazing for its comparative brevity. Other articles have expended many more words to explain much less. From Peter Van Buren at theamericanconservative.com:
Durham seems intent on exposing the larger conspiracy, including the Russia dossier and electronic spying by the Clinton campaign.
Here are ten questions and answers about Special Counsel John Durham’s new filing in his Russiagate investigation.
1) Fox says one thing, and CNN says the opposite. Who’s right?
The filing is only 13 pages. The juicy stuff is just a few paragraphs. Read it.
2) Could you give me the gist?
The filing is an exercise in legal housekeeping. It asks that the court consider allowing indicted Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann to retain his current representation, who has a potential conflict of interest.
Sussmann’s representative works for a law firm that also represents other individuals whom Durham may be going after and may have been involved in the events he’s investigating, perhaps as witnesses. Sussmann has been indicted for lying to the FBI. He brought the Trump-Alfa Bank accusations to the FBI pretending to be a patriotic citizen, when he was actually working on Hillary Clinton’s behalf, trying to get the FBI to investigate Trump. Real intelligence officers call that “using cover.”
While the conflict-of-interest issue is interesting, what is newsworthy are claims in the filing that the tech company Neustar and its executive Rodney Joffe (who was also a law client of Michael Sussmann) accessed “dedicated servers for the Executive Office of the President (EOP).” Joffe, per the filing, then allegedly “exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.”
Joffe also “enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university” (likely Georgia Tech) who had access to “large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract.” Real intelligence officers call that “recruiting sources with demonstrated access,” or informally, “spotting.”