New Revelations From The John Durham Spygate Probe. On September 16, 2021, the special counsel's office filed a
one-count indictment against Sussmann, who served as a lawyer for the Clinton campaign during the 2016 election. The
indictment charged that Sussmann had lied to FBI General Counsel James Baker when he provided him information that purported
to show the Trump organization had established a secret channel to communicate with a Russian bank, Alfa Bank.
Specifically, according to the indictment, "Sussmann lied about the capacity in which he was providing the allegations to the
FBI," with Sussmann falsely stating "he was not doing his work on the aforementioned allegations 'for any client.'" In fact,
though, the indictment charged, Sussmann was acting on behalf of "a U.S. technology industry executive at a U.S. Internet
company" — later identified as Rodney Joffe — and "the Hillary Clinton Presidential Campaign."
Before the 2016 election, the Clinton team also pushed claims to the press of a Trump-Alfa Bank covert communication channel,
with Slate publishing a detailed story on this conspiracy theory the week before the election. The FBI later concluded
there was nothing to the story and then turned its attention to claims of a broader Trump-Russia collusion for the next three years.
Exist to Be Proven. Mr. Durham is currently prosecuting a small fish, a sardine among the Lawfare sharks
and killer whales of K Street, Michael Sussmann, for telling one measly lie to the FBI. Mr. Durham has been at this
task for two years plus. That's a long time to spend on a simple crime based on a few easy-to-get bits of evidence: a
cell phone text, some emails, the testimony of one principal witness — and a pretext that no one ever took
seriously in the first place: the [...] Alfa Bank conduit-to-Russia story. So, in 2016, schlubby lawyer Michael
Sussmann from Perkins Coie, the DC law firm representing the Hillary Clinton Campaign, asks for a meeting with his old DOJ
colleague, Jim Baker, now General Counsel (top lawyer) for the FBI. He has some sensitive information that the Bureau
might find interesting. He says he does not represent any particular client in the matter, he's just stepping forward
as a patriotic citizen. He emphasizes this point more than once, including a text, recorded in the digital cloud
(uh-oh), the night before the meeting. He comes in out of the swampy Potomac heat to Mr. Baker's air-conditioned
lair at 935 Pennsylvania Avenue and spins a tale about a Russian-owned outfit called Alfa-Bank with computer servers located
in the vicinity of Trump Tower in New York City, which, he alleges, are being used by candidate Donald Trump to communicate
with bad guys in Russia. The story goes nowhere fast. The FBI discounts it. Turns out that
Mr. Sussmann billed the hours spent on this folderol to Hillary for America, which, prima facie, indicates he was
working for her campaign at the time. Six years later, he's indicted.
Durham Played You For
A Fool! It's the summer of 2022 — and where are all those Durham indictments you were
promised? And where's that much-discussed Durham report? Do you know that you've been played for a fool
yet — or are you still watching Fox News? Maybe you need another year to figure out the entire game.
Maybe you still believe Bill Barr! Didn't that legendary windbag tell us that the wheels of justice grind very slow but
justice is coming? Let's turn back the clock two years — in case you forgot what AG Bagpipes promised the
American public. [Tweet] Indictments are coming! People will know the names of these people! Criminal
prosecutions! Not just a report! Notice that (then) AG Bill Barr promises justice for the Russia Hoax while at
the very same time excluding Obama and Biden as subjects of the Durham investigation. That's the moment that you should
have known: the fix is in.
Handwritten FBI And DOJ Notes The Special Counsel Just Released Are Huge. Recently released handwritten notes
from a briefing of the acting attorney general on the status of Crossfire Hurricane reveal the FBI either lied about the
source of intel or the British intelligence community fed information to the U.S. agents investigating Donald Trump and his
associates. As part of the pre-trial discovery in the government's prosecution of former Clinton campaign lawyer
Michael Sussmann, the special counsel provided defense lawyers notes taken on March 6, 2017, during a high-level briefing of
acting Attorney General Dana Boente about the then-ongoing investigation into supposed Russia collusion.
Throat's lawyer takes on the chicanery behind the Sussmann verdict. In the wake of Michael Sussmann's "not
guilty" verdict, the validity of the entire Durham investigation has been alternately criticized and defended. And
while much focus has been placed upon the Court's potential ethical conflicts, not enough attention has been given to the
skills of Sussmann's lawyers in directing the Court to tenable rulings. The crime for which Sussmann was charged was
telling the FBI that he was not representing a client when he submitted to the Bureau a "White Paper" detailing Donald
Trump's supposed ties to Russia by means of a Trump Tower server connecting to Russia's Alfa Bank server. In fact,
Durham alleged, Sussmann was representing the Clinton campaign and tech executive Rodney Joffe, the main forces behind the
White Paper, and had billed both clients for the FBI meeting. If he represented either, he should have been found guilty.
Big Things We Learned From The Michael Sussmann Prosecution. [#7] The FBI's Team Is So Swampy: The
prosecution of Sussmann also exposed that the FBI is not "our" FBI, but the swamp's. Baker's trial testimony made that
clear when he was pushed by prosecutors on why he had only recently discovered an old email from Sussmann in which Sussmann
texted that he wanted to meet on his own behalf. Baker told the special counsel's team, "I'm not out to get
Michael. This is not my investigation. This is your investigation. If you ask me a question, I answer
it. You asked me to look for something, I go look for it." That's a shocking attitude for the former general
counsel of the FBI to take, given that Baker also testified he was "100 percent confident" Sussmann said during their
September 19, 2016 meeting that he was not representing a client. "Baker also told the jury he likely wouldn't have
taken the meeting if he knew Sussmann represented the Clinton campaign." Rather than condemn Sussmann, "Baker blamed
himself for throwing Sussmann 'into a maelstrom' and expressed outrage at how the congressmen investigating the investigation
into Trump and his campaign behaved when they questioned Baker about his meeting with Sussmann. Baker displayed not
even a sliver of the same distress over his friend lying to him."
spending released at crossroads of his investigation. John Durham's special counsel office released its most
recent financial statement just days after a defeat in the criminal investigation's first trial as the prosecutor is gearing
up for his next trial centering on Christopher Steele's discredited dossier. From the start of October 2021 to the end
of March 2022, the Special Counsel's Office spent a total of $1,656,466, a slight decrease from the second report released
last year, according to the new financial statement, which is the third one released by Durham's office.
Durham lost because he treated the FBI as a dupe, rather than a Clinton collaborator. What was the role of the
FBI? In the Russiagate probe, in which special counsel John Durham has been tasked with getting to the bottom of the
Trump-Russia "collusion" farce, that is the key question. If you don't get the bureau's role right, you're apt to get
the most consequential things wrong. Durham has banked his investigation on the premise that the FBI was a
victim — an innocent dupe manipulated by the wily Clinton campaign. On Tuesday, this misplaced faith led to
the acquittal of Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann.
This The End Of The Road For The Durham Investigation? A DC jury found Michael Sussmann not guilty, and with
that verdict, John Durham's investigation into the infamous Russian collusion scandal is officially on life support.
The result is not, however, quite the exoneration portrayed by the media. Sussmann was accused of lying to the FBI
about who he was working for when he provided to the agency incriminating information about Donald Trump's alleged
connections to Russia. He stated clearly that he was not doing so while representing a client. Of key importance
to the case was whether the falsehood was "material" — that is, whether it influenced the bureau in its decision
to investigate the claims further. Special Counsel Durham's grand jury charged that "Sussmann's lie was material
because, among other reasons, Sussmann's false statement misled the FBI General Counsel and other FBI personnel concerning
the political nature of his work and deprived the FBI of information that might have permitted it more fully to assess and
uncover the origins of the relevant data and technical analysis, including the identities and motivations of Sussmann's
clients." The jury found that Sussmann's declarations to the FBI were not "material" in prompting an investigation into
Donald Trump, and therefore, the elements of the alleged crime were not satisfied.
campaign lawyer Sussmann [has been found] not guilty in Trump-Russia trial. Former Hillary Clinton campaign
lawyer Michael Sussmann was acquitted Tuesday of lying to the FBI when he handed over since-debunked computer data that
purportedly tied Donald Trump to Russia, with jurors drawn from a largely Democrat-leaning pool saying special counsel John
Durham didn't prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. The verdict came early on the second day of deliberations in
the first trial to result from Durham's probe of Trump-Russia investigations by the FBI and former special counsel Robert Mueller.
What Durham proved.
There is no doubt Sussmann lied to the FBI. There is no doubt he is guilty. But the trial is taking place in
Washington, perhaps the deepest-blue jury pool in the United States. Durham's prosecutors are "facing a jury that has
three Clinton donors, an AOC donor, and a woman whose daughter is on the same sports team as Sussmann's daughter," George
Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said recently on Fox News. "With the exception of randomly
selecting people out of DNC headquarters, you could not come up with a worse jury." So the jury might reject Durham's
evidence — juries are free to do that. Or it might convict. Whatever it does, though, Durham has
already made some important points about the actions of the Clinton campaign in the 2016 election.
has been acquitted. The acquittal is no surprise. This is a DC jury, after all. In the Roger Stone
case, for example, we documented how a juror lied to get on the panel. (That judge didn't care.) Making matters
worse, the Sussmann judge wrongly allowed for a woman to remain on the jury, despite the fact that her daughter and
Sussmann's are on the same high school crew team. One can't help but think that juror had her own daughter's interests
in mind — the cohesion of the crew team, sparing her of teenage drama, etc. — when she reached a
decision. After the verdict was announced, the jury's forewoman held court before the media and expressed her
displeasure that the Special Counsel prosecute a false statement case: "There are bigger things that affect the nation
than a possible lie to the FBI." This juror was never impartial -- despite her assurance to the judge. On the facts,
the evidence was more than sufficient to prove Sussmann's guilt. Sussmann lied to then-FBI general counsel James Baker
via text message in order to get a meeting to pass the Alfa Bank hoax materials to the FBI.
Jury Nullification Marks the End of American Justice as We Knew It. Au revoir, American Exceptionalism.
We are China. We are Putin's Russia. We are the European Union, drifting ever more swiftly into Davos globalism
and the Great Reset. We are the Ayatollah's Iran. We are Orwell's "Animal Farm" and then some. Most of all,
goodbye to the rule of law. Was it ever there? I seem to have vague memories. The jurors in John Durham's
trial of attorney Michael Sussmann — which resulted in the Clinton campaign lawyer's acquittal — will
be remembered, by those allowed to remember, if any, as the moment our already decaying justice system went completely
south. The D.C. jurors, revealed in the voir dire to have been completely biased in the first place, demonstrated that
the English language itself — and the evidence available therein — was of no interest to them.
They not only nullified a possible verdict, but they also nullified English by ignoring the email that Sussmann wrote then
FBI attorney (now Twitter stalwart) James Baker the night before their meeting.
Sussmann is acquitted of lying to FBI in John Durham's Russia probe: Trump tears into 'corrupt'. Former
Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann has been found not guilty of lying to the FBI in the first trial of
Special Counsel John Durham's investigation into what sparked the investigation of Donald Trump's 2016 presidential
campaign. It's one of just two indictments and one guilty plea in Durham's three-year inquiry into the origins of
Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe, spurred by allegations that Trump's 2016 campaign got help from Russia. After
just six hours of deliberation, a jury rejected Durham's claim that Sussmann lied to federal agents when sending them dirt on
Trump's alleged links to a bank backed by Moscow. Trump slammed the verdict as the result of a 'corrupt' legal system
along with a host of Republicans.
trial is a black eye for the FBI. With the jury out in the trial of former 2016 Clinton campaign counsel
Michael Sussmann, the usual odds-takers appeared on cable news, rating the chances of a conviction. Despite the
seemingly overwhelming evidence against Sussmann, the jury's makeup seems strikingly favorable for the defense. One
verdict, however, appears to need little deliberation. It concerns the Department of Justice, and particularly the FBI.
The trial confirmed what many have long alleged about how top officials eagerly accepted any Russia collusion claim involving former
President Trump's 2016 campaign. Special counsel John Durham's investigation, which led to Sussmann's trial, is an indictment
of a department and a bureau which, once again, appeared willfully blind as they were played by Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Despite the trial judge's rulings imposing strict limits on the scope of the trial evidence, Durham's case still revealed new
information on how the Russia collusion theory was pushed into the FBI and the media by the Clinton campaign.
truth about the Russia Hoax is oozing out at the Sussmann trial. With these facts in mind, here are questions
that Americans must ask: [#1] Can we trust our government to protect our data? [...] The average American needs to
understand that information the federal government gathers about us has been used for partisan political purposes and causes
us to ask: How much of our data is out there and who can access it? [#2] Can we really trust our mainstream media
outlets to be impartial? No, because most of them buried the story! They knowingly suppressed the Clinton
corruption story and ramped up their attack on Donald Trump. They chose speculation over objective facts. They
allowed the Clinton campaign to conduct a disinformation campaign using media, government, and Congress. [#3] Should
certain members of Congress be investigated? Yes. As early as July 26, 2016, Adam Schiff and Diane Feinstein are
mentioned in Fusion GPS emails to reporters, pointing to them being briefed on the Trump/Russia "research."
lies to get their hands on Trump. [Clinton campaign lawyer Michael] Sussmann claimed he was not representing
any client when he brought the FBI internet data that he insisted showed that Donald Trump had established a communications
back channel with the Kremlin, through servers at Russia's Alfa-Bank. In reality, Sussmann was representing the
presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton. He wanted an "October surprise" to torpedo Trump's chances, and what better
way than to make it look like the FBI was investigating the candidate? It's clear from text messages and testimony that
Sussmann lied about not having any ulterior motives, and simply acting as a concerned citizen. But his defense presents
a problem — both to the FBI's reputation and special counsel John Durham's prosecution of the lawyer.
Sussmann argues that no matter what he said, FBI officials knew he was aligned with the Clintons.
Elections: A Tale of Two D.C. Courtrooms. Michael Sussmann, a lawyer formerly employed at Perkins Coie,
the influential law firm that funded the infamous Steele dossier on behalf of Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National
Committee, is on trial for lying to the FBI. Sussmann is accused of presenting phony data alleged to prove a connection
between Trump and a Russian bank to the department just weeks before Election Day 2016. The sinister collaboration,
exposed years ago by reporters and bloggers on the Right but now confirmed by Special Counsel John Durham's investigation,
involved Democratic Party honchos including the candidate herself; top officials at the Department of Justice, who used the
dossier as evidence for a warrant to spy on Trump's campaign; FBI officials and informants; the Central Intelligence Agency;
and of course, the national news media. Russia's interference in the 2016 election to rig the outcome in favor of Trump
was accepted as truth not just by the same interests responsible for the hoax but by tens of millions of Americans.
Roughly half the country openly refused to accept the fact that Trump won fair and square.
The Jury Should Convict Michael Sussmann Of Lying To The FBI, But Probably Won't. Closing arguments will begin
later this morning in Special Counsel John Durham's false statement case against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney
Michael Sussmann, after Sussmann made a last-minute decision on Thursday not to testify in his own defense. The
evidence prosecutors elicited from witnesses over the last two weeks provides overwhelming proof of Sussmann's guilt and
destroys the many defense theories Sussmann's legal team floated throughout the trial. Yet a conviction of a fellow
D.C.-swamp dweller may be unattainable. Last fall, the special counsel indicted Sussmann on one count of making a false
statement in violation of Section 1001 of the federal criminal code. The special counsel alleged Sussmann lied to
then-FBI General Counsel James Baker during a September 19, 2016 meeting.
Testimony Shows Spygate Conspirators Deceived The FBI Using Same Strategy Twice. Tech executive Rodney Joffe
fed the Alfa Bank hoax to the FBI via two distinct routes, testimony from yesterday's proceedings in the Michael Sussmann
criminal case indicates. This apparent circular reporting further cements Special Counsel John Durham's Section 1001
false statement case against Sussmann by highlighting the significance of Sussmann's alleged lie to former FBI General
Counsel James Baker. Sussmann, who is in the middle of week two of his trial in a D.C. federal court, was charged last
fall in a one-count indictment with lying to Baker when he provided Baker two flash drives and several "white papers" purporting
to establish the existence of a secret communication network between the Russian-based Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization.
billed Clinton campaign for thumb drives he gave to FBI pushing Alfa-Bank allegations. Special counsel John
Durham's team presented evidence suggesting Michael Sussmann billed Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential team for the thumb
drives he used to push now-discredited Trump-Russia allegations to the FBI in 2016, despite Sussmann claiming he did not do
so for the campaign. Sussmann, a former Perkins Coie lawyer who represented the Democratic National Committee when it
was hacked in 2016, is on trial after being charged with lying to the FBI about whom he was representing when, in September
2016, he presented internet data that suggested a now-discredited link between former President Donald Trump and Russia's
Alfa-Bank. In particular, Sussmann was indicted on charges of allegedly concealing his clients — Clinton's
2016 presidential campaign and "Tech Executive-1," known to be former Neustar executive Rodney Joffe — from FBI
general counsel James Baker. Sussmann denies lying to the FBI and has pleaded not guilty.
Billed Clinton Campaign on Day of FBI Meeting for Work on 'Confidential Project,' Records Show. Billing records
presented by the prosecution in Michael Sussmann's false-statement trial indicate that Sussmann charged the Clinton campaign
for work on the day he met with then-FBI general counsel James Baker in 2016 to present evidence of alleged backchannel
communications between the Trump Organization and Russia's Alfa Bank. Prosecutors allege that Sussmann lied to Baker when
he asked for the meeting under the pretense that he was coming forward as a concerned citizen and not on behalf of any client.
Leaders, Including Comey, Were 'Fired Up' About Trump-Alfa Bank Claims: Agent. Then-FBI Director James
Comey and other bureau leaders were "fired up" in 2016 about allegations that Donald Trump's business was secretly
communicating with a Russian bank, according to internal FBI messages revealed in court on May 23. "People on the 7th
floor to include director are fired up about this server," Joseph Pientka, an agent based in Washington, told Curtis Heide, a
colleague working from the bureau's Chicago office, in a message dated Sept. 21, 2016. "Reachout [sic] and put tools on,"
Pientka added. "Its [sic] not an option — we must do it." The message was sent just days after Michael
Sussmann, a lawyer representing the campaign of Hillary Clinton — Trump's rival for the presidency —
met with an FBI lawyer and passed along information that he alleged showed a secret backchannel between the Trump
Organization and Alfa Bank.
Don't Know it Was Andrew Weissmann Who Publicly Released the Carter Page FISA Application. You will remember
the massive media debate in early 2018 about the FISA application deployed against former short-time Trump campaign aide
Carter Page. The DOJ, at the time under the control of the Mueller special counsel for all things Trump-Russia related,
wouldn't let congress see the FISA application. Devin Nunes complained to House Speaker Paul Ryan. Eventually a
deal was struck and two members from the House Intelligence committee (democrats and republicans) and two members from the
House Judiciary Committee, were allowed to go to Main Justice and read the FISA application, but not copy it. Four
congressmen were allowed to go read and take notes. Trey Gowdy and John Ratcliffe represented the two republicans, and
their notes formed the basis for what later was called "The Nunes Memo." The Democrats were not happy with the claims
in the Nunes memo, and subsequently HPSCI ranking member Adam Schiff wrote the democrat version.
trial reveals FBI internal investigation of Crossfire Hurricane agents. Curtis Heide was the lead agent in the
FBI's Chicago field office back in 2016. Today he testified at Michael Sussmann's trial and mentioned that he is currently
under internal investigation by the FBI for possibly withholding exculpatory evidence in portions of the Crossfire Hurricane
investigation. [...] One FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, has already pleaded guilty to altering an email which would have been
exculpatory of Carter Page. It would be pretty remarkable if another agent was found to have withheld evidence related
to surveillance of Page.
concealed Clinton lawyer's connection to Trump-Russia allegations, FBI agent testifies. An FBI agent testified
in court Tuesday that a "typo" in an email led investigators in 2016 to believe that false allegations linking former
President Trump to Russia's Alfa Bank originated with the Department of Justice, when in fact they came from Hillary Clinton
campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann. FBI Agent Curtis Heide, who along with agent Allison Sands authored the internal
communication, said the inaccuracy, sent out just weeks before the 2016 election, was simply a mistake. "We may have
conflated the Office of the General Counsel and the Justice Department," Mr. Heide said on the witness stand. "I
don't know how that information got in there."
The Sussmann Trial:
fingers pointed at FBI leadership. [Scroll down] The influence that FBI leadership (Comey and McCabe) had
on the investigations related to the Trump/Russia accusations is notable — but not an exception. This is the first time
we heard that the Alfa Bank hoax was pushed by FBI leadership. However, this fits their broader pattern. Recall
the statement of FBI agent William Barnett. He was part of the FBI's investigation of General Flynn and decided it
should be closed down. The FBI's senior officials, who ran the investigation from the "top down," called the shots.
Trial Week 2: It Was Hillary, In the Back Room, With the Chardonnay Bottle. We're back for week two of special
counsel John Durham's prosecution of Michael Sussmann for lying to the FBI. Week one's revelations included the fact that
Hillary Clinton officially gave the green light to the disinformation attack on Donald Trump and his "connection" to Russia,
according to her former campaign manager, Robby Mook. Our suspicion was finally confirmed in this scandalous game of
Clue that cost the American taxpayers $40 million, wasted the time of 40 FBI agents, dragged Americans before federal agents
to explain themselves, and involved untold hours of spying on U.S. citizens. And that was just special counsel Bob
Mueller's part in it. In this game of Clue, it was Hillary, in the back room, with the chardonnay bottle. Donald
Trump's campaign, his reputation, and his Administration lay in a bloody heap on the floor as the Democrat Party, Hillary
Clinton, and all of her minions laughed while dragging the country through this farce.
Drops Another Bombshell, Reveals FBI Lied About Hillary Clinton-Supplied Disinformation. The trial of Michael
Sussmann began another week on Monday [5/23/2022], with more witnesses being called as Special Counsel John Durham continues
to build his case against the former Hillary Clinton lawyer. Sussmann is charged with lying to the FBI, something he
allegedly did when he hid who he was working for while sharing the now-debunked Alfa-Bank story. That disinformation
campaign, which was meant to falsely assert Donald Trump was colluding with the Russians during the 2016 election, has now
been directly tied to Hillary Clinton during the trial after it was revealed that she approved its dissemination. But
apparently, Sussmann and Hillary Clinton by proxy weren't the only ones lying. According to documents presented by
Durham, the FBI lied about the Alfa Bank smear's provenance, telling agents it had come from the DOJ. In reality,
Sussmann had brought it directly to the FBI, with the leadership being aware of its origins as badly done political
wrongly told its agents Trump-Russia collusion claims had come from DOJ, bombshell document reveals. FBI agents
probing since-debunked claims of a secret back channel between Donald Trump and a Russian bank believed that the allegations
had originated with the Department of Justice — when in fact they came from Hillary Clinton campaign attorney
Michael Sussmann, who had shopped them to the bureau's then-general counsel days earlier. In the latest revelation to
emerge from Sussmann's trial in DC federal court on a count of lying to the FBI, special counsel John Durham's prosecutors
revealed that investigators had received an electronic communication citing a referral from the DOJ "on or about" Sept. 19,
2016, the same day Sussmann met with James Baker, then the FBI's top lawyer. The document, a record of the investigation
being opened by agents Curtis Heide and Allison Sands and dated Sept. 23, 2016, did not mention Sussmann as the source
of the allegations.
Turley Says Hillary Will Avoid Responsibility in Durham Probe. George Washington University law professor and
self-proclaimed liberal Jonathan Turley said Friday on Fox News' "Special Report" that Hillary Clinton will probably avoid
"direct responsibility" in the Durham probe because of her "Voldemort-like status." Apropos of nothing, but since we're
busy comparing public figures to Harry Potter characters, I would like to point out that our short-lived disinformation czar
Nina Jankowicz can be compared to similarly temporary-tenured Hogwarts Headmistress Dolores Umbridge. Just sayin'.
But back to the story at hand. Appearing with host Bret Baier on "Special Report," Turley predicted Clinton would
escape consequences like she always seems to.
Brings Home The Bacon. I think we can say definitively that the wait has been worth it. John Durham has
not let us down. I'm speaking, of course, of Hillary campaign manager Robbie Mook's testimony — obviously,
under oath — at the Sussmann trial that the Alfa Bank Hoax was cleared for use by Hillary personally and was
discussed within her inner circle: with John Podesta, Jake Sullivan, and Jennifer Palmieri. Maybe someday we'll learn
how Durham pulled this off — getting this Clinton insider to turn on Hillary. It's a real coup.
the Sussmann trial revealed Hillary Clinton's role in the Alfa Bank scandal. The trial of former Clinton
campaign attorney Michael Sussmann crossed a critical threshold Friday when a key witness uttered the name "Hillary Clinton"
in conjunction with a plan to spread the false Alfa Bank Russian collusion claim before the 2016 presidential election.
For Democrats and many in the media, Hillary Clinton has long held a Voldemort-like status as "She who must not be named" in
scandals. Yet, there was her former campaign manager, Robby Mook, telling a jury that Clinton personally approved a
plan to spread the claim of covert communications between the Trump organization and the Russian bank. It was one of
the most successful disinformation campaigns in American politics, and Mook implicated Clinton as green-lighting the
gas-lighting of the electorate. The mere mention of Clinton's name sent shockwaves through Washington. In past
scandals, the Clintons have always evaded direct responsibility as aides were investigated or convicted, from the Whitewater
land dealings to cattle futures.
On Mook's Outing Of Hillary. People are starting to come to grips with the importance of Hillary campaign
manager Robbie Mook's fingering of Hillary — that she was the one who authorized the Alfa Bank Hoax. There's
a lot to be said, and some people are already saying it. One is Jonathan Turley, and another is Devin Nunes.
Nunes gave a very lucid interview to Fox News that happens to work very well with Turley's equally lucid article at The
Hill. If you read Turley first, then listen to Nunes' explanation of the significance of it all, you'll get a very good
overview of why this revelation will end up being very important — whether or not Sussmann is convicted.
Now Have Proof Hillary Was In On It! Ex-Campaign Manager Reveals. In the course of Special Counsel
Durham's prosecution of Michael Sussmann, a great deal of information has come to light about the origins of the "Russiagate"
disinformation. Recently, we learned that the campaign had pushed a journalist into disseminating the false Russian
server allegations. Now, however, we learn that Hillary Clinton had personally approved of this plan.
herself 'agreed' to leak Trump-Russia allegations to press. "Robby Mook, Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign
manager, said that Clinton 'agreed' to leak allegations that the Trump Organization had a secret communications channel with
Russia's Alfa Bank to the media during his Friday testimony" reports National Review. The media "report" Hillary
tweeted about above, was spoon-fed to them with her blessing. Mook also revealed the "purpose" for the campaign to leak
it to the press was to have a reporter "run it down" further and "vet it out." As for Mrs. Clinton's involvement,
Mook added that he "discussed it with Hillary as well" after which, "she agreed to" their decision to turn the loose gossip
over to the press.
of two trials: How Sussmann is receiving every consideration denied to Flynn. The criminal trial of
Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann began this week with a telling warning from prosecutors to the D.C. jury:
"Whatever your political views might be, they cannot be brought to your decisions." The opening statement by Deborah
Brittain Shaw reflected the curious profile of the Sussmann case. Prosecutors ordinarily have a massive advantage with
juries despite the presumption of innocence. When pleas are counted, federal prosecutors can report as high as
95 percent conviction rates. However, with Sussmann, prosecutors clearly have concerns over whether they, rather than the
defendant, will get a fair trial. Sussman's trial for allegedly lying to the FBI is being heard in the same District of
Columbia federal courthouse where former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn and others faced the very same charge
brought by another special counsel. The cases, however, could not be more different.
Three Clinton Donors on Sussmann Jury in D.C.. As many as three donors to Hillary Clinton's past presidential
campaigns are members of the jury in the trial of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann in Washington, D.C., who
faces the sole charge of lying to the FBI. Prosecutors working with Special Counsel John H. Durham contend that Sussmann
concealed his work for the campaign when passing along information to the FBI about an alleged link between then-candidate
Donald Trump and Russia, via Alfa Bank.
Mook Testifies: Hillary Clinton Personally Approved Leak of Alfa Bank Hoax to Media. Hillary Clinton
approved an effort to leak allegations that Donald Trump was colluding with Russia via Alfa Bank, according to her 2016
presidential campaign manager, Robby Mook, who testified Friday [5/20/2022] in federal court in Washington, DC. The Alfa
Bank allegations were later disproven, as was the broader "Russia collusion" conspiracy theory that they supported.
[Tweets] Mook is a witness in the trial of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, whom Special Counsel John H.
Durham charged with lying to the FBI by allegedly saying he was not working for a client when he passed along the Alfa Bank
allegations. Much of the trial has consisted of arguing that Sussmann was, in fact, working for the Clinton campaign.
Lawyer: Knowing Clinton Was Behind Trump Allegations Would Have Changed Things. The FBI lawyer who served
as a conduit for flimsy allegations against Donald Trump said May 19 he would have acted differently if he knew Trump's rival
for the presidency, Hillary Clinton, was behind the claims. James Baker, who now works for Twitter, said that he likely
would not have have met with Michael Sussmann, who is accused of passing on data that allegedly linked Trump's business to a
Russian bank, if he knew Sussmann was acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign. "I don't think I would have," Baker
said on the stand in federal court in Washington. Knowing Trump's opponent was behind the allegations "would have
raised very serious questions, certainly, about the credibility of the source" and the "veracity of the information," Baker
said. It would also have heightened "a substantial concern in my mind about whether we were going to be played."
the media is ignoring trial at center of the real Russiagate scandal. Why are most media basically ignoring the
trial of Michael Sussmann, when it centers on a huge political scandal — an effort to frame a presidential
candidate for treason? In her devastating opening statement, prosecutor Deborah Brittain Shaw explained, "It was a plan
to create an October surprise ... that was designed to inject the FBI into a presidential election." Sussmann's charged
with falsely claiming to have been acting as a concerned citizen when he told a top bureau official of a supposed secret
Donald Trump channel to the Kremlin, when in fact the lawyer was billing the Hillary Clinton campaign for his dirty
work. Indeed, Brittain Shaw noted, that lie was "part of a bigger plan carried out in concert with two clients, the
Clinton campaign and Rodney Joffe," the tech executive (and Sussmann client and would-be Clinton appointee) who created the
"evidence" of Trump skullduggery.
Clinton lawyer 'lied to the FBI' on behalf of her campaign and wanted to spark an 'October Surprise' to embarrass
Trump. The first trial to emerge from Special Counsel John Durham's probe finally got underway
Tuesday — as prosecutors accused former Hillary Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann of trying to engineer an 'October
surprise' when he sought out a top FBI official to discuss an allegation about Trump and Russia. The allegation didn't
pan out, but the meeting itself constituted an effort to 'use and manipulate' federal law enforcement for political ends,
prosecutors argued. Sussmann's defense team argued he was forthright when he acted on his own to bring information to
authorities, and said the intervention did not benefit the Clinton camp in any way.
witness in Sussmann trial says Trump-Alfa Bank allegation was 'far-reaching,' not objective. An FBI agent
testifying Tuesday on the second day of the trial of 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann discredited
evidence Sussmann gave the agency attempting to connect the Trump Organization with Russia's Alfa Bank, a purported hotline
to the Kremlin. Describing a white paper analyzing internet data between the email server of the Trump Organization and
the Russian Alfa Bank as "not objective" and "far-reaching," FBI Special Agent Scott Hellman said the authors' conclusion of
a secret communications channel "didn't ring true at all." Special Counsel John Durham last year charged Sussmann with
lying to the FBI when he allegedly told then-FBI general counsel James Baker that he was not working on behalf of any client
while providing him with since-debunked collusion allegations. Sussmann is pleading not guilty to the charge. If
convicted, he faces up to five years in prison.
trial: Prosecution says Clinton lawyer used FBI to create an 'October surprise' against Trump. Special
Counsel John Durham's team in its opening argument Tuesday alleged that former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann used
the FBI as "a political tool" to "manipulate" the bureau on "the eve" of the 2016 presidential election to create an "October
surprise" against then-candidate Donald Trump — a plan that "largely succeeded." Sussmann is charged with
making a false statement to the FBI when he told former FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016 — less
than two months before the presidential election — that he was not doing work "for any client" when he requested
and attended a meeting with Baker where he presented "purported data and 'white papers' that allegedly demonstrated a covert
communicates channel" between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin.
Obama Judge in [the] Sussmann Case [is] Totally Conflicted and His Actions Now Show It. The judge overseeing
the case concerning Hillary's attorney Michael Sussmann is totally conflicted. His actions already show this.
Obama appointed Judge Christopher Cooper to oversee the Michael Sussmann case. He is totally conflicted. He
shouldn't be within miles of a court in DC and his actions, in this case, show us why. [...] Judge Cooper is why we have laws
about conflicts of interest.
Show Time for John Durham. The highest-profile case brought so far by John Durham, the Special Counsel tasked
with pinpointing the origin of the plot to frame Republican presidential candidate, Donald Trump, as a Russian spy and
traitor to America, starts Monday [5/16/2022] in a D.C. courtroom. Durham's case combines all the worst elements of
media frenzy — Rachel Maddow's fainting couch moments, "Trump Stole the Election" fake headlines, and packing
peanut-weight Pulitzer Prizes — in a melodrama embodied in the person of Michael Sussmann, Hillary Clinton's
attorney and the man who represented the Democratic National Committee during the 2016 election cycle. Durham is trying
Sussmann for lying to the FBI by saying he wanted his old friend — luckily the FBI general
counsel — to hear a juicy tidbit about the Republican candidate for president, Donald Trump, being a Russian
spy. Oh no, Sussmann claimed, he wasn't coming on behalf of any of his Democrat clients. Not him!
Nunes: Durham case revealed criminal elusion of Congress. A case involving special counsel John Durham
uncovered more documents than Congress was able to get when Devin Nunes was a leading member of the House, the former congressman
said on Sunday [5/15/2022]. Kash Patel, who was an aide to Republicans when they controlled the House Intelligence Committee
under then-Chairman Nunes, said on Sunday [5/15/2022] that FBI notes disclosed as part of Durham's case against Democratic
cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann were subpoenaed by Nunes and "withheld" from the panel during its own Russia investigation.
Agrees To Let Spygate Cabal Hide Some Of Their Emails From The Grand Jury. Tech executive Rodney Joffe may
assert attorney-client privilege for communications he had with employees of Fusion GPS because those communications
furthered Joffe and the Clinton campaign's common interest, a federal judge presiding over the criminal case against Michael
Sussmann ruled yesterday. Prosecutors will now be greatly limited in the material they may elicit from one of the two
witnesses granted immunity in exchange for their testimony against Sussmann. Sussmann, whose trial in a D.C. federal
court on a false statement charge is set to begin on Monday, scored a victory Thursday when presiding judge Christopher
Cooper rejected Special Counsel John Durham's attempts to present the jury copies of emails previously withheld by Joffe, the
Clinton campaign, and the Democratic National Committee as privileged. The ruling came in response to Durham's motion
to compel Fusion GPS to provide the court, for in camera review, 38 emails the investigative research firm withheld
from the grand jury based on the Clinton campaign's claim of attorney-client privilege and work-product privilege.
biggest crooks in Special Counsel Durham's investigation may be at the FBI. A future ex-lawyer named Michael
Sussmann is going to trial next week for his role in feeding the FBI bogus Russian collusion stories. Those stories are
scurrilous and vulgar lies which distracted the nation and the Trump administration for years and for which someone should be
held accountable. But Sussmann was not the person who manufactured those lies. He was just the bag man who passed
them on to the FBI. And so those lies are not what Sussmann has been charged with. He's been charged with a more
pedestrian lie — the lie of telling the FBI he was not working for a client when in fact he was. Not just
any client, but the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign.
in Sussmann Trial is Married to Lisa Page's Lawyer. Just a brief reminder as you review the decisions in the
pre-trial motions for the case against Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann. It is worth remembering that Judge Christopher
Cooper is married to Amy Jeffries, Lisa Page's lawyer. Additionally, Judge Cooper and Michael Sussmann both worked in
the DOJ together. When he was selected as judge in the Sussmann trial, Cooper revealed the potential conflict of
interest in the event the Durham prosecution wanted him to recuse himself from the case. Special Prosecutor John Durham
did not ask Judge Cooper to recuse himself.
lie that hides an enormous conspiracy: Inside the trial that exposes Clinton's plot to slander Trump.
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.
GPS must hand over docs to Durham, but he can't use them at trial. The judge in the case against Democratic
cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann ruled that John Durham's team may review two dozen emails improperly withheld following
Clinton campaign claims of attorney-client privilege — but the special counsel cannot use the records at next
week's trial. Sussmann was indicted on charges of concealing his clients, the Clinton campaign and tech executive
Rodney Joffe, from FBI general counsel James Baker when he pushed eventually debunked claims of a secret back channel between
the Trump Organization and Russia's Alfa-Bank. Judge Christopher Cooper agreed to review more than three dozen records
from the opposition research firm Fusion GPS to see if they had been improperly concealed. Cooper found that Fusion
"had no valid basis to withhold 22 of the 38 emails, but that it has met its burden to establish privilege over the remaining 16."
lawyer Sussmann tries to block witness who could debunk Trump-Russia link. A former Hillary Clinton campaign
lawyer wants to prevent an expert witness from debunking computer research that purportedly showed a secret back channel
between former President Donald Trump and Russia during the 2016 campaign. In court papers filed Wednesday, defense
lawyers for Michael Sussmann said special counsel John Durham apparently plans to use testimony from FBI agent David Martin
"to cast doubt on the specific data and conclusions that Mr. Sussmann presented to the FBI." Durham also appears
poised to have Martin discuss the "materiality" — or decision-making importance — to the FBI of
Sussmann's allegedly false claim that he wasn't acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and a tech-executive client at the
time, the defense said.
Judge Tries To Protect Hillary Clinton In Latest Pre-Trial Rulings. The Obama-appointed judge presiding over
the criminal case against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann let politics trump the law when he
declared in a weekend opinion he would not rule on whether the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee conspired
with others to peddle the Russia collusion hoax. Special Counsel John Durham charged Sussmann last September in a
one-count indictment with making a false statement to then-FBI General Counsel James Baker when Sussmann provided Baker data
and "whitepapers" purporting to show a secret communication network between Donald Trump and the Russian-based Alfa
Bank. According to the indictment, Sussmann told Baker he was sharing the information on his own, when, in fact,
Sussmann represented both tech executive Rodney Joffe and the Clinton campaign. With trial set to begin in one week,
the last month has seen a flurry of pretrial motions — called "motions in limine" — seeking pretrial
rulings on the admissibility of evidence.
limits info about alleged Hillary Clinton 'joint venture' in Sussmann's trial. A judge has ruled that Special
Counsel John Durham's office must limit the evidence it plans to use in court to try to show a "joint venture" between
Michael Sussmann and Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. Sussmann, a cybersecurity lawyer, has been charged
with lying to then-FBI General Counsel James Baker when he handed over data in September 2016 that claimed to show
communications between former President Trump's presidential campaign and the Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank. Sussmann did
not divulge he was working for the Clinton campaign at the time. Yet he was billing the campaign for his work with tech
executive Rodney Joffe to compile the information about Trump and the bank, a purported tie that has since been
debunked. Sussmann was working at the Perkins Coie law firm, which represented the Clinton campaign and the Democratic
National Committee, at the time.
Judge To Review Docs Clinton Campaign Tried To Keep Out Of Court's Sight. The judge in the case of attorney
Michael Sussmann will review a batch of Clinton campaign emails and other documents to determine whether they were improperly
concealed from the court. Judge Christopher Cooper's ruling is a victory for special counsel John Durham, who has
pushed to introduce the documents as evidence in his case against Sussmann, who is charged with lying to the FBI in 2016
about his motivations for presenting the bureau with later debunked evidence of the Trump Organization communicating with
Russia's Alfa Bank. Hillary for America, the law firm Perkins Coi, and others involved in the allegations against
former President Donald Trump claimed that the communications and documents Durham is after are protected under
attorney-client privilege, according to The Washington Examiner.
Counsel John Durham Wins Key Motion in Case Against Former Clinton Lawyer. A federal judge on May 4 granted a
motion from special counsel John Durham to review documents that Hillary Clinton's campaign and other parties had claimed
were protected by privilege, which means the documents may ultimately be made available to the public. U.S. District
Judge Christopher Cooper, after a hearing in Washington, granted Durham's motion to compel production of unredacted versions
of said documents from the Perkins Coie, a law firm hired by the campaign ahead of the 2016 election; Rodney Joffe, a
technology executive; and Fusion GPS, a firm that specializes in opposition research that the campaign and the Democratic
National Committee (DNC) used extensively to investigate then-candidate Donald Trump — Clinton's rival for the
presidency. The parties had resisted producing some documents and handed over redacted versions of others because of
shielding afforded by attorney-client privilege or another form of privilege that protects documents used in producing "work
product" — claims Durham has disputed in part because Fusion primarily engaged in non-legal matters such as
opposition research for the campaign, the DNC, and Perkins.
Republican Raises His 'Only' Concern With Durham Investigation. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) has said that he
is disputing one claim made by special counsel John Durham in his case against a former Clinton campaign lawyer who was
charged last year with lying to the FBI. Michael Sussmann, who had worked for the Clinton campaign-hired Perkins Coie
lawyer, was charged by Durham's team with making false statements to the FBI when he met with then-General Counsel James
Baker in 2016, telling Baker that he did not represent any client. While Sussmann has denied Durham's allegations and
pleaded not guilty, Durham said that Sussmann had told the FBI that he wasn't working for Clinton's campaign when he was being
billed by them. During an interview last week, Jordan told Just The News that his "only concern" regarding Durham's
investigation is when the special prosecutor said that "he doesn't think the FBI knew who Sussmann was representing, but
I just find that hard to believe."
unmasks alliance between media, Democrat dirt diggers that triggered false Russia story. Just days after
Hillary Clinton emissaries Christopher Steele and Michael Sussmann approached the FBI in September 2016 with dirt that would
infuse the Russia collusion probe, the campaign's opposition research firm sent some of the same information to New York
Times journalists. [...] The missive is one of hundreds of emails that Special Counsel John Durham has obtained between
Clinton campaign operatives and journalists that spread "unverified derogatory information" about Donald Trump, spawning the
false Russia collusion narrative shortly before Election Day 2016. They've now been made public in court filings.
Durham recently disclosed several communications with reporters in a filing designed to reject the Clinton campaign's claim
that its Steele dossier and other research should be shielded from public view at an upcoming trial because it was covered by
attorney client privilege. Durham's argument is straightforward: Attorney-client privilege doesn't apply to
materials the campaign distributed widely to third parties.
Evidentiary Hearing: The Transcript. Yesterday, April 27, there was a pre-trial hearing in the Michael
Sussmann case relating to various evidentiary issues. For the uninitiated, Sussmann a former Perkins Coie partner, and
former attorney for the DNC/Clinton Campaign (and Rodney Joffe), has been charged by Special Counsel John Durham with
providing false statements to then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in the fall of 2016.
May Have Enough to Pursue Conspiracy Charges in Russiagate Investigation. A former FBI special agent and
federal prosecutor believes that special counsel John Durham "may have sufficient grounds to seek charges against multiple
parties for conspiracy to lie to the government," according to a report from The Epoch Times. The question is, though,
whether or not he will. The evidence is overwhelming, and Durham has already accused the Hillary Clinton campaign, her
lawyers, and others hired by the campaign of conspiring to dig up dirt on Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign.
He has hundreds of e-mails between Fusion GPS and reporters. Special Counsel John Durham just filed this motion
in response to the efforts of Hillary for America, Fusion GPS, et al. to keep secret (by use of the attorney-client and work
product privileges) communications involving Fusion GPS. You can read it [elsew]here. Durham states the "purported
privilege holders who have intervened do so in a case in which the defendant has denied representing any client when
he brought the Russian Bank-1 allegations to the FBI." The privilege controversy thus entraps Sussmann to a certain
extent, seemingly precluding his denial that he was working on behalf of a client. Brilliant. Additionally,
Durham casts doubt on the declaration of Marc Elias that Fusion GPS was retained to provide "legal advice."
Durham Springs His Trap After 'Hillary for America' Walks Right Into It. Last Tuesday, RedState reported on two
desperate filings put forth by Hillary for America and Fusion GPS. They attempted to assert attorney-client privilege over
materials that John Durham's prosecution of Michael Sussmann is seeking to get its hands on. That left the obvious
question open, though. How could Sussmann both simultaneously assert that he was acting on his own accord and not being
paid by the Hillary campaign while at the same time having Hillary for America and Fusion GPS assert attorney-client
privilege over their communications?
predicts still-classified documents will blow Durham inquiry wide open. A great deal more Russiagate
intelligence remains shrouded from public view and will stun the nation, according to former Director of National
Intelligence John Ratcliffe. The Trump-era spy chief expounded upon his expectation that there will be many more
indictments in special counsel John Durham's criminal inquiry into the origins and conduct of the Russia investigation.
"I expect there to be a lot more indictments to be forthcoming from John Durham besides the ones that have trickled out
so far. And that's based upon documents, some of which — many of which are not yet declassified,"
Ratcliffe said during a recent episode of the Charlie Kirk Show.
Prosecutor Filing Outlines Clearest, Most Detailed, Construct of Hillary Clinton Joint Venture Conspiracy to Fabricate
Trump-Russia Narrative. In a very late-night filing by Special Counsel John Durham, in the case against former
Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann, the special counsel gives the most detailed construct of the "joint venture" between the
Clinton team and allies to fabricate a Russian Collusion Conspiracy Theory against Donald Trump in 2016. As we have
noted, Durham is focused on the people outside government who fabricated information and triggered years of false accusations
against Donald Trump, which ultimately included the creation of a special counsel, Robert Mueller. John Durham has not
touched any of the players inside government within any of his filings, with the exception of former FBI legal counsel James "Jim"
Baker, who is a witness and gave testimony for three days to a grand jury. Durham will not touch anyone inside government.
Sketches Out The Hillary Campaign's "Joint Venture". What we see here is a very nice overview of what Durham
refers to as a "joint venture". In other words, a conspiracy involving two or more persons. When you substitute the
true names for the descriptive monikers (Tech Executive-1, and so forth) you end up with a very nice narrative that describes
the interaction among the players in the joint venture or conspiracy.
Filings Draw First Statements From Three Key Democratic Players in Sussmann Probe. A blizzard of petitions,
motions, and counter-motions have been filed in response to Special Counsel John Durham's April 6 request for documents from
the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign withheld from federal investigators under
attorney-client "privilege." Durham is seeking communications — primarily 38 email exchanges between the DNC
and Clinton's campaign and their law firm Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS, the "opposition research" contractor that circulated
debunked claims of an alleged "secret server" link between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank — in his case
against Michael Sussmann. Sussmann, who worked for Perkins Coie, goes on trial on May 16 in United States District
Court in Washington, D.C., on one count of making a false statement.
Obtained Emails Raise Questions About Department Of Defense Involvement In Spygate. After spending weeks
dismissing concerns about its work with Russia hoax-connected researchers, a newly discovered email from The Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency to a Georgia Tech researcher with the subject line "Mueller case" casts doubt on DARPA's
denials. Last month, The Federalist first reported that an email exchange obtained from Georgia Tech pursuant to a
Right-to-Know request indicated that Special Counsel John Durham's office was investigating the Democrat National Committee
hack. Manos Antonakakis, the Georgia Tech researcher branded "Researcher-1" in the special counsel's indictment of
former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, penned the email shortly after being questioned by one of Durham's top
prosecutors. The special counsel's office charged Sussmann last fall with lying to the FBI's general counsel, James
Baker, when Sussmann provided Baker with data and white papers supposedly showing the existence of a secret communications
network between the Donald Trump campaign and the Russian-based Alfa Bank.
for America and Fusion GPS Make Desperate Move to Fend off John Durham. With the trial of Michael Sussmann, one
of the Hillary Clinton operatives indicted in relation to the Trump-Russia hoax, less than a month out, the attempts to
derail John Durham's prosecution have heated up. Sussmann made a long-shot motion to outright dismiss the case, arguing
that even if he lied, it would not have been material to the FBI's investigation of Trump. That was eventually denied
after Durham ripped it apart. More recently, another filing by the prosecution alleged that Sussmann had billed the
Clinton campaign as part of a joint effort to spread falsehoods to the FBI targeting Trump. Now, in a move that reeks
of desperation, Hillary for America is trying to claim privilege over communications that Durham is seeking to use as evidence.
doesn't want Clinton tweet touting collusion claims to be admissible. The Democratic cybersecurity lawyer
charged with concealing his work for the Clinton campaign from the FBI doesn't want special counsel John Durham to be able to
use Hillary Clinton's tweet touting the Trump-Russia collusion claims he was pushing as evidence at trial. Michael
Sussmann was indicted in September for allegedly concealing his clients — Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and
"Tech Executive-1," known to be former Neustar executive Rodney Joffe — from FBI general counsel James Baker in
September 2016 when he pushed since-debunked claims of a secret backchannel between the Trump Organization and Russia's
Alfa-Bank. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.
stripping bare 'incestuous relationship' in Clinton campaign lawyer case: Chaffetz. Special counsel John
Durham is digging up evidence of an "incestuous relationship" underlying the so-called Russiagate scandal, according to a
former House Republican. Jason Chaffetz, guest-hosting Fox News's Sunday Morning Futures [4/17/2022], talked
about the latest developments from the politically charged criminal investigation with current members of Congress, focusing
on the case against Democratic cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann. Sussmann was indicted last September for
allegedly concealing his clients — Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and "Tech Executive-1," known to
be former Neustar executive Rodney Joffe — from FBI general counsel James Baker in September 2016 when he
presented internet data that suggested a now-debunked Trump-Russia link. Sussmann denies any wrongdoing and has pleaded
Sure Looks Like John Durham Has Made a Decision on Trump Dossier Author Christopher Steele. There's been a lot
of big news over the last several months regarding John Durham's investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion
hoax. The trial of Michael Sussman, who recently lost a bid to dismiss the case, is coming up shortly, and the most
recent filing points to a wide range of targets for Durham. Yet, there's also something else buried in those
revelations: It looks like Christopher Steele, the author of the infamous Trump Dossier, is going to get off scot-free.
says CIA concluded Sussmann's Trump dirt was not plausible. The CIA concluded in early 2017 that Clinton
campaign attorney Micheal Sussmann's dirt tying President Trump to Russia was "not technically plausible," special counsel
John Durham said in a court filing posted Saturday [4/16/2022]. Mr. Durham said Mr. Sussmann met with a second
government agency in February 2017 and presented evidence purportedly linking Mr. Trump to Russia. Although
Mr. Durham didn't name the agency, reports confirmed that Mr. Sussmann met with the CIA around this time.
During the meeting, Mr. Sussmann presented the CIA with accusations of a secret communications channel between the Trump
Organization and Russia's Alfa Bank, according to the court filing. He also passed along information about suspicious
internet data related to Russian-made phones being used near the White House, Mr. Durham said.
Says CIA Determined Data From Former Clinton Lawyer Was 'User-Created,' Not 'Technically Plausible'. Special
Counsel John Durham said in a Friday [4/15/2022] court filing that the CIA determined data from former Clinton campaign
lawyer Michael Sussmann surrounding alleged links between the Trump organization and Russia was "user created" and not
"technically plausible." Sussmann, a Democratic lawyer with ties to Clinton's 2016 campaign, was charged last year by
special counsel John Durham with lying to the FBI during a 2016 meeting. Sussmann filed a motion to dismiss the case in
February, but a judge ruled in April that the case will be allowed to proceed. In the latest court filing, Durham noted
that the CIA "concluded in early 2017" that the data didn't "withstand technical scrutiny."
Durham Filing on Sussmann Shows the Net Is Tightening, People Are Flipping. When last we left you in the saga
of the Durham probe, the defense's motion to dismiss the case against former Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann had been
denied. That means that barring a plea or further postponement, Sussmann will go to trial May 16 (as currently
scheduled), on the charge of the false statement to the FBI. As I noted, that must be making the folks in Clinton-land sweat
with what could be coming next. Now, more information has come out in the latest filings in the case and if it wasn't
obvious already, these filings make it clear that this is going beyond Michael Sussmann.
says CIA found data alleging Trump-Russia plot was 'user created'. Special Counsel John Durham asserted in a
court filing Friday that the CIA concluded data from Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann alleging coordination between
Donald Trump and Russia was "not technically plausible" and was "user created." In the filing, Durham responded to
objections from Sussmann's defense regarding what evidence could be admissible at Sussmann's trial, which is scheduled to
begin next month. Sussmann is accused of lying to the FBI by saying he was not attending a meeting on behalf of a
particular client when he was actually presenting the information on behalf of the Hillary Clinton campaign and a technology
executive with whom he worked. Durham in February first revealed that the government would establish during trial that
among the data "exploited" was domain name system (DNS) internet traffic pertaining to "a particular healthcare provider,
Trump Tower, Donald Trump's Central Park West apartment building, and the Executive Office of the President of the United
How The DOJ And FBI Are Spending Their Time Instead Of Rooting Out Actual Extremists. The FBI has been dealt
several blows by John Durham, the U.S. attorney hired to investigate the mistakes the FBI made with the alleged
then-presidential candidate Donald Trump-Russia collusion during the 2016 election. Durham has indicted Brookings
Institution researcher Igor Danchenko and Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann on counts of lying to the FBI.
Danchenko was the primary source used to create the Steele Dossier, one of the documents used to get a warrant on Trump's
campaign aide. The Trump-Russia collusion narrative played out for years before the Justice Department's independent
inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz released a report saying there was zero evidence of the collusion. Instead,
he found the FBI's investigation had been severely flawed by "so many basic and fundamental errors."
Judge Denies Hillary Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann's Motion to Dismiss Durham Case — Trial Begins May
16. Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann's motion to dismiss Durham's case was denied by a
federal judge on Wednesday [4/13/2022]. Sussmann was indicted last September for lying to the FBI. According to the
indictment, Sussmann falsely told James Baker he wasn't doing work "for any client" when he asked for a meeting with the FBI
where he presented bogus evidence the Trump Tower was secretly communicating with Kremlin-tied Alfa Bank. The attorneys
for Michael Sussmann in February requested the courts dismiss Durham's case against him.
Key Argument For Michael Sussmann's Defense Has Already Crumbled. Former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney
Michael Sussmann's defenders have already been proven wrong on their claim that prosecutors will have a hard time proving
Sussmann told the FBI that he was sharing Alfa Bank "intel" on his own, and not on behalf of a client. Shortly after
Special Counsel John Durham charged Sussmann with making a false statement to former FBI General Counsel James Baker when he
provided Baker with data and three "white papers" purporting to establish a secret communication channel between the Trump
organization and the Russia-based Alfa Bank, Sussmann's friends, former colleagues, and political bedfellows launched a
defense of the former Clinton campaign attorney. Predictably, The Brookings Institute, which served as ground zero for
the Russia collusion hoax, provided cover to Sussmann on its Lawfare blog.
The Court Allow Special Counsel John Durham To See Clinton Campaign Documents? Late Wednesday, Special Counsel
John Durham filed a motion to compel the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee, Fusion GPS, and
Perkins Coie to provide the judge presiding over the Michael Sussmann criminal case copies of unredacted documents previously
withheld from the government. The Clinton campaign and DNC have claimed the withheld or redacted documents are
protected by attorney-client privilege.
Asks Court to Compel Production From Clinton Campaign, DNC. Special counsel John Durham's team on April 6 asked
a federal judge to force Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign and two other parties to hand over documents they claim are
protected by attorney-client privilege. The campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and research and
intelligence firm Fusion GPS appear to be withholding documents that aren't actually protected by the privilege, Durham's
team said in the filing, entered in the case against ex-Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann. Of the withheld materials,
almost all "appear to lack any connection to actual or expected litigation or the provision of legal advice," prosecutors
told U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee who is overseeing the case. In fact, of the 1,455
documents being withheld by Fusion GPS, only 18 emails and attachments are said to involve an attorney.
Prosecutors Provide Evidence of Clinton Lawyer Michael Sussmann Lying to FBI. [John] Durham can only outline
the external participants in the corrupt activity of the U.S. government. No internal participants of government,
legislative or executive, are allowed to be investigated. In the latest court filings against Clinton campaign lawyer
Michael Sussmann, the prosecution drops some significant discoveries outlining how the external participants lied to
willfully blind FBI officials.
Democratic lawyer Sussmann put his lie to the FBI in writing. John Durham released a potential smoking gun in
the case against Michael Sussmann on Monday night, as he published documents showing the Democratic cybersecurity lawyer
messaged the FBI general counsel that he was not working on behalf of any client, when in fact he was working for the Clinton
campaign. Sussmann was indicted last September for allegedly concealing his clients — Hillary Clinton's 2016
presidential campaign and "Tech Executive-1," known to be former Neustar executive Rodney Joffe — from FBI general
counsel James Baker when he pushed since-debunked claims of a secret back channel between the Trump Organization and Russia's
Alfa Bank. The September 2021 indictment alleged Sussmann lied when he said he was not providing the allegations to the
FBI on behalf of any client when he was in fact doing so on behalf of Joffe and the Clinton campaign. Last year,
Sussmann's lawyers attempted to argue there was no evidence that Sussmann lied to Baker.
lawyer Sussmann doesn't want Steele dossier brought up during Durham trial. The Democratic cybersecurity lawyer
charged by special counsel John Durham with lying to the FBI about working for the Clinton campaign doesn't want British
ex-spy Christopher Steele's dossier brought up at the trial following indications from the special counsel that it will
be. Michael Sussmann was indicted last year on charges of concealing his clients, Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential
campaign and "tech executive" Rodney Joffe, from FBI general counsel James Baker when he pushed since-debunked claims of a
secret backchannel between the Trump Organization and Russia's Alfa-Bank. He has pleaded not guilty.
Don't buy left's
lies! Why John Durham's investigation matters. Get ready for another round of the media telling you why
John Durham's investigation doesn't matter. After all this, isn't this just a case of lying to a federal agent?
The Times, Washington Post, CNN, et al. will rush in to say it's nothing. It's everything — and here's
why. If Hillary Clinton or one of her spokespeople went to the media in 2016 and said Donald Trump was a Russian agent,
yes, they would have gotten a half-hour on MSNBC, but others would have been asking for proof, curious that this wasn't just
the fantasy of a political opponent. Ah, but what if you could get the FBI to open an investigation? That would
give this whole enterprise a veneer of credibility. Then you have someone leak it to the press and, voila, you've
weaponized the nation's justice system and no one is the wiser. And the best part is you don't even need any real
evidence! Just lie a lot.
2016 campaign, lawyer, tech exec in 'joint venture' to smear Trump, Durham alleges. Hillary Clinton's campaign,
its lawyer and a tech executive took part in a "joint venture" to gather and spread dirt about Donald Trump during the 2016
presidential campaign, special counsel John Durham charges in a new filing. The bombshell claim was made in a 48-page
motion filed late Monday arguing for the admission of additional evidence ahead of Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann's
pending trial for allegedly lying to the FBI. At the heart of the case is a Sept. 18, 2016, text message Sussmann
sent to then-FBI general counsel James Baker, which was reproduced in Monday's filing.
Lawyer Just Got Caught A In Big Lie By The Durham Investigation. Special Counsel John Durham just dropped a
major bomb about Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann, a key player in the Russia hoax and resulting turmoil and one of the main
targets of Durham's investigation so far. That bomb is that Durham's team has uncovered a text between James Baker, the
FBI General Counsel at the time, and Michael Sussman, a text that Durham is claiming shows Sussman lied to the FBI about his
work on behalf of the Clinton Campaign.
Durham has proof Hillary's lawyer lied to the FBI. [S]ometimes, long-delayed justice does eventually
arrive. In this case, it's beginning to appear that Special Counsel John Durham's efforts to investigate the origins of
the Russia hoax are beginning to center on Hillary Clinton and her team. The latest sign that Durham is on the march is
an in limine motion he filed with the Court seeking to have admitted into evidence a text message that one of
Hillary's campaign attorneys, Michael Sussmann, sent to the FBI. Almost two months ago, Durham filed a conflict of
interest motion with the D.C. Federal District Court. In it, he asserted that his office would show that Perkins Coie,
the attorney for Hillary Clinton and her 2016 political campaign, spied on Trump during the campaign and after he became president.
Durham: Ex-Clinton Lawyer Allegedly Lied to FBI in Writing. Special counsel John Durham published
potentially conclusive evidence in the case against former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann on Monday night, showing
alleged text messages the cybersecurity lawyer sent to the FBI general counsel that he wasn't working for any client when he
provided information to the bureau. Durham's team charged Sussmann last year with lying to the FBI when he presented
information about then-presidential candidate Donald Trump to then-FBI general counsel James "Jim" Baker in late 2016.
Sussmann allegedly concealed that he was working for the Democratic National Committee, Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign, and
tech executive Rodney Joffe when he provided the claim that the Trump Organization had a secret link with a Russian bank,
which the FBI later said was not credible.
bombshell: Prosecutor unveils smoking gun FBI text message, 'joint venture' to smear Trump. Special
Counsel John Durham is revealing new smoking gun evidence, a text message that shows a Clinton campaign lawyer lied to the
FBI, while putting the courts on notice he is prepared to show the effort to smear Donald Trump with now-disproven Russia
collusion allegations was a "conspiracy." In a bombshell court filing late Monday night, Durham for the first time
suggested Hillary Clinton's campaign, her researchers and others formed a "joint venture or conspiracy" for the purpose of
weaving the collusion story to harm Trump's election chances and then the start of his presidency. "These parties acted
as 'joint venturer[s]' and therefore should be 'considered as co-conspirator[s],'" he wrote.
hearing on Sussmann case, Durham's team reveals a little of their plan for prosecution. Michael Sussmann is the
Democratic lawyer who is being prosecuted by special counsel John Durham for lying to the FBI. Back in February, Sussmann's
attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the case arguing that even if their client lied about who he was working for when he
brought information about Trump and Alfa Bank to the FBI, that lie was an "ancillary matter." Today [3/31/2022], the
judge held a pre-trial hearing about the request for dismissal and it sounds as if it didn't go well for Sussmann.
to produce 'large volume' of classified discovery in Steele dossier source case. The Justice Department plans
to produce a "large volume" of classified materials this week in the Russiagate case against the main source for British
ex-spy Christopher Steele's anti-Trump dossier. Special counsel John Durham made the assertion in a filing Tuesday
asking a judge for a deadline extension for the production of classified discovery in accordance with the Classified
Information Procedures Act, a law that establishes procedures for protecting classified information in criminal cases.
Durham pinned the need for a delay on agency personnel being involved in matters related to Russia's war in Ukraine.
Affirms Special Counsel's Probe Into The Alfa Bank Hoax. A Georgia Tech researcher's candid reaction to the
indictment of a former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer hints at an intriguing development in the Russia collusion
scandal. Two days after the indictment dropped, the researcher told a university lawyer and other higher-ups that the
special counsel had lied in the indictment about the Alfa Bank hoax, according to a document first obtained by The Federalist
on Thursday. But the details the Georgia Tech researcher explained instead reveal a more damning scenario concerning
his peers' potential access to data from the Executive Office of the President, or EOP, during the Trump transition
period. These new revelations come six months after Special Counsel John Durham indicted Michael Sussmann on one count
of lying to FBI General Counsel James Baker.
emails prompt DARPA to deny involvement in attributing 2016 DNC hack to Russia. A Pentagon agency has denied
any role in attributing the 2016 hack of the Democratic National Committee to Russia after an email indicated special counsel
John Durham's team asked a computer expert who had researched Trump-Russia collusion claims about it. Democratic
cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann was indicted last year for allegedly concealing his clients, including Hillary
Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, from the FBI when he pushed since-debunked claims of a secret back channel between the
Trump Organization and Russia's Alfa Bank. Durham revealed in February he has evidence Sussmann's other client, known
to be former Neustar executive Rodney Joffe, "exploited" domain name system internet traffic at Trump Tower, former President
Donald Trump's Central Park West apartment building, and "the Executive Office of the President of the United States."
Counsel's Office Is Investigating The 2016 DNC Server Hack. The U.S. Department of Defense tasked the same
Georgia Tech researcher embroiled in the Alfa Bank hoax with investigating the "origins" of the Democratic National Committee
hacker, according to an email first obtained by The Federalist on Wednesday. That email also indicates the special
counsel's office is investigating the investigation into the DNC hack and that prosecutors harbor concerns about the DOD's
decision to involve the Georgia Tech researcher in its probe. The special counsel branded this person "Researcher-1" in
court filings. His identity has since been confirmed by his attorney as Georgia Tech's Manos Antonakakis.
Antonakakis first garnered public attention when Special Counsel John Durham indicted former Hillary Clinton campaign
attorney Michael Sussmann.
Counsel's Office Is Investigating The 2016 DNC Server Hack. The U.S. Department of Defense tasked the same
Georgia Tech researcher embroiled in the Alfa Bank hoax with investigating the "origins" of the Democratic National Committee
hacker, according to an email first obtained by The Federalist on Wednesday. That email also indicates the special
counsel's office is investigating the investigation into the DNC hack and that prosecutors harbor concerns about the DOD's
decision to involve the Georgia Tech researcher in its probe. The special counsel branded this person "Researcher-1" in
court filings. His identity has since been confirmed by his attorney as Georgia Tech's Manos Antonakakis.
New Special Counsel Arguments Against A Russia Hoaxer's Attempt To Escape. Special Counsel John Durham
demolished a key Russia hoax figure's attempt to get criminal charges against him dropped. Approximately two weeks ago,
Michael Sussmann's legal team filed a motion to dismiss the criminal charge the special counsel's office brought against the
former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney. On Friday [3/4/2022], the special counsel filed a response that demolished
Sussmann's legal arguments, highlighted several significant facts related to the pending charge, and revealed the
ridiculousness of the defense's attempt to hide behind the First Amendment.
Rips Apart the Sussmann Motion to Dismiss and Lays out the Clinton Connection. I'm guessing someone didn't like
all the coverage of the Clinton connection to the Durham probe and the allegations in the Durham filing in the case against
former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann that revealed that servers connected to President Donald Trump were being
surveilled for their DNS lookups. After the news came out, the attorneys for Michael Sussmann moved to strike the
factual background in the Durham filing that has raised all the furor, claiming essentially that Special Counsel John Durham
said too much, and that the intent was "to politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool." But
then Sussmann's attorneys moved to dismiss the entire case against him, basically arguing he didn't say enough —
that he didn't state a case for the charge — and that Durham didn't allege all the elements of the charge against him.
Durham Blasts Former Clinton Lawyer Sussmann's Effort to Dismiss Case. Special Counsel John Durham blasted
Hillary Clinton's campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann for trying to get the indictment dismissed. Sussmann was indicted in
September for lying to the FBI. According to the indictment, Sussmann falsely told James Baker he wasn't doing work "for
any client" when he asked for a meeting with the FBI where he presented bogus evidence the Trump Tower was secretly
communicating with Kremlin-tied Alfa Bank.
Figure Whose Attorney Outed Him To The New York Times Now Wants His Name Hidden In Court Documents. No longer
able to control the media narrative about Rodney Joffe's role in peddling the Alfa Bank hoax to the FBI and CIA, his
attorneys now seek to silence Special Counsel John Durham. That revelation came from a brief docket entry in a federal
district court earlier this week documenting a sealed motion to intervene that Joffe's lawyers had filed in the criminal case
against Michael Sussman, in which they asked for references to "Tech Executive-1" to be expunged from the court
filings. The special counsel's office indicted Sussmann on September 16, 2021, charging the former Clinton campaign
lawyer with one count of lying to FBI General Counsel James Baker when Sussmann provided Baker information purporting to show
a secret communication channel between the Trump organization and the Russian-based Alfa Bank. Specifically, the
indictment charged that "Sussmann lied about the capacity in which he was providing the allegations to the FBI," with
Sussmann falsely stating "he was not doing his work on the aforementioned allegations 'for any client.'"
New Things We Just Learned About the Special Counsel Investigation. [#1] Rodney Joffe Pled the Fifth Twice:
Earlier this month, the Russian-connected Alfa Bank filed a motion in a Florida state court seeking an extension of time to
serve the numerous "John Doe" defendants it had sued there in June 2020. Alfa Bank had sued "John Doe, et al." as
stand-ins for the defendants it claimed were responsible for executing "a highly sophisticated cyberattacking scheme to
fabricate apparent communications between [Alfa Bank] and the Trump Organization" in the months leading up to the 2016
presidential election. After filing suit, Alfa Bank began discovery in an attempt to learn the identity of the
individuals responsible for what the large, privately owned Russian bank alleged was the creation of a fake computer trail
connecting it to the Trump Organization. Among others Alfa Bank sought information from was Joffe, the man identified
as Tech Executive-1 in Special Counsel John Durham's indictment against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael
Sussmann. Joffe's attempts to quash Alfa Bank's subpoena failed.
Always React Like Third-Graders. [Scroll down] Now that John Durham has released his report that casts
Hillary and her 2016 campaign acolytes in what can be charitably termed a "very precarious ethical position," the liberal
media are dismissing and pooh-poohing the findings with predictable childlike obstinacy. Like any embarrassed,
humiliated young person, the liberal media simply refuse to acknowledge reality, insisting that what is real doesn't actually
exist. The proof, of course, is the cliché that once a liberal is confronted with undeniable facts and logic,
they will resort to personal, vitriolic attacks.
and Dirty Durham Explainer. You can learn a lot by just listening — unless you're listening to the
legacy media. A recent example is the motion Special Counsel John Durham filed in the case of Michael Sussman on
Feb. 11. Sussman was indicted for lying to FBI General Counsel James Baker when he presented "evidence" suggesting
an illicit connection between Trump and the Russian Alfa Bank and said he had no client; we'll get to the details, but the
gist is that Sussman was billing the Clinton campaign and Rodney Joffe when he said he had no client. At the time,
Sussman was employed by Perkins Coie, a high-powered Washington law firm. [...] I've talked to several lawyer friends, and
frankly, this appears to indicate many violations of law — too many to list. But plenty that would
send mere politically unconnected mortals to Leavenworth for the rest of their lives.
Trump, and 6 Keys to What's Next in Special Counsel's Spying Probe. A single court filing has created immense
buzz in a Justice Department special counsel's case against a former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer. Clinton and the
indicted lawyer, Michael Sussmann, were both dismissive of the revelation in special counsel John Durham's filings.
Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump says Durham's allegation proves his long-standing claim that he was spied on in a
political scandal that is bigger than Watergate. A federal grand jury already has indicted Sussmann on a charge of
making a false statement to the FBI during a September 2016 meeting where he talked about cyberlinks between Trump and the
Russian government. Sussmann allegedly told the FBI that he had no clients, when he actually represented both the
Clinton campaign and technology executive Rodney Joffe. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.
adds to Spygate's chapter on Trump transition. Special counsel John Durham's recent filing alleging that a
Democratic-allied technology executive "exploited" White House internet traffic after the 2016 election appears to add to a
growing list of instances in which former President Donald Trump and his team were targets of snooping during the
presidential transition period following his surprise victory. The fresh findings, which raise questions about just how
involved former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her failed 2016 campaign were in pushing a narrative of Trump-Russia
collusion, add more fuel to the so-called Spygate scandal in which it has been revealed that the FBI targeted Trump during
his campaign into his presidency. That includes British ex-spy Christopher Steele's discredited dossier being used to
obtain warrants from the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court as well as the unmasking controversy involving
retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, FBI leadership's use of a Trump Tower transition team intelligence briefing to
further its Trump-Russia investigation, and more.
Hope The Special Counsel (And Others) Are Investigating The People Who Watch You Online. Arevelation buried in
a cache of documents opens a new and potentially important investigative corridor for Special Counsel John Durham. The
shady tech executive who featured prominently in the federal indictment of Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann
was also communicating with a covert group of computer scientists skilled in mining internet data. This revelation
raises concerns that the man referred to in special counsel documents as Tech Executive-1, Rodney Joffe, may have shared
sensitive government and private internet data more broadly than previously thought. Joffe's role in Spygate represents
one of the most recent developments exposed by the Special Counsel's office. For years, the Christopher Steele dossier
stood as a headstone marking the demise of the Russia collusion hoax perpetrated on our country by the Clinton campaign and
the corrupt media. But recent court filings indicate the Clinton campaign also holds blame for peddling a second con
concerning the Russian Alfa Bank.
Durham sent a message to the attorney general and the country. John Durham has been a special prosecutor for
almost a year and a half — not a long time, but plenty of time for a drumbeat to begin that he was showing little
progress against his orders to examine the origins of the debunked Trump-Russia collusion narrative that convulsed a
presidency. His few indictments so far have been directed against peripheral players, feeding a fear among Donald
Trump's supporters that elites higher up the stack are going to get away with their chicanery. The problem for Durham
is that these perceptions were providing the Biden Department of Justice (DOJ) with increasing political top cover to shut
down the special prosecutor's office as an unproductive, politics-driven exercise in futility that is wasting taxpayer
dollars. If Durham were to be terminated, the American people might not even push back much since no one had a clue
whether his investigation was bearing meaningful fruit. Attorney General Merrick Garland already had undercut Durham's
investigation once by taking steps to rehabilitate the reputation of fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, a key figure in
the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion debacle. The Biden DOJ is not friendly to the goals of Mr. Durham.
Media Hides Hillary's Hackers. [Scroll down] In reality, the highly regarded Justice Department special
counsel John Durham submitted legal papers Feb. 11 that accused Hillary Clinton's campaign and pro-Hillary attorneys of hiring
technicians to hack into the computer servers of Donald Trump, his residence, and his presidential campaign offices. They
did so, Durham wrote, to "establish 'an inference' and 'narrative' tying then-candidate Trump to Russia," and "for the
purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump." When such evidence did not emerge, Team Hillary yelled
about it anyway. What good is a lie unless everyone hears it? "Computer scientists have uncovered a covert server
linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank," Hillary's chief foreign policy adviser, Jake Sullivan, declared
Oct. 21, 2016. "This secret hotline may be the key to unlocking the mystery of Trump's ties to Russia." Sullivan
was as transparent as tar. He failed to disclose that Hillary Clinton financed these "computer scientists." The
duchess of Chappaqua made this Big Lie even bigger.
Answers: Trump Transition
data was passed to the CIA. Last week, we documented Special Counsel John Durham's motion discussing the
potential conflicts of interest of Michael Sussmann's attorneys. That filing was important for a number of reasons,
mainly because Durham stated that Sussmann's client, Rodney Joffe (a federal contractor with access to "sensitive" data)
"exploited" internet traffic data (domain name system, or DNS) pertaining to "the Executive Office of the President of the
United States ("EOP")." [...] We also asked why Joffe and Sussmann continued to push false allegations of Trump's ties
to Russia after the election. One could theorize that they made the Trump/Russia connection in the summer and fall of
2016 to hurt Trump politically.
Sussmann's Lawyers: It's OK If He Lied To The FBI. On Feb. 17, attorneys for Michael Sussmann, the former
attorney for the Hillary Clinton campaign, filed a motion to dismiss the criminal case pending against him in the D.C.
district court. Special Counsel John Durham charged Sussmann in September 2021, in a one-count indictment, with lying
to former FBI General Counsel James Baker in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2). Specifically, the indictment
charged that when Sussmann met with Baker on September 19, 2016, and provided him "white papers" and data files purporting to
show the Trump organization had established a secret communications channel with the Russia-connected Alfa Bank, Sussmann
falsely claimed he was not acting on behalf of a client. In truth, the indictment alleged, Sussmann was working both
for the Clinton campaign and an unnamed "U.S. technology industry executive," since identified as Rodney Joffe.
Durham Filed the Motion That Generated a Feeding Frenzy. As the Durham probe has crept along, often with nary a
peep out of the prosecutor's office for month after month, with Democrats complaining that he was wasting resources and Trump
supporters squawking that he was asleep at the switch, it has been apparent that Durham does not perceive it as his job to
feed the media beast. He did not file a motion with the court because he thought it was a slow news day.
Campaign Is Now Panicking Over Durham Probe. On Thursday, attorneys for Michael Sussmann, the lawyer from
Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign who was charged last year with lying to federal agents, filed a motion to dismiss
Special Counsel John Durham's case against him, reports the New York Post. The lawyers called the matter "extraordinary
prosecutorial overreach." Sussmann's legal team insists that he didn't make false statements to the FBI and that he's
being targeted on a technicality. Sussman voluntarily approached FBI agents in Sept. 2016 to "pass along information
that raised national security concerns." Instead, Sussman came to them with bogus information linking the Trump
Organization and the Kremlin-linked Alfa-Bank.
Durham stands by snooping evidence in case against Democratic lawyer. Special counsel John Durham is contesting
indicted Democratic lawyer Michael Sussmann's call for the Washington, D.C., federal court to strike explosive allegations
regarding data mining at Trump properties and the White House that the prosecutor says was used to weave a phony collusion
narrative between former President Donald Trump and Russia. A filing from Durham on Thursday argued that his reasons
for making public findings asserting that a tech executive, with whom Sussmann was affiliated, was working to dig up
dirt on Trump were "valid" and that any media misinterpretations do not "undermine" the facts.
Campaign Lawyer Attempts to Get Out of Durham Prosecution. The Hillary Clinton campaign attorney who has been
indicted by Special Counsel John Durham for lying to federal investigators filed to have charges dismissed Thursday.
"Attorneys for Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann filed a motion Thursday to dismiss the case against him in Special
Counsel John Durham's investigation, claiming a case of 'extraordinary prosecutorial overreach,'" Fox News reports. An
indictment details the charges against Sussmann, who failed to disclose his work for the Clinton campaign after telling the
FBI President Donald Trump was colluding with the Russian government to win the 2016 presidential election. He pleaded
not guilty and his attorneys argue his statements to the FBI were not false, but rather a simple tip to the law enforcement agency.
sheds light on Hillary's 'master class' in deception. 'Just wait until you see' what's coming, he says. Former
Trump campaign foreign policy adviser George Papadopoulos slammed the original Russia probe against former President Donald
Trump as a "masterclass in deception" on Wednesday during an interview with Fox News in response to Special Counsel John
Durham's latest explosive filing. Papadopoulos asserted that the original investigation was all about "manufacturing a
situation" that involved Trump and his associates in order to falsely tie them to Russia, according to Fox News. In
Durhams' Feb. 11 court filing, he alleged that "Tech Executive-1," who has now been identified as Rodney Joffe, and former
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's campaign attorney Michael Sussmann, "exploited" Internet traffic connected to a "particular
healthcare provider," Trump Tower, Trump's Central Park West apartment building, and the Executive Office of the President
of the United States in order to "establish 'an inference' and 'narrative'" to tie Trump to Russia.
scandal: The sheer dishonesty of the media is astounding. [Scroll down] Most of the media not only
didn't care they perpetuated the lies for years in their attempt to destroy Trump. Now, special prosecutor Durham has a
filing detailing a small portion of the illegal spying and criminal activity and most of the media has downplayed or buried
the report. The NYT, in collusion with other leftist media outlets, has finally started attacking the story instead of
reporting the story. Hillary and others must be protected. They say it is hard to understand, it is old news,
and it may be misinformation. The truth hasn't mattered to the NYT and other media outlets for a long time. There
is nothing hard to understand about the story that dwarfs Watergate. They lied and they spied.
implications of Durham probe threaten to undermine Biden. The bombshell revelations filed late last week by
Special Counsel John Durham, and ignored by most of the mainstream media, could have profound implications on Americans'
ability to trust our institutions. [...] [#1] Government can't be trusted to protect our data. The Clinton campaign,
according to Durham, "exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data" and "enlisted the assistance of
researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a
pending federal government cybersecurity research contract." That means data collected on us by the federal government has
now been used for partisan political activities. How much other data is out there and who can access it? [#2] White
House Communications are not secure. No one should be able to access them. The fact that the Clinton campaign was
able to reflects a severe national security threat. Who else has access to White House communications? [...] [#6] No one
can trust mainstream news outlets who buried this story. Though we knew this, the traditional and social media reinforces this
fact with their obvious double standard in the way they ignore and actively suppress the Clinton corruption story (which is true)
versus their saturation coverage of the purely speculative Trump/Russia collusion story (which has been debunked).
Campaign, Its High-Tech Allies, and Political Espionage. With the latest filing by special counsel John Durham,
a chilling story continues to unfold even though most mainstream media outlets are downplaying it. The story: A
presidential campaign quite possibly used its allies in the tech sector to engage in political espionage — not
just against the opposition candidate, but against a sitting president. The underhanded activity even improperly exploited
sensitive communications from the White House. On Feb. 11, Durham filed a motion about potential conflicts of
interest by Latham & Watkins, the law firm defending former Perkins Coie partner Michael Sussmann. Sussmann fed the FBI
a false story about a claimed "covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russia-based bank,"
identified in news reports as Alpha Bank.
suddenly develops 'laryngitis' after years of pushing Trump-Russia collusion, critics say. The mainstream media
spent years fixated on alleged collusion between Donald Trump and Russia but have largely downplayed or otherwise ignored the
court filing from Special Counsel John Durham as part of his investigation into the origins of the sprawling Russia
probe. "The traditional media is more interested in whisper campaigns and rumors than filings from U.S. attorneys,"
former chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and Fox News contributor Jason Chaffetz told Fox News
Digital. "If they got it wrong, and they did, then cover the truth with the same vigor," Chaffetz continued. "It
seems some media outlets were so interested in perpetuating a lie they can't now say they were wrong."
Clinton Finally Responds to Durham's Trump Spying Bombshell. Hillary Clinton responded to the recent finding by
Special Counsel John Durham that a lawyer working for her 2016 campaign had paid a tech firm that covertly spied on the Trump
campaign and even his presidency. She predictably blamed Donald Trump and Fox News for "desperately spinning up a fake
scandal to distract from his real ones." [...] Clinton was recently confronted in public with the latest Durham bombshell
that she paid intelligence contractors to spy on Donald Trump during his campaign and while he was in the White House.
Durham, Almost the Media's Invisible Man. Special counsel John Durham, tasked with investigating the origins of
the FBI's probe into Donald Trump and Russia, reported a client for Hillary Clinton's law firm, Perkins Coie, was monitoring
internet traffic at Trump Tower, Trump's Central Park West apartment building and the Executive Office of the President.
They wanted information to sell a "narrative" of Trump-Russia collusion. ABC, CBS and NBC coverage? None.
Other networks and major newspapers balked. Then they tiptoed in to deny it meant anything.
Media Knock Durham Filings that Alleged Clinton Associates Spied on Trump. Establishment media on Tuesday
[2/15/2022] panned Special Counsel John Durham's court filings that alleged Hillary Clinton's campaign associates spied on
Donald Trump's campaign and presidency. After more than 48 hours since Durham's court filing revelations were reported,
the New York Times and Washington Post finally wrote articles on the subject, but they cast doubt on the
filings' significance. The outlets framed their articles around criticizing "right-leaning media" for "carefully"
scrutinizing "off track" narratives that are "often based on a misleading presentation of the facts or outright misinformation."
intriguing points about the Durham allegations. There are few people who have followed the Russia collusion
hoax as closely as Dan Bongino. That's why I made sure to listen to his podcast the Monday after the story broke
regarding John Durham's allegations about the Hillary campaign spying on Trump Tower, Trump's apartment, and the White
House. Sure enough, Bongino had a couple of interesting points to make. Also, I'll share with you my predictions
about what's going to happen on the Hillary side of things. When I wrote about the Durham motion to investigate
potential conflicts of interest between Michael Sussmann and his attorney, the law firm of Latham & Watkins, I focused on the
core point, which was that Hillary's campaign, acting through the Perkins Coie law firm, spied on Trump. Bongino,
though, had a few more subtle points to make. [Video clip]
Sets in After Revelation That Durham Investigation Is 'Accelerating,' Targeting 'Other Matters'. Some days ago,
John Durham dropped a bombshell filing that confirmed what has been suspected for years — that Hillary Clinton
used operatives to spy on Donald Trump. More disturbing, though, was the revelation that those who were passing her
information were exploiting a prior Pentagon contract to actually monitor the Executive Office of the President after Trump's
inauguration (click here for my take on why that happened). All of that was funneled through Perkins Coie, the now-infamous
law firm which employed the currently indicted Michael Sussman. Now, a new report from Fox News says that Durham's
investigation is "accelerating," and that it is also targeting "other matters" outside of just Sussman (and Igor Danchenko).
As an aside, the article offers a very in-depth, long-form breakdown of what has transpired with Durham.
Campaign Also Had Internet Company Allegedly Connected to Durham Probe on the Payroll. We reported earlier on
some of the Biden connections to the Durham probe, including DNI John Ratcliffe confirming that Joe Biden had been told about
the plan from the Clinton campaign to smear Donald Trump. But, there's another intriguing piece of information that the
Free Beacon just dropped — that in 2020, the Biden campaign also paid the same internet company being talked about
concerning the Durham probe. [...] That raises the question: was the same action going on against Trump in 2020?
We Learned From Michael Sussmann's Response To The Spygate Special Counsel. Late yesterday [2/14/2022], Michael
Sussmann filed a response to John Durham's Friday court filing that set off a media buzz over the criminal case against the
former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney. In the six-page memo filed in the D.C. federal court, Sussmann's Latham and
Watkins attorneys informed the court they had previously advised the special counsel that Sussman understood his right to
consult with independent counsel and intended to waive any potential conflicts of interest. Sussmann's filing added
that he does not oppose Durham's request that he waive those issues on the record. Sussmann then spent the next five
pages complaining about the special counsel's filing. [...] In other words, the media has finally begun covering the special
counsel's investigation and the indictment against Sussmann, and he is none too happy.
That horse is already out of the barn, isn't it? Clinton
campaign lawyer Sussmann asks court to 'strike' Durham's 'factual background' from latest filing. Attorneys for
Michael Sussmann, the former Clinton campaign lawyer charged as part of Special Counsel John Durham's investigation into the
origins of the Trump-Russia probe, demanded that the court "strike" the "factual background" section of Durham's latest
filing, arguing it will "taint the jury pool." Durham filed a motion on Feb. 11 focused on potential conflicts of
interest related to the representation of Sussmann, who has been charged with making a false statement to a federal agent.
Sussmann has pleaded not guilty. "Unfortunately, the Special Counsel has done more than simply file a document
identifying potential conflicts of interest," Sussmann's attorneys wrote.
investigation has entered a new phase and 2 glaring questions stand out. [Scroll down] So, they
fabricated the Big Lie — claiming Trump was a puppet of Russian President Putin. Voting for Trump was like
putting a Russian asset in the Oval Office. They didn't worry about getting caught since they could bury it once she
won. Clinton's chief disinformation officer, who was also her foreign policy adviser, peddled the story to the
press. The ratings hungry media was happy to repeat the Big Lie. They hated Trump with a passion, so savaging him
was easy. Then the impossible happened. Trump was elected despite their efforts. Clinton's suddenly
unemployed campaign team had to cover their tracks. What if someone found out they were breaking into Internet activity
and communications of the rival campaign? If the incoming Trump administration ever found out, they'd be in big
trouble. It would be even worse than Watergate.
Gabbard Points Out the 'Biggest Threat' to U.S. Democracy. For years the leftist media and Democrats have
issued warnings about "threats" to American democracy and yet, much of it was projection. As reported over the weekend,
Special Counsel John Durham confirmed the Clinton campaign hired a technology company to infiltrate servers at Trump Tower
and while President Donald Trump was in the White House. In other words, they were spying. Former Democratic
presidential nominee and U.S. Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard is sounding that alarm about true threats to American democracy and
where they are coming from. [Tweets]
Patel Drops Bombs — Durham Grand Jury Interviewed 24 People So Far. Kash Patel, the former chief of
staff to the Acting United States Secretary of Defense, joined Greg Kelly on Monday night to discuss the explosive
revelations released this past weekend that the Hillary camp and Democrats were spying on Donald Trump's campaign and later
the Trump White House. According to Durham, tech expert Donald Joffe and his associates exploited internet data from
"the Executive Office of the President of the United States" to further their own political agenda. Durham
investigators uncovered evidence that shows Hillary Clinton's team paid operatives to "infiltrate" the Trump Tower and then
President Trump's White House servers to link Trump to Russia. Kash Patel worked with Rep. Devin where he helped
to discredit the investigations into Donald Trump and Russian interference in the 2016 election.
Lawyers [are] Furious at Durham for Exposing Spying. Lawyers for former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael
Sussmann are furious at Special Counsel John Durham for describing an effort to spy on President Donald Trump while in
office — and cited Breitbart News coverage in their response. On Friday, as Breitbart News reported, Durham
filed a motion about the defense lawyers' potential conflict of interest. He also included information about an effort
to mine data about cell phone communications around Trump Tower, Trump's private residence, and the Executive Office of the
President in an effort to create a narrative about Russian "collusion": [...] On Monday [2/14/2022], Durham's lawyers
responded, not only dismissing concerns about a conflict of interest but denying the allegations and complaining that they
were prejudicial to their client's case.
Nunes expects 'many more' Durham indictments. Special counsel John Durham's criminal inquiry into the origins
and conduct of the Russia investigation will lead to "many more" indictments, former Rep. Devin Nunes predicted Monday
[2/14/2022]. As for whether Hillary Clinton, whose 2016 presidential campaign and associates are increasingly being
implicated in the so-called Russiagate scandal, finds herself in legal jeopardy for possibly directing the creation of a
collusion narrative to undermine former President Donald Trump's campaign and administration, the onetime chairman of the
House Intelligence Committee suggested that Durham has to conduct a flawless investigation. "What did she know, and
when did she know it?" Nunes said in response to Newsmax host Eric Bolling asking if Durham has gathered sufficient evidence
to show criminal intent by Clinton and have her thrown in jail.
executive fires back at John Durham. A technology expert shot back at special counsel John Durham in response
to claims that he "exploited" access to internet traffic to build a narrative of collusion between former President Donald
Trump's 2016 campaign and Russia. As Trump and his allies argue that Durham has found a "far bigger crime" than what
happened in the Watergate scandal, "Technology Executive-1," known to be former Neustar Senior Vice President Rodney Joffe,
issued a statement via a representative to combat the "allegations" made in the special counsel's recent court filing.
Deputy Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre tells reporter to go to the DOJ when pressed on Durham's bombshell
allegations. The White House on Monday [2/14/2022] refused to be drawn into the growing controversy over
claims that Hillary Clinton's allies tried to smear Donald Trump, and whether internet data collection amounted to
spying. Three times Joe Biden's principal deputy press secretary was asked whether the president had any concerns about
campaigns hacking into opponents' computer systems to gather dirt. And three times during the White House daily
briefing Karine Jean-Pierre referred all questions to the Department of Justice.
More Intrigues Inside John Durham's Latest Special Counsel Filings. Beyond the blockbuster news from Friday's
special counsel filing in the Spygate investigation, there were several additional interesting points of note, especially
when the motion is read against information previously known. [...] During that circa March 2017 meeting, the discovery
update explained, Sussmann provided the Office of Inspector General a "forensic report" that supposedly showed that Joffe
"had observed that a specific OIG employee's computer was 'seen publicly' in 'Internet traffic' and was connecting to a
Virtual Private Network in a foreign country." Given Friday's revelation that Joffe was specifically targeting the EOP
during the Trump administration and mining internet traffic, Joffe's supposed "observation" of an OIG's computer connecting
to a foreign country's VPN suggests Joffe surveillance extended beyond the Executive Office of the President of the United States.
DNI Ratcliffe told Durham intelligence supports 'multiple' indictments in probe: sources. Former Director of
National Intelligence John Ratcliffe met with Special Counsel John Durham on more than one occasion and told him there was
evidence in intelligence to support the indictments of "multiple people" in his investigation into the origins of the
Trump-Russia probe, sources told Fox News. Fox News first reported on Durham's latest filing, which alleged that
lawyers from Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign in 2016 had paid to "infiltrate" servers belonging to Trump Tower and
later the White House, in order to establish an "inference" and "narrative" to bring to federal government agencies linking
Donald Trump to Russia.
more optimistic take on the Durham bombshell. Yesterday [2/13/2022], I wrote a post detailing what was in
Special Prosecutor John Durham's latest filing, a seemingly innocuous motion that contained within it the allegation that
Rodney Joffe, a tech executive, at the behest of Hillary Clinton's campaign, spied on Trump, both in Trump Tower and his
apartment and, later, in the White House. However, my cynicism is such that I doubted this would actually come to
anything. Mark Wauck, a retired counter-intelligence special agent for the FBI is more optimistic. [...] My post, after
summarizing Durham's latest allegations, echoed what Sundance, at Conservative Treehouse said, which is that this is a
cosmetic exercise that is meant to provide cover for Mueller's investigation, which was itself a cover-up. Wauck had a
few rebuttals that are worth considering, especially because they'll make you feel happier than what I wrote. Wauck
points out that it's meaningful that Joffe is discussed but not indicted: ["]It's because Durham is targeting him
for cooperation. There's only one reason a member of a conspiracy is targeted for cooperation, and that's because that
person was acting at the behest of someone higher up the ladder who exercised overall control of the conspiracy.["]
As far as Wauck is concerned, that's Hillary herself.
Poll on Durham Probe Is a Killer for Hillary Clinton's Hopes and Dreams. There's a bit of a stunning poll that
has come out in regard to Hillary Clinton and Russiagate. The poll, taken by TechnoMetrica Institute of Policy and
Politics in New Jersey last month, asked 1300 people about what they thought about the Durham probe. What was
astonishing was that almost 3/4 of those polled who were following the story wanted prosecutors to investigate her and
members of her campaign for manufacturing dirt on President Donald Trump. [...] Michael Sussmann, one of the lawyers for the
Clinton campaign, was indicted in September, and Igor Danchenko, one of the key people behind the Steele dossier, was
indicted on Nov. 3. So the people had that information in their quiver to base their decision on. Since then,
as we reported last week, there's been another bombshell from a Durham filing that alleged the Clinton campaign had tried to
infiltrate Trump Tower and the White House to dig up dirt on Trump. So these numbers don't even reflect that yet.
makes allegations that make Watergate look like small potatoes. On Friday [2/11/2022], Special Counsel John
Durham filed with the D.C. Federal District Court a what should have been a boring conflict of interest motion, but it hid a
surprise: The Clinton campaign, through Perkins Coie, spied on Trump both before and after he was president. The
following is an plain English-language summary of relevant parts of the motion: Michael Sussman was a partner at Law
Firm-1 (i.e., Perkins Coie). He met with the FBI General Counsel (i.e., James Baker), and offered data and "white papers"
purporting to show that Trump was communicating covertly with a Russia-based bank (i.e., Alfa-Bank). Mueller,
incidentally, had to admit this was untrue. Durham indicted Sussman because he allegedly told Baker that he was not
divulging this information for a client. In fact, he was acting for at least two clients: the Clinton campaign and
"Tech Executive-1" (i.e., Rodney Joffe), who worked at a "U.S.-based internet company" (i.e., Neustar Inc., a federal contractor).
Durham Drops a 'Shock and Awe' Filing About Spying on Donald Trump. Even if we don't hear much about him
anymore, John Durham is still hard at work. As RedState reported over the last several months, the investigation into
misconduct surrounding the investigation into Donald Trump and Russia has only heated up since Joe Biden took office.
The first major shoe to drop was the indictment of Michael Sussman, who was an intermediary for Hillary Clinton digging up
dirt on Donald Trump. In Sussman's case, he lied about who he was working for and misled the FBI regarding the
now-debunked Alfa-Bank story. But given the vast involvement of other individuals working for the infamous Perkins Coie
law firm, which Clinton used as a proxy to smear Trump with false claims of Russian collusion, Durham's investigation was
always likely to go further.
Explodes at Durham Findings: Treason 'Worse Than Watergate' That 'Would Have Been Punishable by Death'.
Special Counsel Durham has found the Clinton campaign team paid a tech firm to hack into Donald Trump's private and office
communications, even after he became President of the United States. This is the definitive vindication of his claim
that he was spied on. Donald Trump exploded at further vindication of his claim that he was spied on. "The latest
pleading from Special Counsel Robert Durham provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by
operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia," Donald
Trump said in a statement. "This is a scandal far greater in scope and magnitude than Watergate and those who were
involved in and knew about this spying operation should be subject to criminal prosecution. In a stronger period of
time in our country, this crime would have been punishable by death. In addition, reparations should be paid to those
in our country who have been damaged by this."
allies spied on the Executive Office of the President. On February 11, 2022, Durham filed the Government's
Motion to Inquire into Potential Conflicts of Interest in the Michael Sussmann case. [...] The basis for the latest motion
is that Sussmann's current counsel, Latham & Watkins LLP (Latham) might have a conflict of interest because Latham previously
represented Perkins Coie and Mark Elias "in this investigation." It is alleged that Latham "likely possesses confidential
knowledge about Perkins Coie's role in, and views concerning, Sussmann's past activities." (Cleaned up.) There
might also be a conflict because Latham was representing both the Clinton Campaign and Hillary for America in the Special
Counsel's investigation. Durham observes that Latham's duties to these former clients "might cause its interests to
diverge from those of [Sussmann]." Why might there be a conflict? Because Durham might offer evidence at trial he
obtained from the Clinton Campaign and Hillary for America. And because certain employees of the Clinton Campaign and
Hillary for America might be witnesses at Sussmann's trial.
Surveillance and Political Spying Operations Highlighted by John Durham are the Tip of the Iceberg. Barack
Obama and Eric Holder did not create a weaponized DOJ and FBI; instead, what they did was take the preexisting system and
retool it, so the weapons only targeted one side of the political continuum. Together they recalibrated the domestic
surveillance capabilities, the internal spying systems, so that only their political opposition would be targeted. This
point is where many people understandably get confused. In the era shortly after 9/11, the DC national security
apparatus was constructed to preserve continuity of government and simultaneously view all Americans as potential
threats. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) were
created specifically for this purpose. What Barack Obama and Eric Holder did with that new construct was refine the
internal targeting mechanisms so that only their ideological opposition became the target of the new national security system.
Court Filing Identifies Clinton Tech Ally with Govt Provided Access to Spy on Executive Office of President
Trump. CTH begins every outline of the ongoing Durham investigation with the following disclaimer: How is
John Durham going to reveal everything that is possible about the deep state Trump targeting operation, and simultaneously
handle the involvement of Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and the Special Counsel team who were specifically appointed to
cover it up? The short answer is, Durham can't. The ramifications would collapse the U.S. government; yes, all
three collaborating branches. As a consequence, some of these revelations are only valuable insofar as they will be
needed by historians who look upon the scattered rubble of this once great republic and seek to explain to future generations
how it all went wrong.
campaign paid tech workers to dig up Trump-Russia connections: Report. Hillary Clinton's 2016
presidential campaign paid an internet company to "infiltrate" servers at Trump Tower and the White House in order to link
Donald Trump to Russia, a bombshell new legal filing alleges. The Friday [2/11/2022] filing from a Department of
Justice prosecutor tasked with investigating the origins of the FBI's Russian probe served to throw cold water on Democrats'
longstanding allegations of collusion. Special Counsel John Durham filed a motion related to potential conflicts of
interests in connection with the case of Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who is charged with lying to the feds,
according to Fox News. Sussmann allegedly told the FBI he was not working on behalf of Clinton when he presented the
agency with documents that supposedly linked the Trump Organization to a Kremlin-tied bank two months before the election.
accuses Hillary Clinton campaign of treason after Special Counsel John Durham said they paid tech firm to hack into his White
House servers. Donald Trump has furiously accused Hillary Clinton's election campaign of treason after a
special counsel said her team had tried to spy on his White House servers in a bid to find ties to Russia to smear him
with. The former president unleashed a furious broadside on Saturday, claiming that Team Clinton's behavior would once
have merited execution, after Special Counsel John Durham made a court filing explaining the alleged hack. Trump said:
'The latest pleading from Special Counsel (John) Durham proves indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were
spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia.
Filing Rebuts Inspector General Horowitz's Claims on Missing Cellphones, Hints at Growing Rift. A supplemental
court filing by special counsel John Durham confirms previous reporting that Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General
Michael Horowitz concealed crucial information from Durham in connection with two separate investigations — the
ongoing prosecution of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann and the criminal leak investigation of former FBI
General Counsel James Baker. The Jan. 28 filing by Durham updated the court on precisely when Durham first learned
of two cellphones that had been used by Baker while he was with the FBI. The existence of these phones was first mentioned
in a Jan. 25 filing, in which Durham claimed that the Inspector General's Office (OIG) had failed to disclose its possession
of two FBI cellphones belonging to Baker.
Investigation of Obamagate Expands. Special Counsel John Durham is not yet finished with his investigation into
the Obamagate scandal, and a new report says his efforts have expanded. According to recent court filings, Durham has
gained access to a significant amount of FBI internal affairs files in his effort to uncover the Obama administration's
maneuvers to promote bogus allegations against Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election. Team Obama's
disingenuous investigation of the anti-Trump allegations, called Crossfire Hurricane, relied on the discredited Christopher
Steele dossier, which was paid for by party activists.
Investigation of Obamagate Expands. Special Counsel John Durham is not yet finished with his investigation into
the Obamagate scandal, and a new report says his efforts have expanded. According to recent court filings, Durham has
gained access to a significant amount of FBI internal affairs files in his effort to uncover the Obama administration's
maneuvers to promote bogus allegations against Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election. Team Obama's
disingenuous investigation of the anti-Trump allegations, called Crossfire Hurricane, relied on the discredited Christopher
Steele dossier, which was paid for by party activists.
Court Filing Reveals DOJ Inspector General Horowitz Withheld Key Evidence From Special Counsel. A new court
filing by special counsel John Durham reveals that Department of Justice (DOJ) Inspector General Michael Horowitz concealed
crucial information from Durham in connection with the ongoing prosecution of Michael Sussmann, a former attorney to Hillary
Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. The filing also reveals that Horowitz failed to disclose that his office is in
possession of two cellphones used by former FBI general counsel James Baker. The phones may contain information that's
important to the Sussmann case, as well as to a separate criminal leak investigation of Baker that Durham personally
conducted between 2017 and 2019. Horowitz first came to public prominence in June 2018 when he issued a report on the
FBI's actions leading up to the 2016 presidential election. Horowitz followed up in December 2019 with another report
on the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigation and the bureau's pursuit of a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)
warrant on Trump campaign aide Carter Page.
Actions by Durham Indicate a Broken Investigation by a Broken DOJ. The latest from the Durham investigation
which should have been completed ages ago is not good news. According to reports, Durham's team only this month found
out about key evidence that should have been analyzed months ago. As most Americans know, corrupt Obama officials
during the 2016 Election used a false document (the Steele Dossier) as a basis for spying on the Trump campaign and
Administration. This dossier was a lie created by the Hillary gang and the DOJ and FBI used it anyways in a coup
attempt to have President Trump removed from office. [...] This investigation has led to almost nothing to date.
(At times there were doubts that the investigation was actually in place.)
Durham Puts Hillary Clinton On Notice In New Filing: 'Active, Ongoing Criminal Investigation'. Special Counsel
John Durham has put Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Jake Sullivan, and others on notice by calling his investigation into the
Trump Russia story an "active, ongoing criminal investigation," three times, in a new court filing. Durham has been
following the evidence and all signs point to the Hillary Clinton campaign. Clinton's former lawyer, Michael Sussmann,
will stand trial for lying to the FBI this spring.
vs. Horowitz: Tension Over Truth and Consequences Grips the FBI's Trump-Russia Reckoning. As he
documents the role of Hillary Clinton's campaign in generating false allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, Special Counsel
John Durham has also previewed a challenge to the FBI's claims about how and why its counterintelligence investigation of the
Trump campaign began. At stake is the completeness of the official reckoning within the U.S. government over the
Russiagate scandal — and whether there will be an accounting commensurate with the offense: the abuse of the
nation's highest law enforcement and intelligence powers to damage an opposition presidential candidate turned president, at
the behest of his opponent from the governing party he defeated. The drama is playing out against the clashing
approaches of the two Justice Department officials tasked with scrutinizing the Russia probe's origins and unearthing any
misconduct: Durham, the Sphinx-like prosecutor with a reputation for toughness whose work continues; and Michael
Horowitz, the Department of Justice inspector general, whose December 2019 report faulted the FBI's handling of the Russia
probe but nonetheless concluded that it was launched in good faith.
tells court members of Clinton 2016 campaign under scrutiny. Special counsel John Durham told a federal court
that he is scrutinizing members of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign as part of his
criminal inquiry into the origins and conduct of the Trump-Russia investigation. Durham's team asked a judge to
"inquire into a potential conflict of interest" related to the lawyers for British ex-spy Christopher Steele's main
anti-Trump dossier source, noting that a separate lawyer at their firm "is currently representing the 2016 'Hillary for
America' presidential campaign, as well as multiple former employees of that campaign, in matters before the Special
Counsel." Igor Danchenko, a U.S.-based and Russian-born researcher, was charged with five counts of making false
statements to the FBI.
Durham is investigating the Clinton Campaign. Igor Danchenko, the primary subsource of Christopher Steele, was
arrested on November 3, 2021 for giving multiple false statements to federal officials during his 2017 interviews with the
FBI. These included lies about Danchenko's sources, his travels to Russia, and his falsified contacts with Sergei
Millian. [...] Notably, Special Counsel John Durham alleges that one of Danchenko's real "sources" was Charles Dolan, Jr.
(perhaps first identified by Aaron Mate), who served in various leadership positions to elect Bill Clinton in the 1992 and
1996 campaigns and was an advisor to Hillary Clinton in her 2016 campaign for president. With Dolan's involvement, the
obvious question becomes whether he was the intermediary between the Clinton Campaign and Danchenko. After all, we know
that the Hillary Clinton Campaign paid for the Steele dossiers and the work by Fusion GPS. This was arranged through their
attorneys (and the DNC attorneys) at Perkins Coie — notably Mark Elias and Michael Sussmann. Elias left the
firm this summer. Sussmann was indicted in September 2021 by Special Counsel Durham for giving false statements
relating to the Alfa Bank/Trump hoax.
Danchenko [is] Now Represented by Hillary Clinton Lawyers. In a court filing today [12/20/2021] by Special
Counsel John Durham[,] it's noted that previously indicted Igor Danchenko, the primary sub-source for Christopher Steele's
fraudulent dossier against Donald Trump, is now represented by the same lawyers representing Hillary Clinton's legal
interests. John Durham is asking the court to evaluate the legal conflicts: [...] Why would the legal firm representing
Hillary Clinton (to the Durham probe) step-in to represent Igor Danchenko in his criminal indictment? The only logical
reason would be for Danchenko to represent a legal risk to the interests of Hillary Clinton, likely through the direct
association between Hillary Clinton and Charles Dolan, Danchenko's collaborator and the liaison to Chris Steele from the
Clinton campaign. As a result of the Durham indictment, we know Igor Danchenko was working closely with Democrat Party
public relations executive Charles Dolan to funnel the fabricated source material to Chris Steele. The Clinton team's
communication and contact with Charles Dolan would represent a legal risk to Hillary Clinton.
the Limited Hangout. In September, John Durham, the special counsel investigating the origins of the FBI's
Russia probe, charged Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann with lying to the FBI. In September 2016, Sussmann, a former
Justice Department official, passed reports to the bureau that were meant to incriminate the Trump circle by claiming
evidence of links between the Trump organization and a Russian bank. Sussmann had told the FBI he was not acting on
behalf of a client, but records Durham obtained from Sussmann's law firm, Perkins Coie, showed he was billing the Clinton
campaign for drawing up the reports and for the meeting itself. Last month, charges were brought against Igor
Danchenko, the former Brookings Institution analyst who was ostensibly the primary source for Christopher Steele's notorious
"dossier," which served as the legal foundation for the Russiagate conspiracy theory within the FBI. Danchenko was
indicted for lying to the FBI, on five counts, with a maximum sentence of five years for each count.
Big Russian Collusion Coverup Must End With John Durham's Report. With each new indictment, Special Counsel
John Durham is slowly exposing the extent of the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign's involvement, and that of other longtime
Democrat operatives, in the most destructive political dirty trick in history. The big question that remains is whether
the ringleader and masterminds of the Russian collusion hoax will ever be revealed and held accountable. The
indictments handed down involve lying to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and the FBI. Last year, Kevin
Clinesmith, the FBI attorney who falsified a document that was then presented to that court, received a mere slap on the
wrist. What punishment will Michael Sussmann and Igor Danchenko receive? Considering the turmoil this hoax put
our nation through in the last five years, the criminal penalties should be severe. But will they be?
Patel Names Four Government Officials He Believes Could Be Targets of John Durham's Investigation. Kash Patel,
former Pentagon Chief of Staff, and former Senior Staff Advisor to the House Intelligence Committee, discusses the recent
public developments within the John Durham investigation, and gives his opinion on possible targets who were operating inside
government. Patel holds the opinion that Joe Biden's current National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan is a likely
target. Patel also says he could see three former FBI officials as targets of the Durham probe: (1) former FBI
Deputy Director Andrew McCabe; (2) former FBI Special Agent in the Counterintelligence Division, Peter Strzok; and (3) former
DOJ legal counsel to Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page. [Video clip]
Special Counsel John Durham Subpoenaed The Brookings Institution. In April 2021, the Brookings Institution
publicly confirmed that Special Counsel John Durham had subpoenaed records from the D.C.-based left-wing think tank in
December 2020. The friendly reporters at Time magazine framed the subpoena as limited to the decades-old employment
record of former Brookings staffer Igor Danchenko. Last week's indictment of Danchenko, however, provides a perfect
reminder that Brookings was ground zero for the Russia collusion hoax, with many key staff embroiled in the damaging lie that
Donald Trump colluded with Vladimir Putin to steal the 2016 election. On Thursday last, Durham charged Danchenko in a
five-count indictment with lying to the FBI during the agents' questioning of him related to his role as Christopher Steele's
"Primary Sub-Source" for the notorious dossier that enabled Obama administration surveillance of the Trump campaign.
The details in the 39-page speaking indictment provide further evidence that Durham's team has been steadily unraveling the mess
of Spygate, with the most recent thread leading to the Clinton camp — and the left-leaning Brookings Institution.
What Did Obama
Know and When Did He Know It? In researching my 2020 book, Unmasking Obama, I focused on one question
above all others: What did Barack Obama know about the plot to link Donald Trump to Russia and when he did he know
it? Unlike the Watergate era, when all the insiders in government and media rushed to discover what Nixon knew, only
the outsiders have dared to ask about Obama. Major credit here goes to Rep. Devin Nunes and his chief investigator
Kash Patel, Inspector General Michael Horowitz, former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, and most recently
Special Counsel John Durham. For all their good efforts, however, this probe remains very much a work in
progress. That caution established, the answer to the question in the headline is becoming increasingly clear.
The information contained in Durham's recent indictment of Russian national Igor Danchenko, when coupled with the CIA notes
declassified in October 2020 by Ratcliffe, leads directly to the White House.
Twists in Durham Probe: FBI Danchenko Recordings and Suspicions Fiona Hill Lied. The indictment of Igor
Danchenko, the "primary sub-source" of Christopher Steele's infamous dossier, reveals that the FBI electronically recorded
several previously undisclosed interviews with the Brookings Institution researcher. Separately, it raises suspicions,
according to congressional sources, that his Brookings superior Fiona Hill may have committed perjury when testifying about
Steele during President Trump's first impeachment. The existence of electronic records of Danchenko speaking to the FBI
far more extensively than previously known creates the possibility that much more will come out about the origins of the
Steele dossier and the way the opposition research was weaponized.
Hill's testimony during Trump impeachment now being examined. The indictment of Igor Danchenko, the "primary
sub-source" of Christopher Steele's infamous dossier, reveals that the FBI electronically recorded several previously
undisclosed interviews with the Brookings Institution researcher. Separately, it raises suspicions, according to
congressional sources, that his Brookings superior Fiona Hill may have committed perjury when testifying about Steele during
President Trump's first impeachment. The existence of electronic records of Danchenko speaking to the FBI far more
extensively than previously known creates the possibility that much more will come out about the origins of the Steele
dossier and the way the opposition research was weaponized. And those under scrutiny in Special Counsel John Durham's
investigation of the origins of the Trump-Russia affair will have to wonder whether information to which they previously
attested jibes with the Danchenko recordings.
theory of case appears to be Trump-Russia collusion was largely a Clinton fabrication. Special counsel John
Durham's investigation and indictments appear to be affirming what has long been suspected: that many of the biggest
Trump-Russia collusion claims can be traced back to the Clinton campaign. Durham's indictments of Igor Danchenko,
British ex-spy Christopher Steele's main source, and lawyer Michael Sussmann outline the deep links that Hillary Clinton's
campaign had in creating and peddling the discredited dossier and pushing refuted claims that Russia's Alfa Bank and the
Trump Organization had a secret back channel during the 2016 election.
the FBI Manipulated by the Democratic Party? John Durham, the U.S. attorney appointed in 2019 by then Attorney
General William Barr to investigate the origins of the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential
campaign, has finally begun to show his hand. It doesn't look good for either the FBI or the Democratic Party. On
Thursday he indicted a former Brookings Institution researcher named Igor Danchenko on five counts of lying to the FBI.
Danchenko was the primary source for former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele's infamous "dossier," which
alleged an elaborate conspiracy between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and the Kremlin. That document set the
media and Democratic Party narrative for the first two and a half years of Trump's presidency, and was crucial evidence the
FBI submitted to the federal surveillance court in late 2016 to obtain a warrant to monitor a Trump campaign aide.
liberal think tank keeps popping up in Durham investigation. The latest indictment by Special Counsel John
Durham has created a stir in Washington as the investigation into the Russian collusion scandal exposed new connections to
the Clinton campaign. The indictment of Igor Danchenko exposes additional close advisers to Hillary Clinton who
allegedly pushed discredited and salacious allegations in the Steele dossier. However, one of the most interesting new
elements was the role of a liberal think tank, the Brookings Institution, in the alleged effort to create a false scandal of
collusion. Indeed, Brookings appears so often in accounts related to the Russian collusion scandal that it could be
Washington's alternative to the Kevin Bacon parlor game. It appears that many of these figures are within six degrees
Security Adviser Sullivan is 'foreign policy advisor' in former Clinton lawyer indictment: sources. Jake
Sullivan, President Biden's White House national security adviser, is the "foreign policy advisor" referred to in the
indictment of former Hillary Clinton presidential campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, according to two well-placed
sources. This is the closest Special Counsel John Durham's investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation
has come to anyone directly associated with the Biden White House. Sussmann was indicted for allegedly lying to the FBI
on Sept. 16, and has pleaded not guilty to one count of making a false statement to a federal agent. This case
came out of Durham's probe into the origins of the Russia investigation.
Looking at Danchenko, Start Looking at Andrew Weissmann and Robert Mueller. TechnoFog has a good outline on the
background of Igor Danchenko and the DOJ/FBI team effort to avoid undermining the Steele Dossier. The accurate analysis
ends with the following question, also posed by Sergei Millian: "Why was the DOJ/FBI covering for Danchenko"? [...] The
DOJ/FBI coverup, which included being purposefully blind to the 2017 Danchenko revelations, was not done to protect
Danchenko. It was done to protect Andrew Weissmann and Robert Mueller. Yes, the FBI and DOJ knew the primary
subsource for Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko, disavowed the material in the dossier and undermined it in January of 2017
and again [on] June 15, 2017, as everyone is noting. Yes, despite that knowledge Mueller/Weissmann applied for a FISA
renewal on June 29th. However, there's a date a year later, all the way into July of 2018, when the DOJ and FBI claimed
that Danchenko was speaking truth in their affirmation to the FISA court.
Patel: John Durham Is Building a Bigger Conspiracy Case. Kash Patel, former senior Trump administration
official and lead investigator exposing Russiagate, said U.S. Attorney John Durham's recent indictment of Russian Igor
Danchenko suggests he is building a larger conspiracy case. "I think he's building a bigger conspiracy case, and it's
just going to take time and that's where he's going," Patel said on [...] Saturday [11/6/2021] [...]. "John Durham's
working hard. He's only been at for two-plus years. When I was a federal prosecutor, I spent 3, 4, 5 years
building some prosecutions, so it takes time, but I think we are heading in the right direction," he added.
latest indictment: More lines drawn to Clinton's campaign. [Igor] Danchenko, 43, was a key figure in the
compilation of the infamous Steele dossier that led to the now discredited investigation of alleged collusion between the
Trump campaign and the Russian government during the 2016 presidential race. But Danchenko, a Russian emigre living in
the U.S., seems unlikely to be the Durham investigation's apex defendant. In fact, Durham describes him at points more
like a shill than a spy, an "investigator" who was fed what to report by Clinton operatives such as [Charles] Dolan.
Durham is known as a methodical, apolitical and unrelenting prosecutor. Thus far, his work seems to betray a belief
that the FBI got played by the Clinton campaign to investigate the Trump team. The question is whether Durham really
wants to indict just the figurative tail if he can get the whole dog — a question that now may weigh heavily on a
number of Washington figures, just as it did following Durham's indictment in September of Clinton campaign lawyer Michael
The Dossier Deceit.
We learn from special counsel John Durham's indictment of Igor Danchenko that "the FBI ultimately devoted substantial
resources attempting to investigate and corroborate the allegations" in the now-infamous Steele dossier. "Ultimately"
is right — but not before it relied on the shoddy document to surveil an American citizen in an investigation that
produced the Mueller probe and a two-year-long obsession with Trump and Russian built on a preposterous foundation. The
web of deceit is a tangled one, but while the indictment details a shocking story of transnational dirty tricks weaponized at
the highest level of American politics, the most significant moral failure was on the part of the FBI itself. Durham,
who is investigating the origins of the FBI's Trump-Russia investigation, indicted Danchenko on five counts of lying to the
Bureau's investigators regarding the compilation of the information in the dossier.
Durham Needs to Look Toward Mary McCord. When the Carter Page FISA application was originally assembled by the
FBI and DOJ, there was initial hesitancy from within the DOJ National Security Division (DOJ-NSD) about submitting the
application, because it did not have enough citations in evidence (the infamous 'Woods File'). That's why the Steele
Dossier ultimately became important. It was the Steele Dossier that provided the push, the legal cover needed for the
DOJ-NSD to submit the application for a Title-1 surveillance warrant against the campaign of Donald J. Trump. When the
application was finally assembled for submission to the FISA court, the head of the DOJ-NSD was John Carlin. Carlin
quit working for the DOJ-NSD in late September 2016 just before the final application was submitted (October 21, 2016).
John Carlin was replaced by Deputy Asst. Attorney General, Mary McCord.
'PR Executive 1' in Durham Indictment Is Former Democratic Party Campaigner. A lawyer on Thursday [11/4/2021]
confirmed that Washington-based communications executive Charles Dolan Jr. is the individual referred to as "PR Executive-1"
in special counsel John Durham's indictment against Russia analyst Igor Danchenko, which was unsealed earlier this
week. The grand jury indictment of Dachenko alleges that he lied when he told the FBI that he never communicated with a
public relations executive who had been active in the Democratic Party about claims in a dossier issued by former UK spy
Christopher Steele. Although the public relations executive, or "PR Executive-1," is never named in the indictment,
Dolan's lawyer Ralph Martin told The Epoch Times on Friday that his client is the person in question. "Chuck
understands and appreciates your interest," Martin told The Epoch Times, confirming reports on Thursday about Dolan's identity.
Durham's latest indictment paints the FBI as a victim of Democrat operatives. [Scroll down] But the FBI
was not a victim but a participant. That is clearly shown by the DOJ's Inspector General's report. Despite their
investigation they became active participants in pursuing Trump despite knowing the dossier and the Alfa bank Materials were
nonsense. In fact, they use the dossier to get their FISA warrants. The FBI let the public believe that there was
substance to the dossier and the Alfa bank allegations. The only reason that Durham portrays the FBI as misled is to
state a cause of action against the liars: defrauding the federal government, causing resources to be expended based on
Dossier Source Arrested As Part of Durham Probe Into Russia Collusion Hoax. A key figure in the Russia
collusion hoax was arrested on Thursday [11/4/2021] in Special Counsel John Durham's years-long investigation into the FBI's
"Crossfire Hurricane" investigation, which weaponized the Democrats' opposition research into former president Donald Trump's
2016 campaign. According to the New York Times, Igor Danchenko, the primary researcher behind the now debunked and
discredited Steele dossier, has been arrested under sealed indictment. Danchenko worked for Steele's firm, Orbis
Business International, which subcontracted to notorious opposition research firm, Fusion GPS. The Democrat law firm Perkins
Coie, which was working for the Hillary Clinton campaign, hired Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on then-candidate Trump.
The Igor Danchenko Indictment.
John Durham has another scalp. On November 3, 2021, Igor Danchenko — Christopher Steele's primary
subsource — was arrested by federal authorities. Now we have his indictment. Danchenko has been
charged with false statements to federal officials during his 2017 interviews with the FBI. According to the indictment,
Danchenko lied about his contacts with "Russians," his travels to Russia, and the identity of his sources. (Those are just
some of the lies.) [...] For purposes of background on the second charge, Danchenko alleged he received a call from from
Russian reporter/businessman Sergei Millian alleging a Trump/Russia conspiracy. Millian has long-denied placing this
call. This call was important because it was the basis, in part, of the FISA warrants against Carter Page.
Durham's investigation revealed Danchenko "never received such a phone call or such information from" Millian.
main dossier source arrested in Durham investigation. The alleged main source for British ex-spy Christopher
Steele's discredited anti-Trump dossier was arrested on Thursday [11/4/2021] as part of special counsel John Durham's
criminal inquiry into the origins and conduct of the Trump-Russia investigation. Igor Danchenko, a Russian-born lawyer
who lives in the Washington, D.C., area, was taken into custody by federal law enforcement after being hit with charges in a
newly-unsealed indictment obtained by Durham's office. The special counsel's office said Danchenko had been charged
"with five counts of making false statements to the FBI" that Durham for claims he made about the sources used in providing
information to Steele for his "Company Reports," which became the dossier. The indictment was returned on Wednesday,
and Danchenko is slated to appear before a magistrate judge in the Eastern District of Virginia Thursday afternoon.
Dossier Primary Subsource, Igor Danchenko, Arrested on Five Counts of Lying to FBI — Danchenko Was Working With
Democrat Campaign Official. The primary subsource for the Christopher Steele dossier was a guy named Igor
Danchenko. According to several investigations of the dossier, Chris Steele attributes most of the information within
the dossier to Danchenko. John Durham has just arrested Igor Danchenko [...] In essence, Chris Steele put a bunch of
Danchenko garbage inside his dossier, and his dossier was used to get the Carter Page FISA warrant to conduct surveillance
against the Trump campaign (October 21, 2016). Danchenko then disavowed the veracity of all the information he provided
during FBI interviews in January, February and March 2017; but the FBI ignored the Danchenko statements and used the dossier
for two more FISA renewals in April and June 2017.
charges Steele dossier sub-source with five counts of making false statements to the FBI. Federal agents
arrested the primary sub-source who contributed to the unverified anti-Trump dossier Thursday [11/4/2021] as part of Special
Counsel John Durham's investigations into the origins of the probe into whether the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to
influence the 2016 presidential election. Igor Danchenko's arrest is linked to a federal grand jury indictment in the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Durham is charging Danchenko, a Russian citizen residing in
Virginia, with five counts of making false statements to the FBI. The charges stemmed from statements Danchenko made
relating to the sources he used in providing information to an investigative firm in the United Kingdom. Danchenko is
scheduled to make his first court appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Theresa C. Buchanan Thursday afternoon.
arrest of the man behind the phony dossier underscores the many lies of the Russia hoax. It has been a long
time coming. But that is how reckonings sometimes happen. The fabulist behind the discredited anti-Trump dossier
was taken into custody by federal authorities Thursday as Special Counsel John Durham continues to build his case against
those who manufactured and propagated the phony Trump-Russia collusion narrative. Igor Danchenko was charged in a
criminal indictment with five counts of lying to the FBI about the sources he used for the bogus information he delivered to
former British spy Christopher Steele that comprised the bulk of his dossier. But we already know a great deal about
the man who was hired by the disgraced Steele to smear Donald Trump with false accusations of crimes he did not commit.
Danchenko Arrested as Part of Durham Investigation. The office of Special Counsel John Durham has confirmed
that Igor Danchenko, a key source for British ex-spy Christopher Steele, has been arrested. This is the third arrest by
Durham who is moving toward the prosecution stage of his investigation into the origins of the Russian collusion
scandal. Durham is variously described as either painfully methodical or positively glacial as a prosecutor. But
he is widely credited with being a dogged and absolutely apolitical prosecutor. Danchenko's arrest is a seismic
development and confirmed Durham is far from done with his investigation. Washington was recently rocked by the
indictment of Michael Sussman, former counsel for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National
Committee, for his alleged role in spreading a false Russia conspiracy theory. Now Danchenko is being charged with five
counts of making false statements. Danchenko is widely referenced as the sub-source for former British intelligence
officer Christopher Steele for his controversial dossier.
illustrates how the Steele dossier was a political dirty trick orchestrated by Hillary Clinton. Special counsel
John Durham's indictment of Igor Danchenko, the principal source for the bogus Steele dossier used by the FBI as a basis for
the Trump-Russia investigation, further illustrates that Durham has his sights set on the Clinton campaign. Danchenko
has been charged with five counts of lying to the FBI in interviews during 2017, as the bureau struggled in futility to
verify outlandish allegations that Donald Trump and his campaign were clandestine agents of the Kremlin. Those
allegations were compiled in the so-called Steele dossier, which the FBI relied on in obtaining surveillance warrants from a
secret federal court.
Durham to Call Former FBI Lawyer to Testify in Case Involving Former Democrat Lawyer. Prosecutors working with
special counsel John Durham's team indicated on Tuesday [10/26/2021] they may call former FBI General Counsel James Baker to
testify in the case of former Democrat attorney Michael Sussmann, who was indicted for allegedly lying to the FBI. During
a status hearing Tuesday, Durham prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis and his team said they plan to call Baker, who now works for
Twitter, to testify as part of the case against Sussmann, according to Fox News and the Washington Examiner. Last
month, Sussmann pleaded not guilty to making a false statement to a federal agent. U.S. District Judge Christopher
Cooper asked Sussmann's lawyers and prosecutors to continue with their discovery process, which could take months. The
prosecution said that 6,000 documents were provided to Sussmann's defense, amounting to more than 80,000 pages in total.
Durham's Investigation Is Much Farther Reaching Than Originally Thought. Durham is definitely making moves if
he's going after Fusion GPS and the DNC along with the individuals he's targeting. I certainly didn't expect that given
how quiet things have been for so long. I think most had assumed he was getting ready to wrap things up. In fact,
there was a report that stated that some months ago. Yet, he's burst onto the scene with a big indictment and is
apparently not done yet. Could he be getting to the bottom of the DNC "hack," which has always seemed more likely to be
a leak based on the evidence we have? Will Fusion GPS operative Glenn Simpson get caught up in all this? We can
hope as it would point to some semblance of justice being administered. What we do know is that numerous
Democrat-backed groups and figures spread false allegations during the 2016 election in order to try to destroy Donald
Trump. Those people need to pay a price if we are to ever rid our system of such corruption and interference.
Poll Shows Independent Voters Want Durham to Probe Biden Aide. Reflecting the national media's scant coverage
of the Spygate scandal, only 3 in 10 Americans say they are aware that a special prosecutor is investigating the origins of
the Trump-Russia "collusion" probe, according to a nationwide survey conducted this month by TechnoMetrica Institute of
Policy and Politics (TIPP). But of those who say they know of Special Counsel John Durham's investigation, most say
they want him to get to the bottom of whether the FBI opened investigations into several Trump campaign advisers during the
2016 election without proper "predication." Nearly two-thirds (62 percent) of respondents say they want the
Justice Department to renew Durham's budget for another fiscal year, the TIPP poll found, and a whopping 81 percent want
the department to release his final report to the public. Attorney General Merrick Garland, a Biden appointee, holds
the purse strings to Durham's investigation. He also has authority over whether his report will be made public.
says 1,000 intel documents given to Durham support more charges. Former Director of National Intelligence John
Ratcliffe said a raft of documents he provided to special counsel John Durham supports additional charges in his criminal
inquiry into the Russia investigation. A recent grand jury indictment against Michael Sussmann, a cybersecurity lawyer
accused of lying to the FBI, is just the tip of the iceberg, Ratcliffe teased during a Fox News interview on Sunday
[10/10/2021]. "Michael Sussmann's is the first of what I would hope would be a number, based on the fact — I
provided not just those declassified documents, but I provided 1,000 intelligence community documents that I think support
additional charges that I would expect John Durham to bring," he told host Maria Bartiromo on Sunday Morning Futures.
Probes Pentagon Computer Contractors in Anti-Trump Conspiracy. Cybersecurity experts who held lucrative
Pentagon and homeland security contracts and high-level security clearances are under investigation for potentially abusing
their government privileges to aid a 2016 Clinton campaign plot to falsely link Donald Trump to Russia and trigger an FBI
investigation of him and his campaign, according to several sources familiar with the work of Special Counsel John
Durham. Durham is investigating whether they were involved in a scheme to misuse sensitive, nonpublic Internet data,
which they had access to through their government contracts, to dredge up derogatory information on Trump on behalf of the
Clinton campaign in 2016 and again in 2017, sources say — political dirt that sent FBI investigators on a wild
goose chase. Prosecutors are also investigating whether some of the data presented to the FBI was faked or forged.
Senate Republicans Demand John Durham Report Be Made Public. The pending report from special counsel John
Durham, who was tasked with investigating the origins of the FBI's Trump-Russia probe, should be released to the public,
Senate Republicans argued in a letter this week. More than 40 Republican senators, including Minority Leader Mitch
McConnell (R-Ky.), signed a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland asking that Durham, a former U.S. attorney, be allowed
to continue his investigation and that his report is released to the public. There have been questions about whether
Durham's investigation will lack funding past the end of the federal government's fiscal year on Sept. 30. He was
tapped by then-Attorney General William Barr to investigate the FBI's operations when it surveilled former President Donald
Trump's 2016 campaign. Barr elevated Durham to become special counsel in October 2020.
Save America, Durham Must Reveal the Whole Russiagate Story and Punish the Guilty. A bit more information has
emerged from the John Durham investigation into Russiagate (or "Spygate," as it is known hereabouts). This is due to
what is likely a leak from one or more of the targets to their loyal propagandists at CNN. (In the article, the reporters do
their best to downgrade the scandal they fanned for years as no more than a trivial "dirty trick" that all campaigns
do. There's a well-known word for that adapted into the English language.) The import of these leaks is usually to
soften the impact on the target(s), but it also gives us another indication Durham is still active. In this instance,
more subpoenas have been issued, including some to Perkins Coie. That's the Democratic National Committee's and Hillary
Clinton's law firm that only a few weeks ago defenestrated — for reasons unspecified, but we can
guess — one of Hillary's principal lawyers, Mark Elias. The other Clinton campaign lawyer, Michael Sussman,
has already been charged with lying to the FBI on the matter of alleged Trump links to the Russian Alpha Bank, ties that
turned out to be non-existent. This time, however, we learned that "Tech Executive-1" in the Sussman indictment is
Rodney Joffe, a rather distinguished cybersecurity expert, but not in this case because he was apparently involved with the
same attempted deception.
Set of Subpoenas Handed Out in Russia Probe to Law Firm For Clinton Campaign Attorney. "Special Counsel John
Durham, the attorney tapped by the Trump administration to audit the Russia investigation, has reportedly handed down a new
set of subpoenas, including to a law firm with ties to Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign" reports National Review. The
law firm, Perkins Coie, was the law firm of Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman when he is purported to have knowingly
made a false statement to the FBI. The subpoenas for the documents were issued earlier this month according to CNN.
Durham's investigation included whether Sussman lied to the FBI about who, if anyone, he was representing when he tipped off,
albeit with false information, the FBI about alleged communications between the Trump campaign and the Russian,
Kremlin-connected Alfa Bank.
indictment and subpoena bizarrely cast FBI as victim, Andrew McCabe says. Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew
McCabe said the work of special counsel John Durham is taking a strange turn. He replied in the affirmative on Thursday
[9/30/2021] when CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer asked whether a recent grand jury indictment against a cybersecurity lawyer accused
of lying to the FBI and a fresh subpoena against a law firm with close ties to Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign
shows the prosecutor found "essentially not much" so far in his inquiry into the origins and conduct of the Russia
investigation. "There's really very little here relevant to what he supposedly was hired to investigate," McCabe
added. "He's getting pretty far afield from the FBI. In fact, the recent indictment and these subpoenas really
hold the FBI more in the position of victim rather than subject of an investigation. So it's a bizarre turn of events,
and it's one that I'm sure is disappointing a lot of Republicans."
Issues New Subpoenas in Probe of FBI Russia Investigation, Targets Clinton Campaign Law Firm. Special Counsel
John Durham, the attorney tapped by the Trump administration to audit the Russia investigation, has reportedly handed down a
new set of subpoenas, including to a law firm with ties to Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign. The grand jury subpoenas
for documents were issued earlier this month, according to CNN, after Durham charged Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann
for allegedly knowingly making a false statement to the FBI. Investigators from the special counsel's office are seeking
additional documents from Sussmann's former law firm, Perkins Coie, an indication that Durham may be looking to add to
Sussmann's charges or to bring cases against other defendants.
800 lb Gorilla in The Durham Investigation Background. The recent indictment of Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann
has triggered a significant amount of well intended articles, essentially reconstituting the hope that someone —
or some group — might finally be held accountable for the multi-year, multi-issue, multi-institution fraud, better
known as 'spygate'. [...] However, as to the bigger question: will the Durham probe finally outline all the evidence to
prove all the years of deception and fraud perpetrated by the massive aligned system of corrupt government? My short
and painful answer is, NO. The longer answer is attached to the one issue that all researched opinions and analytical
theories never touch. The 800 lb gorilla in the room that no one will put into their accountability prism, because
it blocks all other sunlight: If Durham was going to reveal what optimistic folks proclaim as possible; how is Durham
going to handle the reality that Robert Mueller's entire existence was in place to hide it?
Where does John
Durham go from here? Michael Sussmann has been indicted for lying to the FBI general counsel James Baker during
a September 2016 meeting where he provided to Baker materials and information purported to link the Trump Organization with
Russian entity Alfa Bank. In order to bolster the credibility of his claims, Sussmann told Baker he was acting on his
own and not for any clients. This was a lie — Sussmann was acting on behalf of a tech executive and the
Hillary Clinton campaign. According to Special Counsel John Durham, Sussmann would repeat this lie on February 9, 2017
to two employees of another government agency ("Agency-2" in the indictment; possibly CIA). The more interesting parts
of the Sussmann indictment have to do with the orchestrated effort by Sussmann, the Clinton Campaign, a tech executive
(identified as Rodney Joffe), their team of partisan researchers, and Fusion GPS to smear the Trump Organization —
and thus candidate Trump — as having a "purported secret channel of communications" with Alfa Bank (a Russian bank).
The left wants to
shut down the Durham probe. It needs to continue. In Washington, there is no greater indication of
wrongdoing than the number of people denouncing efforts to investigate it. The "nothing to see here" crowd went into
hyperventilation last week when Special Counsel John Durham indicted a former Clinton campaign lawyer, Michael Sussmann.
Legal experts who spent years validating every possible criminal charge against Donald Trump and his associates are now
insisting that Durham needs to end his investigation. The Washington Post heaped ridicule on Durham despite an
indictment detailing an effort to hide the connection of the Clinton campaign and a concerted effort to push false Russian
collusion claims. Keep in mind that Durham was ordered to investigate the origins of the Russian investigation,
including claims that those origins were unlawfully concealed or knowingly false. The Sussmann indictment involves both
issues after he allegedly pushed a false allegation of collusion and then hid the fact that he was working for the Clinton
NYT: John Durham seeks
indictment of Clinton Campaign Lawyer. Special Counsel John Durham "will ask a grand jury to indict" former
DNC/Clinton campaign lawyer (and Perkins Coie partner) Michael Sussman for giving false statements. The false statement
charges would relate to a September 19, 2016 meeting FBI lawyer James Baker had with Sussman, where Sussman relayed to the
FBI the discredited theory that the Trump Organization was communicating with Alfa Bank.
Greenwald Breaks Down Significance Of Expected Indictment Against Hillary Clinton Lawyer. Special counsel John
Durham is reportedly seeking a grand jury indictment against to indict an attorney reportedly representing Hillary Clinton's
presidential campaign for peddling a fake story in 2016 that the Trump campaign was using a secret server to communicate with
a Russian bank — a lie promoted by Hillary Clinton herself right before the 2016 US election. According to the
Washington Post, Michael Sussmann, a cybersecurity lawyer and partner at Perkins Coie, pushed the theory that computer
scientists had discovered secret server connections between Trump and Alfa Bank — an allegation which was then
amplified through left-wing media chambers (such as Slate) as part of their ongoing full-court press against Trump.
Senate Republicans Demand John Durham Report Be Made Public. The pending report from special counsel John
Durham, who was tasked with investigating the origins of the FBI's Trump-Russia probe, should be released to the public,
Senate Republicans argued in a letter this week. More than 40 Republican senators, including Minority Leader Mitch
McConnell (R-Ky.), signed a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland asking that Durham, a former U.S. attorney, be allowed
to continue his investigation and that his report is released to the public. There have been questions about whether
Durham's investigation will lack funding past the end of the federal government's fiscal year on Sept. 30. He was tapped
by then-Attorney General William Barr to investigate the FBI's operations when it surveilled former President Donald Trump's
2016 campaign. Barr elevated Durham to become special counsel in October 2020. "The Special Counsel's ongoing work
is important to many Americans who were disturbed that government agents subverted lawful process to conduct inappropriate
surveillance for political purposes," the Republican senators' letter reads. "The truth pursued by this investigation
is necessary to ensure transparency in our intelligence agencies and restore faith in our civil liberties. Thus, it is
essential that the Special Counsel's ongoing review should be allowed to continue unimpeded and without undue limitations."
grouse about Garland's handling of Durham inquiry: Report. Witnesses are getting antsy with special
counsel John Durham 's criminal inquiry into the opening and conduct of the Russia investigation. Last week, nearly
seven months into the Biden administration, reports said the federal prosecutor had presented evidence before a grand jury,
a sign he is considering more criminal charges beyond the one brought against former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who
admitted to altering an email about a Trump campaign aide who was under government surveillance.
Republicans demand Durham report be made public. More than 40 GOP senators signed on to a letter to Attorney
General Merrick Garland demanding that Special Counsel John Durham's investigation be allowed to continue and the report be
made public. The letter comes amid questions about whether Durham will have funding to continue his investigation past
the end of the government's fiscal year on Sept. 30. "The Special Counsel's ongoing work is important to many Americans
who were disturbed that government agents subverted lawful process to conduct inappropriate surveillance for political
purposes," the letter reads. "The truth pursued by this investigation is necessary to ensure transparency in our
intelligence agencies and restore faith in our civil liberties. Thus, it is essential that the Special Counsel's
ongoing review should be allowed to continue unimpeded and without undue limitations." Durham was appointed by former
Attorney General William Barr in 2019 to conduct a review of the origins of the FBI's investigation into Russian collusion
during the 2016 election. He was elevated to special counsel in October 2020.
That WSJ Report of the Durham Probe Investigating FBI Tipsters. [Scroll down] If John Durham was to
outline evidence of any FBI and DOJ corruption and/or wrongdoing in his review of the Spygate or "Crossfire Hurricane"
investigation, the transparently obvious questions would be: (1) why didn't Robert Mueller see it? and
(2) why would Mueller be investigating something that he knew stemmed from a false point of origin? See the problem?
As soon as John Durham found out that Robert Mueller and team were dirty; and as soon as John Durham found direct evidence that DOJ
and FBI officials were coordinating with dirty politicians in the Senate Intelligence Committee (both parties); and as soon as he
found out that all of them — in both branches of government — were working together to frame a false
narrative (based on nothing) just to target and eliminate Donald Trump; he would know he needed an exit. Special
Counsel John Durham cannot prosecute anyone for anything the Robert Mueller team should have known; and the Robert Mueller
team should have known everything, because Mueller and team used ten times as many DOJ and FBI assets and resources as
Durham; used all of the originating evidence that Durham is now re-reviewing; looked at the exact same set of facts and
witnesses now under review by Durham; and spent two years doing it.
report may not be 'broad' as hoped but prosecutions in play, Nunes says. Any report compiled by special counsel
John Durham "may not be as broad as we want it to be," warned a leading Republican congressman, who nevertheless expects more
prosecutions. Rep. Devin Nunes, the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, made the observation as he
assessed what remains to be seen of the inquiry into the origins and conduct of the Russia investigation. The long
duration of the special counsel investigation has frustrated former President Donald Trump, who often asks about Durham's
progress. But the lawmaker said he remains confident in the work the prosecutor is doing, largely hidden from the
McCabe looks awfully nervous about Durham. Most conservatives that I know have all but given up on the hope
that the special counsel investigation underway by John Durham will ever result in prosecution of the miscreants who used the
intelligence apparatus to spy on the Trump Administration under cover of the Russiagate hoax. The shockingly light
penalty in the plea deal exacted on the FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, who lied to the FISA Court on warrant applications
seemed to indicate that Durham is not serious about punishing serious wrongdoing. But, there is still the possibility
that Clinesmith revealed some secrets that implicate higher ups, even though the fruits of such possible cooperation with
prosecutors have not been evident yet.
percent of Americans unaware of John Durham probe: Poll. A whopping 67 percent of Americans are unaware
of special counsel John Durham's investigation into decision-making at the FBI and Justice Department surrounding the probe
into former President Trump's purported ties to Russia, according to a poll released Tuesday [4/20/2021]. The survey was
conducted earlier this month by Tippinsights, a polling company. Of the 33% who are aware of the Durham probe, 45% said
they are conservatives, 26% identified as moderates, and 30% identified as liberal.
Durham Deploys Records Subpoena Against Brookings Institute For Steele Dossier Primary Source, Igor Danchenko.
The New York Times writes a story about John Durham issuing subpoenas to the Brookings Institute for records of Igor
Danchenko's work there. Danchenko was Chris Steele's primary sub-source for the infamous Steele Dossier. The
material provided by Danchenko to Steele was described as unsubstantiated "gossip", "rumor", "hearsay" and innuendo by
Danchenko himself after he was questioned by the FBI. [...] In essence Chris Steele put a bunch of garbage inside his
dossier, and his dossier was used to get the Carter Page FISA warrant to conduct surveillance against the Trump campaign
(October 21, 2016). Danchenko then disavowed the veracity of all the information he provided during FBI interviews in
January, February and March 2017; but the FBI ignored the Danchenko discussion and used the dossier for two more FISA
renewals in April and June 2017.
Durham scrutinizes Steele dossier source through Brookings Institution subpoena: Report. Special counsel
John Durham is reportedly scrutinizing British ex-spy Christopher Steele's main source for his discredited dossier, using a
subpoena to obtain documents from the Brookings Institution related to its employment of Igor Danchenko, a researcher who
visited Russia in 2016 as he worked for the ex-MI6 agent. The New York Times reported on Monday, citing "people
familiar with the investigation," that Durham "has keyed in on the FBI's handling of a notorious dossier of political
opposition research both before and after the bureau started using it to obtain court permission to wiretap a former Trump
campaign adviser." The outlet said Durham obtained records from the left-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C., related to
Danchenko, who worked for the organization from 2005 to 2010 as a Russia researcher but is best known as the main source for
Steele's discredited Trump-Russia dossier in 2016.
Haven't the Durham or Hunter Biden Investigations Ended Yet? It's widely assumed in much of the media
commentary I've seen in the past few months that neither the Durham special counsel's office nor the federal investigation
into Hunter Biden's tax affairs are real. Pundits and commentators make it clear in their pronouncements that they
believe neither investigation is credible or, if they ever were, they were subsumed by politics long ago. If it's true
that both always were or soon became bogus investigations, this brings up a relevant question: Since President Joe
Biden is now safely installed in the White House, and there's no longer any reason to keep up the pretense that anything is
happening, why are both investigations continuing? Why haven't they been ended yet? Counter to most of the media
pontifications about this ongoing federal investigation, I'm convinced they are quite real.
Solomon Gives Stunning Update in Durham's 'Russiagate' Investigation. Without question, the vast majority of
Americans who support former President Donald Trump were angry and frustrated throughout 2020 passed with barely a mention of
then-U.S. Attorney John Durham's criminal investigation into the FBI's fraudulent "Russiagate" counterterrorism operation
directed at his 2016 campaign. In the weeks before the November election, word got out that then-Attorney General
William Barr wasn't going to announce any indictments or even a report on Durham's investigation because he did not want to
influence the outcome.
director says Crossfire Hurricane disciplinary action [was] delayed at John Durham's request. FBI Director
Christopher Wray said the bureau slowed down its internal disciplinary process for the Crossfire Hurricane investigation at
the request of special counsel John Durham, who is conducting a criminal inquiry into the officials tasked with scrutinizing
former President Donald Trump's ties to Russia. Sen. John Kennedy broached the topic during a Senate Judiciary
Committee hearing on Tuesday [3/2/2021], asking Wray how many FBI employees he had referred for prosecution as a result of
Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz's 2019 critical report on the Russia investigation. After Wray
said the prosecution issue was in Durham's hands, he was asked how many people he fired in response to the independent
Trump Trade Official Peter Navarro Says There Will be at Least Three Indictments Coming from John Durham.
Former Trump Administration Trade Official Peter Navarro predicted today [2/28/2021] on Maria Bartiromo's Fox News show
"Morning Futures" that there will be at least three indictments coming forth from the investigation being conducted by Special
Counsel John Durham with regard to the Trump-Russia hoax perpetrated by the Obama Administration officials beginning in the
summer of 2016 in an effort to help Hillary Clinton try to get elected in spite of her mishandling of classified information.
Durham steps down as U.S. attorney but will remain in charge of Russia probe. John Durham, a decorated career
prosecutor, announced Friday [2/26/2021] he is stepping down at the end of the month as a U.S. attorney in Connecticut but
will continue as special prosecutor investigating the origins of the Russia collusion probe that dogged the early Trump
presidency. Durham's announcement, which was widely expected as part of the transition inside the Biden Justice
Department, allows him to focus on wrapping up the Russia investigation from Washington DC where the probe has been ongoing
since 2019. "My career has been as fulfilling as I could ever have imagined when I graduated from law school way back in
1975," Durham said. "Much of that fulfillment has come from all the people with whom I've been blessed to share this
workplace, and in our partner law enforcement agencies. My love and respect for this Office and the vitally important
work done here have never diminished."
a Durham Report Is Becoming Highly Unlikely. The prospect that Biden's attorney general might allow Durham to
indict former Barack Obama administration officials is ludicrous. Remember that documents released over the last year
gave evidence that as vice-president Biden was not only aware of the spying operation against Trump officials but
participated in it. Biden not only knew that the FBI was framing incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn but
suggested that the Department of Justice might charge Flynn for violating the Logan Act. In other words, the FBI
officials that Durham is reportedly investigating are Biden's co-conspirators. To allow them to be indicted would not
only point to Biden's guilt but also show that the most powerful man in the world is unable or unwilling to protect allies
who have helped advance the cause of the party he now leads. That would show Biden to be weak. [Attorney General
nominee Merrick] Garland understands that his primary duty as Biden's chief law enforcement officer is not to oversee the
fair and equal treatment of all Americans under the law, but to protect the president and the party he serves.
Trump Asks 'Where [...] Is The Durham Report?'. With the possibility that President Trump may be serving out
his last month in office, the target of a Deep State coup is facing the grim reality that the perpetrators may get away with
it. With the installation of frontman Joe Biden likely only weeks away, Trump appears to be realizing that the fix has
always been in and that former Attorney General William P. Barr was put in place by powerful interests to run out the
clock. Barr's early departure this week comes with several dangling loose ends including the "investigation" by bulldog
federal prosecutor John Durham into the origins of the Russia collusion scam undertaken by Barack Obama's FBI to frame Trump
as an agent of the Kremlin. Durham has completely disappeared, leading a perplexed and frustrated Trump to take to
Twitter on Saturday morning [12/26/2020] to ask "Where [...] is the Durham Report?"
signs memo allowing Durham to use classified Russia evidence in grand jury probe. Classified information may be
utilized in the probe scrutinizing the origins of the FBI investigation related to the 2016 presidential campaign, according
to a presidential order from President Trump. U.S. attorney John Durham, who had been conducting the investigation, was
named as a special counsel in the probe in October. "The Attorney General is currently conducting a review of intelligence
activities relating to the campaigns in the 2016 Presidential election and certain related matters," the memo states. "On
May 13, 2019, the Attorney General directed John Durham to conduct that review, which subsequently developed into a criminal
investigation. On October 19, 2020, the Attorney General appointed Mr. Durham to conduct that investigation
pursuant to the powers and independence afforded by the Special Counsel regulations of the Department of Justice."
Counsel John Durham expanding team, making 'excellent progress': source. Special Counsel John Durham is
expanding his team and making "excellent progress" on his investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, a federal
law enforcement official familiar with the investigation told Fox News. Fox News has learned that Durham, the U.S.
attorney for Connecticut, who Barr appointed in October as special counsel, is adding prosecutors to his team. It is
unclear, at this point, who those prosecutors are. Fox News reported in May that Jeff Jensen, the U.S. attorney for the
Eastern District of Missouri who was tapped by the Justice Department in February to review the case of former national
security adviser Michael Flynn, was helping with Durham's investigation. President Trump pardoned Flynn last month.
Didn't Want to Go After Top Officials Like Comey: Trump. U.S. Attorney John Durham didn't want to go
after top officials like former FBI Director James Comey, President Donald Trump alleged on Wednesday [12/2/2020]. "We
caught Comey cold, we caught McCabe cold. We caught them all," Trump said during a White House address, referring to
Comey and the man who temporarily replaced him, Andrew McCabe. "We're still waiting for a report from a man named
Durham, who I have never spoken to, and I have never met. They can go after me before the election as much as they
want, but unfortunately Mr. Durham didn't want to go after these people, or have anything to do with going after them
before the election. So who knows if he is ever going to even do a report," the president added. The swipe came a
day after Attorney General William Barr revealed he'd appointed Durham as a special counsel to review the Russia-Trump
counter-intelligence probe, among other matters. Barr appointed Durham in October but kept it secret until Dec. 2.
says he gave Durham thousands of docs, urges accountability: No question abuse of power took place.
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe says he's turned over "thousands of documents" to U.S. Attorney John Durham
during his investigation into the origins of the so-called "Russian collusion" probe of the 2016 Trump campaign. In an
interview with the Washington Examiner published Thursday [12/3/2020], Ratcliffe said he's counting on Durham to uncover the
truth about what the DNI believes is monumental corruption and wrongdoing by officials tied to the Russia investigation.
Schiff flip-flops on special counsels after Durham appointment. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., once called
for legislation to protect then-special counsel Robert Mueller to ensure that his Russia investigation would continue
unimpeded, but now he is railing against Attorney General William Barr's appointment of a special counsel to continue
investigating the FBI's actions in the early stages of that same Russia probe. Barr recently announced that prior to
November's election, he named Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham as special counsel for the investigation of the Russia
probe that Durham was already leading. As a U.S. attorney, Durham is subject to being relieved of his duties when
President-elect Joe Biden takes office. His investigation could also be shut down by the next administration.
Bill Barr Appointed John Durham as Special Counsel October 19th — Did Not Tell Anyone, Did Not Inform
Public. It looks possible AG Bill Barr is trying to pull a sneaky fast-one against President Trump and the
American people. Because what Barr is claiming to do, he really isn't doing. According to a stunning article by
Associated Press, AG Bill Barr appointed John Durham as a special counsel on October 19th, and did not tell anyone. [...]
However, here's the issue: under DOJ regulations [28 cfr 600] a special counsel must come from "outside government";
so did John Durham resign his position prior to the appointment, or has Bill Barr just given the appearance of a special
counsel appointment while knowing the legal validity of it will collapse upon challenge?
Durham Probe Is Now a Special Counsel Investigation. Attorney General Bill Barr has appointed U.S. Attorney
John Durham as a Special Counsel, elevating his current investigation into the origins of the Russia probe. The
appointment took place shortly before the 2020 presidential election on October 19. "On May 13, 2019, I
directed United States Attorney John Durham to conduct a preliminary review into certain matters related to the 2016
presidential election campaigns, and Mr. Durham's review subsequently developed into a criminal investigation, which
remains ongoing. Following consultation with Mr. Durham, I have determined that, in light of the extraordinary
circumstances relating to these matters, the public interest warrants Mr. Durham continuing this investigation pursuant
to the powers and independence afforded by the Special Counsel regulations," Barr wrote in an order. "The Special
Counsel is authorized to investigate whether any federal official, employee, or any other person or entity violated the law
in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential
campaigns, individuals associated with those campaigns, and individuals associated with the administration of President
Donald J. Trump, including but not limited to Crossfire Hurricane and the investigation of Special Counsel
Robert S. Mueller,. III."
Nunes warns 'growing concern' that Biden and Obama will shut down Durham inquiry. Rep. Devin Nunes warned
of "growing concern" that President-elect Joe Biden, taking cues from former President Barack Obama, will shut down U.S.
Attorney John Durham's inquiry into the Russia investigation. The California Republican, who is the ranking member on
the House Intelligence Committee, said on Sunday that Attorney General William Barr should set up a special counsel before
Inauguration Day to keep the so-called investigation of the investigators alive. "Now we're sitting waiting for Durham
to complete this investigation. I think people are getting not only very frustrated but also, there's a growing concern
that Durham is not going to come out with anything and then Biden and Obama are going to be back in, and they're going to
shut this investigation off," Nunes told Maria Bartiromo on her Fox News program, Sunday Morning Futures.
Probe Still Moving Ahead. U.S. Attorney John Durham's probe into how the FBI'S Russia probe got started is
moving "full steam ahead." Fox News attributed the information to a source familiar with the investigation. And
another source confirmed the investigation "is definitely still happening," according to the news network. Word of the
probe's status came despite concerns from Republicans that the investigation had become dormant following the election.
Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer was charged in August with making a false statement in the first criminal case arising
from Durham's investigation into the probe of ties between Russia and the 2016 Donald Trump campaign.
Durham Investigation Closing Down Without Indictments, Scared of Biden Blowback. For well over a year now, the
Durham investigation has been pumped up as the coming justice for a lot of bad characters involved in the government's
Trump-Russia travesty. Any hope that figures like John Brennan, James Comey, and Andrew McCabe would pay a price for
their illegal FISA warrants, lying, and targeting of Donald Trump rested on Durham doing his job. "Trust the plan"
became a mantra among some on the right, with the idea being that the hammer was always just around the corner.
Unfortunately, it appears Durham successfully ran out the clock. What many have suspected for a long time appears to be
true, namely that no one will be held accountable for the corruption of the Trump-Russia investigation. The Federalist,
who has covered this saga better than any other news outlet out there, is now reporting that Durham is looking to close up
shop, fearing that an incoming Biden administration will retaliate.
Claims Durham Is Dropping the Spygate Investigation. It appears that the bureaucracy is more afraid of the
Democrats than the people, as a report emerges claiming the Justice Department is dropping the investigation into Spygate,
nearly two years after it began. The Federalist's Sean Davis reports that the investigation into a treacherous spying
operation on Donald Trump's campaign and presidency is being dropped.
Turley: Rumor has it John Durham has 'material undisclosed' by special counsel or DOJ watchdog. Legal
scholar Jonathan Turley said there are "rumors" about secret materials obtained by U.S. Attorney John Durham. The
George Washington University law professor addressed the criminal inquiry into the Russia investigation in an op-ed for the
Hill on Thursday about what President-elect Joe Biden might do with politically charged investigations. Turley said
there are "some rumors that Durham holds material undisclosed by the special counsel or the inspector general," referring to
Justice Department watchdog Michael Horowitz, with whom Durham disagreed in the determination that the opening of the
Trump-Russia investigation was justified, and former special counsel Robert Mueller, who found no criminal conspiracy between
the Trump campaign and Russia.
Johnson: 'Political' for John Durham not to release interim report before election. A top Republican senator
blamed U.S. Attorney John Durham's criminal inquiry into the Russia investigation for presenting a roadblock to documents
sought by Congress. This is why Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Committee, said "it is incredibly disappointing" if the federal prosecutor does not intend to release an interim report
before the Nov. 3 election due to concerns about such a disclosure being viewed as political as Fox Business anchor Maria
Bartiromo reported on Sunday [9/27/2020]. "What's political is if he doesn't report," the Wisconsin Republican
declared. Johnson said the "deep state" has, "through these other investigations," prevented the public "from knowing
what happened with the FBI's corruption of their investigation, the corruption of the transition process, for about
"Sources Confirm No Interim Durham Report or Indictments Before Election". Fox News host Maria Bartiromo
announced earlier today that sources have shared not to expect any interim report or outcomes from the probe by John Durham
prior to the election. Obviously for many CTH readers this will not be an unanticipated outcome; however, that alone
does not mitigate disappointment. A decision not to pursue honest justice due to the election is ultimately a political
decision. The dynamic of worrying about the optics of the political calendar, is itself a political decision.
No Durham Report, Indictments Coming per Sources. This is not the kind of big news you want to get on an
otherwise slow Sunday morning, but here it is. Fox News' Maria Bartiromo is reporting this morning that there will be
no Durham interim report or indictments coming before the election. By the wording, she may actually be saying there's
no report coming at all. If true, this is a travesty of justice of the highest order given what has transpired the last
five years. [...] Whether or not you believe this news will probably depend on the level of cynicism you normally operate
with in regards to this topic. I've been far more skeptical of the Durham investigation than even I'd like to admit
That DOJ Prosecutors Don't Normally Resign Are Distortions and Purposefully Dishonest. I noted several examples
on Twitter yesterday of the "Greek Chorus" for "Former Federal Prosecutors" banging cymbals like wind-up monkeys and
shrieking "Federal prosecutors don't normally resign so this is all a protest of the corrupt acts of Attorney General Barr!"
Here are a couple of examples: [Tweets] Both of these are inaccurate and dishonest. First, we don't know why
Dannehy chose to resign. I noted in this story earlier that the time she has served with Durham takes her past her
20 year DOJ service time benchmark, given that when she left DOJ in 2010 she had only 19 years of service. It's
also possible that her role in the Durham investigation had come to an end, and that maybe it was necessary for her to depart to
preserve the integrity of the cases that might be coming shortly. But to say that her departure is in league with the
departures of SCO prosecutors from problematic cases they handled is simply duplicitous.
Dannehy, Connecticut prosecutor who was top aide to John Durham's Trump-Russia investigation, resigns amid concern about
pressure from Attorney General William Barr. Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, a top aide to U.S. Attorney John H.
Durham in his Russia investigation, has quietly resigned — at least partly out of concern that the investigative team
is being pressed for political reasons to produce a report before its work is done, colleagues said. Dannehy, a highly
regarded prosecutor who has worked with or for Durham for decades, informed colleagues in the U.S. Attorney's office in New
Haven of her resignation from the Department of Justice by email Thursday evening. The short email was a brief farewell
message and said nothing about political pressure, her work for Durham or what the Durham team has produced, according to
people who received it.
aide resigns from Russia probe amid concerns over pressure from Barr: report. A top aide to U.S. Attorney John
Durham has reportedly resigned from the Justice Department's probe into the origins of the Russia investigation amid worries
over political pressure from Attorney General William Barr. Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, who has worked with Durham
for decades, resigned Thursday evening [9/10/2020], sources told the Hartford Courant in a story published Friday. Her
resignation email did not include mention of political pressure. Dannehy, whom sources told the Courant is not a supporter
of President Trump, was reportedly conflicted between politics and loyalty to Durham, a longtime colleague. The career
prosecutor has led high-profile investigations into leaders such as former Connecticut Gov. John G. Rowland (R).
General William Barr Gives Update On Criminal Charges In Durham Investigation. U.S. Attorney General William
Barr strongly suggested during an NBC News interview on Wednesday night that there are more criminal charges coming in U.S.
Attorney John Durham's criminal investigation of the origins of the FBI's counterintelligence investigation into the 2016
Trump campaign. NBC News reporter Pete Williams asked Barr: "Okay, would you say — it's unlikely that
there'll be further criminal charges?" Barr responded: "No, I wouldn't say that at all, no." During a Fox News
interview last month, Barr said that there were "significant developments" in the criminal investigation before the upcoming election.
going on with the Durham investigation, if anything? Ever since Attorney General Barr appointed U.S. Attorney
John Durham to investigate the origins of the Russia collusion probe, Trump supporters have been waiting for the bomb to
drop. And waiting. And waiting. But nothing ever happens. Judicial Watch's founder Tom Fitton thinks
that conservatives are being scammed. Instead of an investigation, it's just another Washington cover-up. I
suspect (or, maybe, hope), though, that Barr and Durham are holding their fire because of the election.
investigation drags on. The Washington Examiner reported, "U.S. Attorney John Durham will soon interview former
CIA Director John Brennan, another sign that the investigation of the Trump-Russia investigators is ready to wrap up by the
end of the summer." Notice the story did not say which summer. [...] This looks more like investigation theater than
holding anyone accountable for the FBI spying on Obama's political opponents. This case is being slow walked.
Where [...] Is John
Durham? In May 2019, Attorney General William Barr made an announcement millions of Americans had been waiting
for: A U.S. attorney outside the Beltway would investigate the corrupt origins of the FBI's probe into Donald Trump's
presidential campaign and government efforts to sabotage the incoming president after he was elected. For the past 14
months, we have been waiting (impatiently, I confess) for news from John Durham, the Connecticut prosecutor Barr tapped to
lead the long-delayed inquiry. After all, by the time the attorney general initiated the targeted probe, there was
plenty of evidence of wrongdoing by top officials in the Obama Administration, including James Comey, John Brennan, and
Andrew McCabe among others. Special Counsel Robert Mueller had wrapped up his two-year partisan witch hunt and despite
unlimited resources — along with the unflinching support of Republicans on Capitol Hill — Barack
Obama's former FBI director could find no evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. But Mueller
did plenty of damage in the interim.
Steele evidence strengthens Durham prosecution as frustration over inaction grows. It was in London that the
whole Russia collusion caper began four years ago, so it seems only fitting that as the discredited probe enters its final
phase that damning new evidence of the FBI's failures would emerge back in England. This week when a British judge
ruled against the former FBI human source Christopher Steele, the decision delivered more than an order for the former spy's
company to pay damages to two Russian businessmen maligned by his dossier. It also introduced new incontrovertible
evidence that bolsters Attorney General William Barr's and U.S. Attorney John Durham's probe into whether the FBI engaged in
misconduct and criminally deceived the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to win permission to spy on the Trump campaign.
under pressure to wrap up investigation, could 'punt' to after Election Day: source. U.S. Attorney John Durham
is under pressure to wrap up his investigation into the origins of the Russia probe by the end of the summer, but if he
doesn't, he could wait to reveal his findings or initiate prosecutions until after the 2020 presidential election, Fox News
has learned. Two sources familiar with Durham's investigation told Fox News this week that Durham is working
expeditiously to try to finish the probe by the end of summer, but that several lines of investigation are not yet complete.
Mr. Durham. We Need Your Report Before Election Day. [Scroll down] Durham does not want his
report "to be viewed political"? He must be dreaming. Nothing could be more political. It's inextricably so,
no matter what he says or does or when he does it. To wit, what Mr. Durham is said to be investigating is whether
one or more of our most important law enforcement and intelligence agencies (DOJ, FBI, CIA, State Department and so forth)
were highjacked and used illegally to prevent Donald Trump from being elected president and/or for undercutting his
presidency and administration after he was. What [...] could be more political than that? Yes, it would be a
crime as well, but a crime for the most obvious and extreme political ends. And if Durham does "punt" until after
the 2020 election, it could become more political still, pushing our society to the edge of civil war and beyond.
Investigation Must Be Wrapping Up Because Barr Has Become Enemy Number One. To hear the media tell it, Attorney
General William Barr and his boss, President Donald Trump, are on the verge of breaking up. Or maybe Barr is acting as
the president's lapdog. It changes depending on the outlet and the hour. But one thing seems almost certain:
U.S. Attorney John Durham is wrapping up his investigation into the origins of the Russia collusion probe because the same
narrative machine that kicked in to give us impeachment has now demanded that Barr testify in front of the House Judiciary
Committee in March. And he's agreed.
US attorney leading Russia probe investigating whether US intelligence agencies hid information. The federal
prosecutor leading the probe into the 2016 Trump-Russia investigation might be pursuing a basis to accuse former US
intelligence officials who served under former President Barack Obama of hiding intelligence about Russia's election
interference, according to The New York Times. The Times reported that John Durham, the US attorney tapped by Attorney
General William Barr to look into the investigators, is questioning past disputes between different US intelligence agencies'
analysts over sharing highly sensitive information regarding Russia's scheme to meddle in the 2016 US election.
Barr Has Suddenly Become Chatty — and He's Provided Quite an Information Dump. Below are 24 points
Barr felt the need to make after the release of the Horowitz report. (All of the information is attributed to Barr.)
[#1] Don't expect Durham's findings to be announced before late Spring or Summer 2020. [#2] The FBI did spy on the
Trump campaign. That's what electronic surveillance is. [#3] Regarding FBI's actions in surveilling Trump campaign
associates, it was a "travesty" and there were "many abuses." [#4] From "day one," the FBI investigation generated exculpatory
information (tending to point to the targets' innocence) and nothing that corroborated Russia collusion. [...] [#24] Why
haven't we already thrown people in prison? "These things take time." The government has to have proof beyond a
reasonable doubt before we indict; it's a substantial hurdle. Nobody is going to be indicted and go to jail unless
that standard is met.
Trump Was Right From the Beginning.
The biggest bombshell on Monday burst not in Washington, D.C., but in Connecticut, where John Durham, its U.S. attorney,
rebutted Michael Horowitz's finding that the FBI had adequate grounds to begin an investigation of the Trump campaign.
No, it didn't, said Durham: [...] Translation: Durham has collected much more information than Horowitz, and it points
toward the conclusion that the investigation was bogus from the start. Naturally, the media is portraying Horowitz's
timid conclusion as a refutation of Trump while ignoring the import of Durham's objection. Reporters have also scoffed
at Attorney General Bill Barr's comments buttressing Durham's position.
Attorney John Durham Responds To FISA Report, Hints At What's To Come. United States Attorney John Durham
responded to Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz's report on Monday by stating that it was incorrect due to
the limited information that it was based on whereas Durham's criminal investigation is not limited in scope and appears to
have uncovered a lot more than Horowitz did. "I have the utmost respect for the mission of the Office of Inspector
General and the comprehensive work that went into the report prepared by Mr. Horowitz and his staff," Durham said in a
statement. "However, our investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the
Justice Department," Durham continued. "Our investigation has included developing information from other persons and
entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S. Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation
is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report's conclusions as to
predication and how the FBI case was opened."
'Historic' Durham Investigation Will Implicate Obama in Spygate. On Friday morning [11/22/2019], President
Donald Trump told Fox & Friends that spygate — the Obama administration's surveillance on the Trump
campaign during the 2016 election based on the false pretense of Trump being in league with Russia — will be
"perhaps the biggest scandal in the history of our country." He said Attorney General Bill Barr's investigation of FISA
abuses and U.S. Attorney John Durham's criminal investigation will prove "historic," and he predicted that the investigations
will implicate former President Barack Obama himself. "Now, what you're going to see, I predict, will be perhaps the
biggest scandal in the history of our country, political scandal," Trump said.
Calm, Where's the Storm? US Attorney John Durham is looking into the origins of spygate and has now shifted his
investigation from an inquiry to a criminal investigation. Where are the indictments, sealed or otherwise? Where
are the Roger Stone-style SWAT team raids at the homes of Comey, Brennan, and Clapper, the type orchestrated by the
above-mentioned Andrew Weissman? Are any of the spygate players in solitary confinement like Paul Manafort? Or
are any of them fighting for their lives, like Michael Flynn, for supposedly misstating something to the FBI during a
prearranged entrapment interview?
media reporting that US Atty Durham has interviewed Alexander Downer. Alexander Downer's meeting with George
Papadopoulos at the Kensington Wine Rooms in 2016 played a key role in providing a rationale for an FBI investigation of the
Trump campaign, including FISA warrants allowing wiretapping. At the time, Downer was the Australian high commissioner
(ambassador) to the U.K. and had been Australia's foreign minister earlier, a very senior diplomat to be entertaining a young
Trump campaign volunteer. The meeting, also attended by Aussie diplomat Erika Thompson, elicited the information from
Papadopoulos that he had been told by mysterious Maltese professor Joseph Mifsud that the Russians had a trove of Hillary
Clinton's missing emails. When that information was duly passed along and reached the U.S., it became justification for
investigating "collusion with Russia."
Levin: Barr and Durham should investigate trio of former National Security Council staffers. Conservative
commentator Mark Levin says the Justice Department should investigate three former National Security Council staffers.
One former staffer filed a complaint that spurred House impeachment proceedings and two others were recruited by House
Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff. Levin, who was Attorney General Edwin Meese's chief of staff during the
Reagan administration, appeared on Fox News host Sean Hannity's show last week and discussed how the National Security
Council has been exposed as a "rat's nest" in President Trump's White House. He said Attorney General William Barr and
U.S. Attorney John Durham, who is conducting a criminal inquiry into the genesis of the Russia investigation, should also
open up a related investigation into the origins of what is now the Democrats' impeachment proceedings.
Last Trusted Prosecutor in Washington. John Durham may be the most consequential and least known figure in
Washington right now. In May, U.S. attorney general William Barr selected Durham, a longtime prosecutor with a
résumé so sterling it nearly glows, to investigate the origins of the special counsel's probe into Russian
interference in the 2016 election, and whether it was properly predicated. Some Trump fans believe there was a vast
effort by a "deep state" of high-ranking intelligence and law-enforcement officials to smear Trump or hinder his campaign by
creating a perception of corrupt ties to Russia. [...] Since he is an attorney general appointed by President Trump, almost
every decision from William Barr is criticized by Democrats as a partisan abuse of law-enforcement powers. But the
appointment of Durham received no backlash, and in fact received praise far and wide.
Durham Knows He Has Crimes and Has a 'Pretty Good Idea' of the People Behind Them. Fox is breaking more
interesting news about the Durham investigation. We know the investigation of the origins of the Russia probe has
become a criminal investigation. This gives U.S. Attorney John Durham the power to issue subpoenas to witnesses and
impanel a grand jury to get more information and to potentially file charges. Now a source has told Fox that Durham
knows the crimes that were committed, who was involved and what can be charged.
Ignoring The Criminal Investigation Into Obamagate. [Scroll down] He [John Durham] has just turned this
reportedly into a criminal investigation — his investigation into Obamagate has apparently become a criminal
investigation. That is the story that should be the headline every day. [...] It is big news that John Durham is
investigating the previous administration in a criminal way. That means somebody could get indicted, that means
somebody could go to jail, and it's hilarious. The principals in this, the skills, the perps, the investigators are
suddenly deserting the sinking ship.
Raid, Durham Probe Will Frustrate Impeachment. The carrying out of President Donald Trump's order to eliminate
Baghdadi will be paired with another big net minus for Democrats: U.S. attorney for Connecticut John Durham's Russian
election influence probe shifting into a criminal investigation. While some speculate that the criminal dimension may
be in regard to peripheral matters, the speed with which Durham has come to this point, having only begun his work less than
six months ago, strongly suggests otherwise. As does Democrats immediately — and groundlessly —
accusing Attorney General William Barr of meddling in Durham's probe. Highly unlikely since Durham has a Boy Scout-like
reputation of integrity and thoroughness.
Italian Job: 'Spygate' probe goes criminal. Thursday evening [10/24/2019] brought news that the Durham "review"
of the Justice Department/FBI handling of the "Russia-Trump" operation has become a criminal investigation. [...] The report
on the decision to "go criminal" also comes with an added detail from Fox's Catherine Herridge. According to her
reports, the catalyst for the decision to pursue this as a criminal investigation came from the visits of Attorney General
William Barr and federal DA John Durham to Italy in August and September. It was information they obtained during
meetings in Rome that tipped the scales on the potential for criminal indictments.
FBI Top Lawyer James Baker Is Now Cooperating With Durham; There Are Two James Bakers In This Movie. Is it
possible that former FBI General Counsel James Baker has begun cooperating with Attorney General William Barr and U.S.
Attorney John Durham? Rumors began swirling on Friday in Washington following OANN's Jack Posobiec's interview with
Ned Ryun, who is the CEO and founder of American Majority. I'll give you the bottom line first. Toward the end of
the segment, Posobiec said to Ryun, "Essentially what you're saying is that Baker has flipped."
Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation. For more than two years,
President Trump has repeatedly attacked the Russia investigation, portraying it as a hoax and illegal even months after the
special counsel closed it. Now, Mr. Trump's own Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation into how it
all began. Justice Department officials have shifted an administrative review of the Russia investigation closely
overseen by Attorney General William P. Barr to a criminal inquiry, according to two people familiar with the matter.
The move gives the prosecutor running it, John H. Durham, the power to subpoena for witness testimony and documents, to
convene a grand jury and to file criminal charges.
DOJ Review of Russia Probe Origins Is Now Criminal Investigation. The Department of Justice's sweeping review into the origins
of its Trump-Russia probe has evolved into a criminal investigation, according to the New York Times. The launch of a criminal
probe allows U.S. Attorney John Durham, the prosecutor tapped by Attorney General William Barr to lead the review, to subpoena witnesses
for testimony and documents. The move also authorizes Durham to impanel a grand jury and file charges.
Investigation Is Criminal: a Disaster for the MSM. To those of us who have been watching this spectacle from
the beginning, this was inevitable. After all, where'd the Mueller/Russia probe come from in the first place?
Since there was absolutely no there there, it makes no sense that it wasn't a fraud from the outset. Who started
it? Who are the treasonous/seditious culprits who conspired to overthrow an election?
investigation into possible FBI misconduct is now criminal probe, sources say. U.S. Attorney John Durham's
ongoing probe into potential FBI and Justice Department misconduct in the run-up to the 2016 election through the spring of
2017 has transitioned into a full-fledged criminal investigation, two sources familiar with the investigation told Fox News
on Thursday night [10/24/2019]. One source added that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz's upcoming report on
alleged FBI surveillance abuses against the Trump campaign will shed light on why Durham's probe has become a criminal
inquiry. Horowitz announced on Thursday his report would be available to the public soon, with "few" redactions.
The investigation's new status means Durham can subpoena witnesses, file charges, and impanel fact-finding grand juries.
against seditious conspiracy have real legal teeth. With the coming AG Barr- and US Attorney Durham-initiated
legal tsunami ready to wash in against all that were part of this historic silent coup, it would now be possible to bring
additional charges against those bad actors that previously thought they were beyond real criminal penalties because the fix
was in. It is about to get very interesting, and as an original member of Trump Nation, it will be interesting to see
how many very cleaver but morally and legally blind individuals who betrayed their oath of office are brought to justice.
probe into possible FBI misconduct expanded based on new evidence, sources say. U.S. Attorney John Durham's
investigation into the origins of the FBI's 2016 Russia probe has expanded based on new evidence uncovered during a recent
trip to Rome with Attorney General Bill Barr, sources told Fox News on Tuesday [10/22/2019]. The sources said Durham was
"very interested" to question former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan, an
anti-Trump critic who recently dismissed the idea. The two Obama administration officials were at the helm when the
unverified and largely discredited Steele dossier, written by British ex-spy Christopher Steele and funded by the Hillary
Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee, was used to justify a secret surveillance warrant against former Trump
adviser Carter Page.
Sure Looks Like the Barr-Durham Probe Is Now a Criminal Investigation. Yesterday, RedState via Elizabeth Vaughn
shared the news that Durham had further expanded his investigation to include James Clapper and John Brennan. This, of
course, left Brennan flailing about wildly, wondering why the DOJ would even be interested in him. [...] With the latest
report, there are a few things happening that make me think this isn't just window dressing. In fact, I think it has
morphed into a full blown criminal investigation.
Clapper To Be Interviewed As Part Of Investigation Into Russia Probe Origins. U.S. Attorney John Durham intends
to interview former CIA Director John Brennan as part of his investigation into U.S. intelligence agencies' activities in the
Trump-Russia probe, according to NBC News. Brennan told NBC News, where he is an analyst, that both he and James
Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, are sought for interviews with Durham's investigators. The
interviews, should they occur, would signal that Durham is expanding his investigation.
Times: Prosecutors Have Interviewed About Two Dozen Witnesses in Russia Probe. Federal prosecutors say
they've interviewed about two dozen witnesses, including former FBI officials, in the government's probe of the origins of
the FBI's Russian investigation, according to a story in today's New York Times. Attorney General William Barr, who
requested the investigation, is trying to discover the basis for the FBI's surveillance of the Trump campaign during the 2016
election and whether it was politically motivated by anti-Trump, pro-Clinton officials. U.S. attorney John Durham has
apparently made more progress in his investigation than observers previously thought.
Broadens Investigation into 2016 Russia Probe, Adds More Agents and Resources. John Durham, the U.S. attorney
tasked with investigating the origins of the counterintelligence investigation into Russia and the Trump campaign in 2016, is
expanding his probe to include "a post-election timeline," Fox News reported on Tuesday. Durham — who has a
reputation for being a "hard-charging, bulldog" prosecutor — has also added agents and resources to the case,
multiple senior administration officials told Fox. Previously, it was understood that Durham was only reviewing U.S.
intelligence activities during the 2016 election up to the inauguration. Now, based on his findings, Durham has
reportedly expanded his investigation to include a time period that runs through "the spring of 2017, up to when Robert
Mueller was named special counsel."
Comey-Brennan Conspiracy to Violate Trump's Civil Rights. The IG investigations are a sideshow. [...] The real
investigation into Comey, former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, former special agent Strzok and the rest of the FBI and
CIA malefactors is the one being conducted by a real prosecutor, U.S. Attorney John Durham.
Durham Must Investigate 'Unmasking'. Partisans may cheer or jeer prosecutor John Durham, appointed by Attorney
General William Barr to investigate how the FBI came to investigate Russian involvement in the Trump 2016 campaign. Of
deeper interest to thoughtful people across the political spectrum is the light this investigation may shed on abuses of
government surveillance that have occurred under both Republican and Democratic administrations. Given Durham's
reputation for being both fearless and fair, the U.S. attorney for the District of Connecticut seems ideal for the job:
He has investigated government misconduct ranging from the fiasco surrounding Boston mobster Whitey Bulger to CIA "enhanced
is targeting Brennan and "Unauthorized political surveillance". The criminal farce of the Mueller-Weissmann
dossier is being exposed as an extension of the Russia hoax. Mueller is the fragile front man manipulated by a cabal of
Trump-hating coup plotters. The focus can now shift to U.S. Attorney John Durham and Inspector General Michael
Horowitz. And also to the criminal behavior that created the campaign to destroy Donald Trump by the Obama White
House. Attorney General William Barr and the spokesman for John Durham both said that the focus of their investigation
would be on "unauthorized surveillance" and "political surveillance".
pursuing transcripts of George Papadopoulos tapes in review of Russia investigation origins. Little is known
about these classified transcripts, including who is the source, other than the growing hype about them in conservative
circles. Former Rep. Trey Gowdy called them a "game changer" in a Fox News interview in May. But progress is
being made to peel back the mystery, according to a Fox News report, as Attorney General William Barr and U.S. Attorney John Durham's
investigation into the origins of the Russia investigation and possible misconduct by DOJ and FBI officials ramps up.
witnesses in FISA abuse probe agree to talk to DOJ inspector general. Key witnesses sought for questioning by
Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz early in his investigation into alleged government surveillance
abuse have come forward at the 11th hour, Fox News has learned. Sources familiar with the matter said at least one
witness outside the Justice Department and FBI started cooperating — a breakthrough that came after Attorney
General William Barr ordered U.S. Attorney John Durham to lead a separate investigation into the origins of the bureau's 2016
Russia case that laid the foundation for Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe.
John Durham Questioning CIA Officials About Intelligence Community Assessment. The New York Times has a report
this evening surrounding U.S. Attorney John Durham questioning CIA officials about the origination of the Trump-Russia
investigation. However, a closer look at the substance underneath the NYT reporting and it doesn't actually look like
Durham is questioning the CIA about the investigation itself; rather it appears he is questioning the CIA about how they came
to the conclusions within the January 7th, 2017, Intelligence Community Assessment, or ICA.
investigating 'non-governmental organizations and individuals' as part of 'broad' probe into surveillance abuses. As part of
its ongoing "multifaceted" and "broad" review into potential misconduct by U.S. intelligence agencies during the 2016 presidential campaign,
the Justice Department revealed Monday [6/10/2019] it is also investigating the activities of several "non-governmental organizations and
individuals." Additionally, the DOJ announced that the probe, let [sic] by Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham, was looking into
the involvement of "foreign intelligence services." Former Trump aide George Papadopoulos told Fox News last month that an informant
who was likely "CIA and affiliated with Turkish intel" had posed as a Cambridge University research assistant in September 2016 and tried
to "seduce him" to obtain information linking the Trump team to Russia.
Durham Needs To Investigate Why The Info Generating The Mueller Probe Is All Linked To Hillary Clinton. The
Federal Bureau of Investigation had a budget approaching $10 billion during James Comey's tenure as its director.
Combined with budgets for the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency, these agencies cost taxpayers around
$30 billion annually. Therefore, one would think that incriminating evidence derived from the FBI, NSA, or CIA
could have linked Donald Trump to Russian hackers or Kremlin operatives, if that evidence existed. Instead, almost all
the major findings used to justify investigations into Trump's campaign are linked to Hillary Clinton or the Democratic Party.
has not received 'satisfactory' answers from intelligence community in Russia probe origins review. Attorney
General Bill Barr said he has not received answers from the intelligence community that are "at all satisfactory" in the
early stages of his review into the origins of the Russia investigation. Last month, Barr announced he had assembled a
team to review the FBI's original Russia probe which was opened in the summer of 2016. Barr appointed U.S. Attorney from
Connecticut John Durham to lead the investigation which will focus on the use of FBI informants as well as alleged improper
issuance of Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrants.
Steele allegedly refusing to cooperate with Barr-appointed 'bulldog' US Attorney. Disgraced former British spy
Christopher Steele has allegedly prematurely refused to cooperate with U.S. Attorney John Durham, the "bulldog" prosecutor
assigned by Attorney General Bill Barr to investigate the origins of the fruitless probe into alleged Russian collusion.
According to a source close to Steele's private investigation firm, Orbis Business Intelligence, who spoke with Reuters,
he is, however, willing to cooperate with other federal officials.
Pay the Piper. Attorney General William Barr is now tasked to investigate the origins of the phony
investigation against President Trump. The assault is over. The king is still alive and sounds of the piper can
be faintly heard. Speculation abounds regarding what was done and by whom. Like him or loathe him, Donald Trump
is now on the offensive and he holds all the cards. Watergate may end up looking like a jaywalking violation by the
time this investigation is over.
Of The Obama Administration Conspiracy. With President Donald Trump's announcement on May 23rd that he has
authorized Attorney General William Barr to begin the declassification process of everything related to the start of the
Russian Collusion investigation, we may finally be at a point where people from the Obama administration will start to be
held accountable for their actions, which were designed to undermine the Trump presidential campaign and his presidency.
That announcement comes on top of the recent appointment by Barr of U.S. Attorney John Durham to look into the origins of the
Russian Collusion investigation. Also, there is the much-anticipated Inspector General report looking into whether the
Department of Justice and the FBI abused their power when they went to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC)
seeking FISA warrants to surveil a former Trump foreign policy adviser, Carter Page.
Investigations Into Investigators Begins. Attorney General Bill Barr is coming after the Democrats and Deep State
actors who committed the Russia probe hoax. And, if his Fox News interview on Friday [5/17/2019] is to be believed, he is
coming after them with his guns blazing and taking no prisoners. He told Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer that a part of the
probe is going to focus on briefings that President Donald Trump received in 2017. [Video clip]
Bull Durham at Justice. Mr. Barr gets credit
for not naming Mr. Durham a "special counsel." Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein succumbed to Democratic
special-counsel demands two years ago this month, with all the predictable results. The rampaging investigation
prosecuted Americans for everything other than the "collusion" it was supposed to uncover. It became a black hole, the
subject of endless media speculation — and a cudgel for Democrats to use against the Trump presidency.
Special counsels are only supposed to be appointed when the Justice Department is clearly too conflicted to investigate a
matter. No one doubts that the in-house Mr. Durham is capable of making an impartial assessment of the individuals
and actions that launched the Trump-Russia probe. Then again, Justice also had the ability to investigate the original
Trump-Russia story. It was just a matter of getting the right person to run the investigation.
Investigator John Durham Once Probed Mueller in a Shocking Case. Connecticut U.S. Attorney John Durham was
appointed to investigate the origins of the Russia-Trump probe. Apparently, he has been on the job for weeks.
Durham is the perfect investigator for the job by all accounts and he had experience with Robert Mueller in the Whitey Bulger
case. He did not side with Mueller and Mueller's agents suffered the consequences of Mueller's, some would say, corrupt
One Of The Spygate Rats Will Flip First? The news that Attorney General William Barr has tasked Connecticut
U.S. attorney John Durham to "examine the origins of the Russia investigation and determine if intelligence collection
involving the Trump campaign was 'lawful and appropriate.'" According to reporting by Dan Bongino's team, Durham has
previously investigated corruption in law enforcement and the destruction of CIA videos. Perhaps Durham's most notable
case was his unravelling of the FBI corruption and cover-up involving mobster Whitey Bulger and the Boston FBI field office
while Robert Mueller was FBI Director.
stories can't be true:' 'Spygate' begins to unravel as Brennan vs Comey camps point fingers. Disgraced former
Obama administration officials James Comey and John Brennan are reportedly duking it out publicly in what for all intents and
purposes looks a whole lot like a real-life performance of the hilarious Mad magazine cartoon "Spy vs. Spy."
Except the implications of this "performance" are mad real, pun intended. This real-life feud over what's often
referred to as "spygate" concerns the infamous Steele dossier. The question everybody wants to be answered is
"whodunit," i.e., which one of these two disgraced officials was responsible for elevating the fraudulent, smear-filled
document into undeserved relevance.
diGenova: 'John Brennan Is the Mastermind' of 'Conspiracy to Frame Donald Trump'. "John Brennan has lost his
security clearance," recalled diGenova, "much to the credit of the President of the United States, a good result for the
American people." DiGenova added, "Make no mistake about it, John Brennan is the mastermind of this conspiracy to frame
Donald Trump and to steal his presidency from him after he was elected."
no bull from investigation by Durham. Cautiously optimistic — that's how I feel about U.S. Attorney
John Durham being put in charge of getting to the bottom of the failed FBI-Deep State coup against President Trump.
Maybe you're pessimistic, concerned that the top federal prosecutor in Connecticut might turn out to be another one of these
disappointments like Jeff Sessions' boys from Chicago and Utah who haven't really done any investigation of the
Durham already used a grand jury in Russia origins probe, Joe diGenova says. U.S. Attorney John Durham has
already used a grand jury in Connecticut, attorney Joe diGenova said on Tuesday [5/14/2019]. It was revealed this week
that Attorney General William Barr tasked Durham with examining the origins of the federal Russia investigation. In a
Fox News interview, diGenova said Durham, who is a U.S. attorney in Connecticut, has been working for a couple of months.
Russiagate Prober Has Haunted FBI for Months. John Durham, the prosecutor tapped by Attorney General William
Barr to investigate how Trump-Russia allegations emerged and spread within federal law enforcement, has already been looking
into whether the FBI's former top lawyer, James Baker, illegally leaked to reporters. In fact, the U.S. attorney from
Connecticut appears to have begun that work more than seven months ago, to judge from an underreported transcript of an
October congressional interview with Baker.
are the odds that the Durham investigation is for real and will bring the bad actors to justice? Following the
disclosure that U.S. attorney John Durham has been tasked with investigating and prosecuting potential crimes in the origin
of the Russia Hoax, we learned some very encouraging facts that suggest that the Russia Hoax will be fully aired and
miscreants brought to justice. Like Howie Carr, who had a front-row seat when John Durham went after corruption in the
FBI Boston office, I am "cautiously optimistic" (Howie's term) that Durham and his boss A.G. Barr want to get to the bottom
of the hoax and put those who may have committed crimes in prison. In Boston, Durham faced a gigantic scandal that was
very damaging to the FBI and did not blink. He got John Connelly, Whitey Bulger's protector, sentenced to 40 years in
prison. This does not sound like a prosecutor who can be persuaded to lay off getting to the truth in order to protect
the reputations of important people and institutions.
General taps top Connecticut federal prosecutor for review of Trump-Russia inquiry. Attorney General William
Barr tapped Connecticut's chief federal prosecutor, John Durham, to assist in an investigation into the origins of the Russia
investigation and the FBI's surveillance activities, a person familiar with the matter said Monday [5/13/2019]. The
person, who is not authorized to comment publicly, said that Durham has been assisting the attorney general for at least a
couple of weeks to determine whether federal investigators acted appropriately in the early stages of the now-completed
inquiry into Russia's interference in the 2016 election.
assigns US attorney in Connecticut to look into government surveillance involving Trump campaign: source.
Attorney General William Barr has appointed a U.S. attorney to examine the origins of the Russia investigation and determine
if intelligence collection efforts targeting the Trump campaign were "lawful and appropriate," a person familiar with the
situation told Fox News on Monday evening [5/13/2019]. John Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut, will conduct the
inquiry, the source said. The move comes as the Trump administration has pushed for answers on why federal authorities
conducted the surveillance — as well as whether Democrats were the ones who improperly colluded with foreign
actors. Two sources told Fox News earlier today that Barr was "serious" and had assigned DOJ personnel to the
probe. Durham is known as a "hard-charging, bulldog" prosecutor, Fox News is told.
Bill Barr Appoints U.S. Attorney John Durham to Review Origin of Russia Investigation. Once again the New York
Times is getting out ahead of the story to reveal Attorney General Bill Barr has instructed U.S. Attorney John Durham to
review the origins of the 2016 DOJ and FBI surveillance of the Trump campaign. The appointment looks like a way to keep
the sensitive inquiry within Barr's control as opposed to appointing a special counsel. John H Durham, the U.S.
attorney from Connecticut, has handled previous investigations into the intelligence community.
FBI spies are toast.
The man who nailed the FBI agents who helped mobster Whitey Bulger is heading the investigation of the origin of Obama's
unconstitutional spying on Donald John Trump. [...] Time magazine lauded him (and rightly so) on August 26, 2009.
It reported, "In 1999 he was selected by Attorney General Janet Reno to probe law-enforcement corruption in Boston. Last
year he was named by Attorney General Michael Mukasey to head the ongoing investigation into the destruction of CIA interrogation
videotapes. Colleagues say Durham is thorough and cautious in deciding whether a case deserves to be prosecuted. But
once he fixes on a target, the veteran lawyer usually catches his prey."
Barr appoints US attorney to examine origins of Russia probe. Attorney General William Barr has appointed a top
Connecticut prosecutor to look into the origins of the Russia probe. US Attorney John Durham was tapped to determine if
the government's methods of collecting intelligence involving the 2016 Trump campaign were "lawful and appropriate," the
Associated Press reported, citing a source. This appointment comes about a month after Barr told Congress he believed
"spying did occur" against the Trump campaign, without providing details.
Document location http://akdart.com/fbxi.html
Updated June 23, 2022.