Tag Archives: John Durham investigation

Special Council John Durham’s Failed Investigation of the Plot against President Trump, by Paul Craig Roberts

Never have even an iota of hope that the government can competently or impartially investigate itself. From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

I never expected anything to come out of Special Council John Durham’s “investigation” of Russiagate, the attempt by the CIA, FBI, and Democrat Party to frame President Trump as a Russian agent, and nothing has come out of it.

I didn’t expect anything to come out of the “investigation” because the Establishment is opposed to Trump and most certainly will not permit an investigation that would bring out the truth. The vindication of Trump is the last thing that will come out of Washington. As the Establishment controls the appointment of special prosecutors, it was obvious that nothing would come of Durham’s “investigation.”

And there were other indications.  When Durham was appointed, stories were planted on the presstitutes about what a bulldog he is and that all involved in the plot against Trump were in peril.  As a person who spent 25 years in Washington, this was a dead giveaway.  If Durham were a bulldog, there would be no need of press releases to tell us.

Let’s review the facts.  The CIA director, John Brennan, accused President Trump of treason. The FBI director had its Russiagate investigation run by officials, such as Peter Strzok, a Deputy Assistant Director, who, together with his FBI lawyer lover, as their emails show, were committed to defeating Trump from being elected and to removing him from office if he prevailed. Strzok is the FBI official who wrongly cleared Hillary Clinton of her illegal use of a personal email server while she served as US Secretary of State. Just the man to investigate the President of the United States for “Russian connections” that insured Russian interference in the 2016 US elections would put Russian agent Trump in office. Special counsel Robert Mueller employed Strzok to investigate links, which the presstitutes told us existed, between Trump’s presidential campaign and the Russian government.

Continue reading→

Durham Prosecutes FBI Informants, While Protecting Their Handlers, by Paul Sperry

Durham’s investigation was a complete sham, meant to protect rather than prosecute anyone important. From Paul Sperry at realclearinvestigations.com:

Since being named special counsel in October 2020, John Durham has investigated or indicted several unscrupulous anti-Trump informants. But he has spared the FBI agents who handled them, raising suspicions he’s letting investigators off the hook in his waning investigation of misconduct in the Russiagate probe.

In recent court filings, Durham has portrayed the G-men as naive recipients of bad information, tricked into opening improper investigations targeting Donald Trump and obtaining invalid warrants to spy on one of his advisers.

But as the cases against the informants have gone to trial, defense lawyers have revealed evidence that cuts against that narrative. FBI investigators look less like guileless victims and more like willing partners in the fraudulent schemes Durham has brought to light.

Notwithstanding his reputation as a tough, intrepid prosecutor, Durham has made excuses for the misconduct of FBI agents, providing them a ready-made defense against any possible future prosecution, according to legal experts.

“Durham was supposed to clean up the FBI cesspool, but it doesn’t look like he’s going to be doing that,” said Paul Kamenar, counsel to the National Legal and Policy Center, a Washington watchdog group. “He started with a bang and is ending with a whimper.”

In the latest example, critics point to a flurry of pretrial motions in Durham’s case against former FBI informant Igor Danchenko, the primary source for the false claims regarding Trump and Russia advanced by the opposition research paid for by Hillary Clinton’s campaign known as the Steele dossier.

Next month, Danchenko faces charges he lied to FBI investigators multiple times about the sourcing of the information in the dossier, which the bureau used to secure wiretap warrants to spy on a former Trump campaign adviser. Relying on Danchenko’s reporting, the FBI claimed that the adviser, Carter Page, was a Russian agent at the center of “a well-developed conspiracy of cooperation” between Trump and the Kremlin to steal the 2016 presidential election.

Continue reading→

John Kiriakou: The Setback in Russiagate Probe

Does John Durham keep going or does he let Russiagate become yet another instance where the Ruling Caste is not called to account? From John Kiriakou at consortiumnews.com:

The jury foreperson said politics wasn’t a factor.  But was any prosecution of a senior Clinton campaign official possible in a jurisdiction where Clinton beat  Trump 91-4?

Hillary Clinton. (Evan Guest/Wikimedia Common

Michael Sussmann, an A-list attorney who was a senior advisor to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, was acquitted by a jury in the federal District Court of the District of Columbia last week. 

Sussmann had been accused of lying to the F.B.I., a crime widely considered to be a “process felony” or a “throwaway felony,” something the Justice Department charges you with when they can’t get you for anything else.  Even though the federal sentencing guidelines called for 0-6 months in prison had Sussmann been convicted, the loss of his law license and the humiliation of a felony conviction would have been a far worse punishment.

But that didn’t happen.  Sussmann was acquitted after the jury had deliberated for only six hours, two of which were spent eating lunch.  After the trial was completed, two jurors, including the foreperson, told The Washington Post that the verdict was not a close call or a hard decision. 

The foreperson added, “Politics were not a factor. Personally, I don’t think it should have been prosecuted…The government could have spent our time more wisely.”  The second juror said, “Everyone pretty much saw it the same way.”

Continue reading→

Special Counsel John Durham’s Failed Russiagate Investigation, by Paul Craig Roberts

Is the fix in with Durham? From Paul Craig Roberts at paulcraigroberts.org:

Years ago I wrote that nothing would come of Special Counsel John Durham’s Russiagate investigation.  Yesterday I was proven correct. A politicized Washington, D.C., jury threw out the only case Durham has brought against a seditious operation that began six years ago.  Michael Sussman, a Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer was cleared of lying to a FBI agent, the only crime Durham could find of a massive operation orchestrated by the CIA and FBI to prevent President Trump from normalizing relations with Russia.

American foreign policy was set on a totally different course from Trump’s intent by the neoconservatives with the Wolfowitz doctrine of US hegemony.  Russia has to be pushed back and overcome with problems that would drain and redirect the Kremlin’s energy away from opposing US unilateralism.  After pouring $5 billion into preparing the overthrow of the Ukrainian government, the neoconservatives struck with the US-orchestrated “Maidan Revolution” in 2014 and installed an anti-Russian puppet government.  Neither the military-security complex nor the neoconservatives were going to let President Trump proceed with his goal of normalizing relations with Russia.  The relations were on schedule to be much worsened with the humiliation and isolation of Russia as the goal.

Continue reading→

Sussmann Trial Exposes Dems’ Scandal-Industrial Process, by Charles Lipson

The Democrats have both crime and the subsequent cover up down to a fine art. From Charles Lipson at realclearpolitics.com:

Sussmann Trial Exposes Dems' Scandal-Industrial Process

(AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana, File)

Modern political scandals, like Caesar’s Gaul, are divided into three parts. The first is the actual malfeasance. That might be taking bribes, lying to federal agents, leaking classified materials, sexual misconduct, selling political access, whatever. The second part is the hyper-partisan involvement of Congress and, often, federal agencies, all eager to score points for their side. The third part is the media’s role, which goes beyond bias to include active promotion of political goals.

Federal agencies, like all bureaucratic institutions, have always tried to increase their power and preserve their autonomy. What’s different today is that the bureaucrats, and often their entire agencies, are frequently partisan players. That’s disheartening but understandable. One party is clearly the “party of government” and the party of experts. Most educated professionals, including bureaucrats and journalists, identify with that party. Filled with partisan “civil servants,” these agencies routinely tilt investigations (or kill them outright) to advance political goals – the same ones as their favored party. For the same reasons, they leak insider information to friendly media. Predictably, the opposing party tries to score points by attacking them for doing so

Continue reading→

Shouldn’t Hillary Clinton Be Banned From Twitter Now? By Matt Taibbi

Russiagate has been a lie from day one and Clinton knew it. Yet, not a Russiagate or Hillary Clinton tweet has been banned from Twitter. From Matt Taibbi at taibbi.substack.com:

Trial testimony reveals Hillary Clinton personally approved serious election misinformation. Is there an anti-Trump exception to content moderation?

Last week, in the trial of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis asked ex-campaign manager Robby Mook about the decision to share with a reporter a bogus story about Donald Trump and Russia’s Alfa Bank. Mook answered by giving up his onetime boss. “I discussed it with Hillary,” he said, describing his pitch to the candidate: “Hey, you know, we have this, and we want to share it with a reporter… She agreed to that.”

In a country with a functioning media system, this would have been a huge story. Obviously this isn’t Watergate, Hillary Clinton was never president, and Sussmann’s trial doesn’t equate to prosecutions of people like Chuck Colson or Gordon Liddy. But as we’ve slowly been learning for years, a massive fraud was perpetrated on the public with Russiagate, and Mook’s testimony added a substantial piece of the picture, implicating one of the country’s most prominent politicians in one of the more ambitious disinformation campaigns we’ve seen.

Continue reading→

Truth, Lies and Sussmann, by Peter Van Buren

Sussman lied, the Democrats lied, the FBI lied, the media lied, and last but certainly not least, Hillary Clinton lied. They created Russiagate out of whole cloth and tried to destroy Trump. From Peter Van Buren at libertarianinstitute.org:

15597723400 aa7befc853 c

It can be a bittersweet moment when truth is all that’s left. Suspicions of infidelity become credit card receipts from a no-tell motel. A Facebook post tells of a meal shared when a business trip was scheduled. It is ugly, especially the certainty you were lied to by someone you once trusted, especially when that person wanted to be President of the United States. Two such instances that deserve notice passed through the mainstream media last week with barely a notice.

The first is that Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee lied about Russiagate. Hillary paid experts to create two data sets, one purportedly showing Russian cellphones accessing Trump WiFi networks, and another allegedly showing a Trump computer pinging an Alfa Bank server in Russia. The latter was supposedly how Trump communicated incognito with his handlers in Moscow Center. We’ve seen the lipstick on the collar before but how do we know for certain this time?

Former Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias on May 18, 2022 during the trial of his former partner, Michael Sussmann, swore to it under oath. Special Counsel John Durham brought Sussmann to trial for allegedly lying to the FBI, denying he was working for a client when he was representing the Clinton campaign.

Continue reading→

What it means that Hillary Clinton did it, by David Zukerman

It looks like, to use a favorite media phrase, that the walls are closing in on Hillary Clinton. From David Zukerman at americanthinker.com:

The Wall Street Journal ran a scathing editorial on May 20, called “Hillary Clinton Did It“.

This editorial began: “The Russia-Trump collusion narrative of 2016 was a dirty trick for the ages — and now we know it came from the top — candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.” The editorial quickly explained: “That was the testimony Friday by 2016 Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook in federal court [in Washington, D.C.], and while this news is hardly a surprise, it’s still bracing to find her fingertips on the political weapon.” (Also not surprisingly, The May 20 print edition of The New York Times did not include a story on Mook’s testimony.)

Mook’s testimony was heard at the trial of attorney Michael Sussman, charged with lying to the FBI in calling to their attention a story that Donald J. Trump, by means of connections with Russia’s Alfa Bank, was colluding with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The lie at issue was not the false claim about a Trump-Alfa connection, but the charge that Sussman brought this matter to the FBI as a good citizen, and not as a representative of the Clinton campaign.

Continue reading→

Breaking Down The Flurry Of Legal Filings By Clinton Campaign Associates In Durham Case, by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke

Durham inches closer and closer to something big, and his targets know it. From Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke at The Epoch Times via zerohedge.com:

In a coordinated legal action between a number of Hillary Clinton operatives and associates, almost two dozen separate documents were simultaneously filed on April 19 in special counsel John Durham’s case against former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann.

(Getty Images, Justice Department; Illustration by The Epoch Times)

This sudden flurry of mass filings included responses from former Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta, campaign manager Robby Mook, Clinton campaign lead lawyer Marc Elias, contractors Fusion GPS, the Clinton campaign itself, and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).

The trigger for the flurry of filings was a request by Durham to unseal a number of emails involving the parties. The emails are currently being withheld on very questionable grounds of attorney–client privilege. Based on the coordinated filings, it appears that a large number of important people associated with the Clinton campaign are very concerned about the information in those emails becoming public.

Continue reading→

The Russiagate Hoax Goes Much Deeper Than We Thought, by Peter Van Buren

One hates to allow one’s self even a scintilla of optimism, but it looks like Durham’s investigation may be closing in on the big fish. Let’s hope he doesn’t have an unfortunate accident and we get a chance to see how it all plays out. From Peter Van Buren at libertarianinstitute.org:

The latest filing by Special Counsel John Durham, investigating Russiagate and the Hillary Clinton campaign, suggests the rabbit hole goes a bit deeper than we thought. One hates to sound like Rachel Maddow, but it is just that much more likely the walls are closing in.

Durham filed a new, 34-page motion on April 15, 2022, in answer to defendant Michael Sussman’s request to dismiss the case against him. Durham accused Sussman of lying to the FBI about his working for the Clinton Campaign while he was trying to sell the Bureau on an investigation into Trump’s ties to Russia, focusing on alleged Internet pings between a Trump server and the Russian Alfa Bank. Sussman’s claims also included a number of pings against Trump Tower WiFi and later White House WiFi by a Russian-made Yota cell phone.

Sussman’s motion basically called Durham case garbage, which pressed Durham to explain to the court why the case needed to proceed, hence the new motion. The court subsequently ruled against Sussman and the full trial will commence May 15.

As he has done in the past, Durham used the required motion as a chance to tip over a few cards he is holding. It looks like aces.

Continue reading→

%d bloggers like this: