|
Related topics on other nearby pages: US Attorney John Durham investigates: FOIA Release Highlights Durham Never Intended Accountability for Deep State Actors. In August of 2020 I sent this tweet to the general public after a lengthy discussion with John Durham's lead investigator: [Tweet] This tweet created major controversy amid those who were deep in the research weeds on the entire Spygate/Russiagate fiasco. Few would believe that in the effort to preserve the institutions at all costs, AG Bill Barr was the Bondo application and Special Prosecutor John Durham was the spray paint. It was all a coverup operation to hide the rot in the DOJ and beyond. Essentially, Durham and Bill Aldenberg admitted to me that nothing the Robert Mueller team did in the preceding two years was subject to their review. Yes, that is correct, Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann were specifically appointed in May 2017 by Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein to help coverup and hide the IC targeting of Donald Trump in the preceding two years. Emphasize this point, the intelligence community was targeting candidate Donald Trump, because they had the power as a result of the new surveillance state. Could Be Interesting — Tucker Carlson Visits Julian Assange? [Scroll down] Julian Assange was/is the only person with direct knowledge of how Wikileaks gained custody of the DNC emails; and Assange claimed he has evidence it was from an inside DNC leak, not from a DNC hack. The Russian "hacking" claim was ultimately so important to the CIA, FBI, DOJ, ODNI and U.K Intelligence apparatus. Well, right there is the obvious motive to shut Assange down as soon as intelligence officials knew the Mueller report was going to be public. And that is exactly what Main Justice and the U.S. intelligence community did. This is why John Durham never touched it. All of them know what happened. All of them know why Julian Assange was taken from the Embassy in London. A bag had to be thrown over Assange in order to retain the justification for the Weissmann/Mueller special counsel and the larger Russian election interference claims. None of them do not know this. They all know. Start asking the right questions about the timeline of Assange being arrested. How to Fix the FBI. The recently published Durham Report officially confirms what was already widely known: Without any proper or credible predicate, the FBI launched a partisan political effort to derail the 2016 presidential campaign of Donald Trump while simultaneously acting to protect Trump's Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, from serious legal jeopardy. Under the cloak of a "counterintelligence" investigation codenamed Crossfire Hurricane, FBI Director James Comey, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and the FBI's leadership team employed the Bureau's powerful intelligence-gathering authorities to target the Trump election campaign. Relying on frivolous and unsubstantiated claims of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, including the wildly ludicrous fantasies set out in the so-called Steele Dossier, an opposition-research product commissioned by Democratic Party operatives (which may itself have been Russian influenced), Director Comey and the FBI advanced the Russia collusion narrative through deliberate leaks of information to the media, misleading statements to Congress and the public, and a falsified application for secret FISA surveillance of Trump associate Carter Page. Durham Sequel Goes Back to the Prequel. The allegedly heroic [Rod] Rosenstein gets only a single mention in Durham's recent report, and Rosenstein's "important contributions" failed to emerge in Durham's June 21 testimony. On the other hand, John Durham did not spare the FBI. The bureau, he testified, failed to "sufficiently scrutinize" collusion claims, did not "apply the same standards" to the Clinton and Trump campaigns, and was too willing to use "politically funded and uncorroborated opposition research, such as the Steele dossier." This continued even after intelligence briefings "suggesting that there was a Clinton campaign plan underway to stir up a scandal tying Trump to Russia." Hearing Highlights of the Plot to Take Down Donald Trump in 2016. On Wednesday, John Durham explained the findings of his investigation into the FBI handling of the Russia-Trump hoax to the House Judiciary Committee. In the opening statement, Rep. Jordan explained what John Durham found. There was no predicate for the Beria-style probe. There was not one single substantive allegation in the dossier, but it was used just the same to enable spying on innocent Americans. Durham also found that the FBI failed in its mission to follow the rule of law. [Tweet with video clip] After 40 years in the FBI, John Durham and his fellow investigators called the findings sobering. Sobering is very euphemistic. [Tweet with video clip] He answered questions on a purported plan by one of Mrs. Clinton's foreign policy advisors to create a scandal tying Donald Trump to the Russians. This plan was shared with then-CIA director Brennan, then-President Barack Obama, and his Vice President Joe Biden, and James Comey of the FBI, and the DNI on August 3, 2016. No one stopped it. In fact, they went along as if it were legitimate. Why does Hillary and her advisor skate? [Tweet with video clip] 'Russian Collusion: It Was Hillary Clinton All Along'. It was clear from the beginning that charges of "collusion" between Donald Trump and Russia during the 2016 election were phony — a cheap, and illegal, political trick. But they did their damage. While Trump beat Hillary Clinton, there has since been a non-stop Democratic Party-led campaign to tar him as a "traitor" or worse. And, as the recent testimony of Special Counsel John Durham to Congress shows, Clinton lay behind this scheme to defraud American voters and throw an election. So, today, despite powerful evidence of official wrongdoing, we're back where we were some seven years ago. Durham: You better believe Obama, Biden, and Comey knew that this was a Hillary dirty trick. What did Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Loretta Lynch, and James Comey know about Russia-collusion — and when did they know it? John Durham dropped a bombshell in his testimony today at House Oversight, which will go on for at least a couple of hours or more, but this part wasn't the bombshell. In his special-counsel report, Durham had already revealed that CIA Director John Brennan briefed these four in August 2016 that Hillary Clinton planned to paint Donald Trump as linked to Russian intelligence, presumably to shift attention away from her own e-mail scandal. That briefing resulted in a "referral memorandum," and one of its recipients was then-FBI director James Comey. Oversight chair Jim Jordan asks Durham whether Comey ever bothered to share that with the agents assigned to the newly launched Operation Crossfire Hurricane or ever presented to the FISA court when applications were made for domestic surveillance of Trump campaign officials. Nope, Durham says, and explains how he found that out: [Tweet with video clip] Durham Says Comey, McCabe, Strzok and Others Would Not Agree to be Interviewed by Prosecutors. Special Counsel John Durham on Wednesday testified before the House Judiciary Committee about his investigation into the origins of Spygate. Last month John Durham released his final report concluding the FBI had no verified intel when it opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation into Trump in 2016. In July of 2016, Peter Strzok opened a counterintel investigation into Trump's camp dubbed "Crossfire Hurricane" on suspicions (based on no evidence) that the Russians had infiltrated Trump's circle. I don't buy Durham's excusing FBI agents as good people. I have not spent any time today listening to John Durham's testimony, which I find fundamentally uninteresting. He managed to craft a report that, even as it hinted at a [really bad] coup attempt within the government against the duly elected president, nevertheless gave everyone involved what amounted to a pass. Maybe it's that jaundiced attitude that leaves me unimpressed with the fact that Durham claims that most FBI agents are really good people. [...] What we're learning is that, from the top down, the DOJ and the FBI are corrupt. And we're also learning that the men and women who work for it, or who retired during this corrupt era, are either complicit in the corruption or too afraid to do or say anything. Durham Report Summary. [Clip and save.] "There is not a single substantive piece of information in the [Steele] dossier that has ever been corroborated". John Durham testified today about the Steele Dossier, funded by the Hillary Clinton Campaign and Democratic National Committee: "There is not a single substantive piece of information in the dossier that has ever been corroborated by the FBI, or to my knowledge anyone else." [Tweet with video clip] She got away with it. The Steele Dossier was manipulated by James Comey, then Director of the FBI, by Democrats, the media, and others in The Resistance to paralyze the Trump administration and to put the nation through years of investigations. She's truly a despicable character, her whole miserable political life. John Durham Set To Testify In Congress Over Report On FBI. Special counsel John Durham is set to testify on Capitol Hill next month after releasing his report excoriating the FBI over its handling of investigations into the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia. Durham was tasked with investigating Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI's 2016 investigation into Trump-Russia collusion, and other related activities, in May of 2019. Former Attorney General Bill Barr gave Durham special counsel status in December of 2020 to protect the investigation as the White House changed hands from former President Donald Trump to President Joe Biden. Durham ended his roughly four-year investigation last week after the Department of Justice released a 306-page report containing Durham's findings. The report painted a damning picture of an FBI that disregarded its mission and central principles in order to pursue a partisan investigation into Trump. House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) immediately sought to have Durham testify about his investigation. Committee spokesman Russel Dye said Friday that the hearing would take place on June 21, according to the New York Post. If You Want To 'Drain The Swamp,' Then Drain The FBI. Republicans aren't "draining the swamp" unless they drain the FBI. Special Counsel John Durham published a long-anticipated report last week chronicling severe abuses of power by deep-state FBI officials who ran a years-long campaign to frame former President Donald Trump as a Russian asset. The 306-page report outlined how the FBI relied on baseless fabrications commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign to construct the entire narrative for its investigation known as "Crossfire Hurricane," in which the Obama-era Justice Department conducted illegal surveillance on American citizens in an attempt to undermine the 2016 election. According to Durham, "neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation." In other words, the incessant accusations of Trump-Russia collusion that Americans were bombarded with for all four years of the Trump administration were entirely made up. Durham and the truth. John Durham is a man of unquestioned integrity who possesses a willingness to go after the FBI, the CIA, or any federal agency that exceeds its authority or betrays its public trust. Throughout the years, he has shown himself to be an honest and thorough investigator[.] He has exposed the FBI's criminal handling of the Whitey Bulger affair as well as revealing the misdeeds of the CIA in destroying tapes of criminal interrogations of terrorist prisoners. Durham, in his report detailing the Trump/Russian collusion, the Trump obstruction of justice, the Steele Dossier as an actual document, and all other things which would 'hopefully' find Donald Trump to be at best a vulgarian who abuses the nation's trust, and at worst a traitor, instead found great fault with our federal agencies. The DoJ and the FBI "failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law." Corruption Of President Biden — And Of The Justice Department, And Of The Media. On Wednesday [5/10/2023] Congressman James Comer and some colleagues held their.long-promised press conference detailing new information about corruption of the President of the United States. I happened to be driving at the time (not common for Manhattanites like me) and so listened to a portion of the event. The oral presentation was expressed in general terms that mostly reiterated things that we already knew. Added to our previous knowledge was information from recently produced and analyzed bank records that enabled pinpointing exact dates, sources and amounts of various payments from foreign entities to intermediary shell corporations and thence on to various Bidens. [...] And thus little by little we learn more details about our current President accepting large amounts of money from multiple foreign countries, one of which is our most significant geopolitical adversary. I don't think I'm the only one whose jaw drops when I find out that our "leaders" at the very highest levels — in other words, the President — think that it's perfectly OK to take millions from foreign governments that include global adversaries, hide it with intermediaries and shell companies, and refuse to answer questions of any kind. Wasn't there a time when the United States was a place where this kind of thing just was not done? Why the Durham Report Matters — Part 2. On March 15, 2017, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes held a press conference announcing there was no specific evidence of "wire taps" at Trump Tower. However, on March 22, 2017, Nunes held another press conference saying information was brought forth to the HPSCI showing the Trump campaign was under Title-1 surveillance by the FBI and former Obama administration. In between those critical six days, something happened that was important. Why
The Durham Report Matters — Part One, Remember the Russian Diplomats Expelled by
Obama? How entrenched is the defense mechanism? Well, consider a few
things: Why the Durham Report Matters to Democracy. Two special counsels, several inspector general reports and six years later, the country finally has a more complete account of the FBI's Russia collusion probe of the 2016 Donald Trump campaign. Special counsel John Durham's final report makes clear that a partisan FBI became a funnel for disinformation from the Hillary Clinton campaign through a secret investigation the bureau never should have launched. The 306-page Durham report released Monday afternoon is far more comprehensive than anything issued by original special counsel Robert Mueller. Mr. Durham had already unfurled some of the narrative with his prosecutions of Russian national Igor Danchenko and Democratic lawyer Michael Sussmann. He lost those cases, though the indictments laid out how the Clinton campaign used foreign nationals, an oppo-research outfit, and political insiders to feed the FBI and the media lies about Trump collusion. The Durham report gives a fuller picture of the FBI's complicity under former director Jim Comey and deputy Andrew McCabe. It scores an FBI that "failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law." The Durham Report Indicts the Deep State — And the Media. Our ruling class will use any means necessary — no matter how lawless, vicious, or brazen — to preserve its power and privilege. And it will seemingly never pay a price for its corruption and criminality. That is the ultimate lesson conveyed in the more than three hundred pages of gory details about the republic-eroding scandal that is Russiagate, comprising Special Counsel John Durham's final report. Russiagate's aim from the jump was to delegitimize, destabilize, and destroy Donald Trump's presidency. Hatched by the Hillary Clinton campaign, this would be her revenge for losing to Trump — an attempt to make his victory a Pyrrhic one. This would be the deep state's way to sabotage and subvert a commander in chief who threatened to upend its agenda, and that of the entire political establishment. Neither fidelity to the law and truth, nor any sense of shame, nor any fear of consequences could temper the zealous would-be vanquishers of the "bad orange man." We know this because, as Durham's report spells out, and as even casual observers have long been aware, the story of Trump-Russia collusion was a farce from the very beginning and in virtually every respect. Durham report: Where the FBI officials cited for misconduct are now. Describing numerous episodes that took place during the earliest months of the investigation, Durham notes that rank-and-file FBI agents often had questions or doubts about the steps ordered by FBI leadership; those agents were repeatedly overruled. In one notable instance in spring 2017, Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Dina Corsi told FBI analysts not to put in writing any of their findings about how little evidence they'd found to support the allegations of Russian collusion. An FBI analyst present for that meeting called the request "highly unusual," according to Durham, and an attorney who heard Corsi give that directive recalled feeling "shocked" that the agents had been told to relay their findings "orally" without a paper trail. Corsi appears to be still employed by the FBI, according to her LinkedIn profile, on which she had been active as recently as Wednesday. She lists her title as a deputy assistant director in the FBI's intelligence branch, working on the Strategic Intelligence Issues Group. A Cabal of Sociopaths. The Durham Report is a [scathing] indictment of the Mueller report which preceded it. It "makes clear that the collusion probe failed to investigate how the collusion probe began as a dirty trick by the Clinton campaign and how the FBI went along for the ride." [...] The Wall Street Journal uses as an example the fact that the Mueller team never were allowed to interview Democrat Charles Dolan, reportedly a source for the Steele dossier, an unfounded document that supposedly was a predicate for the investigation of "collusion." Durham found that the Russians may have compromised Steele's sources even before he began to write and peddle to Democratic press lackeys the preposterous dossier. That was not all: Durham found that the FBI knowingly relied on Igor Danchenko. Danchenko had been undercover as a possible Russian spy yet he was hired to investigate whether Trump colluded with Russia. The notion that Mueller was compromised, drunk, or demented when he headed this investigation is hard to dismiss. Durham Report, Notice What He Doesn't Do? Recommend Any Solutions! The FBI did not weaponize itself. The weaponization of the institution was done by people; the same people that John Durham did not indict for weaponizing it. The same applies to the DHS, ODNI, DOJ, DOJ-NSD and SSCI. These institutions did not weaponize themselves; they were weaponized by the people within them. This is the core reality behind the missing part of the John Durham report, no proposed change in policy or institutional systems. Why? Because the policies and systems are not the issue; it was the intent of the people within it — those who weaponized it. Here's the kicker. Those people are still in place — that's why the weaponization continues. How the Durham Whodunit Became Who Didn't Do it. In Agatha Christie's "Murder on the Orient Express," detective Hercule Poirot observes, "The impossible could not have happened, therefore the impossible must be possible in spite of appearances." That may be the best summary of the findings of special prosecutor John Durham in his 305-page report issued yesterday. Not only did the impossible happen, but they all did it: the Clinton campaign, the FBI, and the media. In hindsight, it would appear impossible. A political campaign hatches a plot to create a false claim of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Making this even more implausible is that the CIA and FBI knew about the plan. The Durham Report: Did the FBI Offer Russia $1 Million To Frame Donald Trump? According to John Durham's report, FBI agents traveled to Rome in early October and offered Christopher Steele $1 million for evidence corroborating his allegations that the 2016 Donald Trump presidential campaign had been compromised by the Russian government. How did the Bureau expect the British ex-spy to verify his claims when the only people who could provide documentary or physical evidence to support his memos would be from Donald Trump's circle, or Russian officials and other figures close to Vladimir Putin? Steele didn't have any access to Trump's people but what about the Russians? Did he know anyone from Putin's world? Indeed, he did. Steele worked for a Russian businessman famously connected to Putin, Oleg Deripaska. In July 2016, the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane team opened a full investigation on the Trump campaign in order to use one of the US government's most intrusive surveillance tools — a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant — to spy on Hillary Clinton's rival. The FBI wanted to know if the Trump campaign had an October Surprise planned for Clinton and to see if there was dirt for the Clinton campaign to use as its own October Surprise against Trump. In September, Crossfire Hurricane's FISA application was rejected and with the election less than two months away, the clock was running. Steele's reports had finally arrived, but the FBI was worried that wouldn't be enough. After all, they were garbage. No serious intelligence or law enforcement professional could take Steele's memos seriously. How Congress Could Have the Final Say on the Russian Collusion Scandal. For those interested in the truth about the Russian collusion investigation, the Durham Report has hundreds of pages of details of the alliance of political, government and media figures behind arguably the greatest hoax in U.S. history. The only thing it does not have is an actual indictment or true accountability for the critical players in an effort to derail an American presidency. Indeed, some witnesses associated with the Clinton campaign appear to have refused to cooperate with the investigation. Congress could change that. Buried in the detailed account is a little noticed footnote stating that Clinton General Counsel Marc Elias "declined to be voluntarily interviewed by the Office." Likewise, Durham noted that "no one at Fusion GPS ... would agree to voluntarily speak with the Office" while both the DNC and Clinton campaign invoked privileges to refuse to answer certain questions. Durham report: FBI defenders misrepresent 2019 watchdog findings in attempt to discredit special counsel. Democrats and commentators reacted dismissively to the conclusion this week of a long-awaited investigation into the origins of the Russian collusion inquiry, with some critics of special counsel John Durham citing a 2019 inquiry to claim the matter had already been settled. The Justice Department's inspector general, Michael Horowitz, did indeed examine FBI conduct in the Russia investigation during the Trump administration. Horowitz's findings were highly critical of the FBI and came with a list of recommendations for sweeping changes to the bureau, many of which its leaders adopted. But the media, and even people involved in the Russia investigation itself, have recast the 2019 inspector general report as an exoneration of the FBI in light of the far more aggressive allegations leveled at the bureau by Durham. What Durham's report avoided. There was so much detail in the Durham report that the first round of responses quite naturally focused on what was included. Even if the report basically confirmed what conservatives have said for years about Russiagate, it was good to have it on the record and official, even though the lack of indictments, much less prosecutions, ensured that the miscreants remain, in the immortal words of Bill Ayers, "Guilty as sin, free as a bird." A number of the worst ones enjoy lucrative contracts as commentators on CNN and MSNBC. And, of course, the outright lies of the "big fat nothingburger" school of progressive commentary allow the left to make sure that their own supporters never learn of the details. But after absorbing the details of Durham's output, those with good memories started to point out what was NOT included in Durham's work product. [...] Retired FBI special agent Mark Wauck points out another big time miscreant who has escaped consequences or even official scrutiny: acting AG Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mueller: [...] Wauck also cites and embeds a half-hour discussion between Alex Christoforou and Alexander Mercouris on another significant missing person somehow left out by Durham: Professor Joseph Mifsud. [Video clip] The FBI's Keystone Cops According to John Durham. The unclassified report released by Special Counsel John H. Durham on the misbehavior of the FBI in the Crossfire Hurricane operation — the investigation into the Trump-Russia collusion hoax — confirms that the FBI had no basis for even opening an investigation. Agency personnel disregarded the careful protocols that are designed to prevent abusive, meritless investigations, particularly politically biased investigations that could affect the outcome of an election. And they treated claims made against the Clinton campaign much more cautiously and favorably than claims made against the Trump campaign. As Durham concludes, "confirmation bias" — the tendency of FBI personnel to believe unsubstantiated claims because of "pronounced hostile feelings toward Trump" — at a minimum: [...] LinkedIn Bans Journalist For Mentioning Durham Report. Under the pretense of being a career-builder site, Microsoft-owned LinkedIn has flown largely below radar, but it may now be one of the most egregious social-media offenders in terms of practicing anti-conservative bias and censorship. On Tuesday, the site confirmed my long-held suspicions that it sought to police conservative speech by implementing an outright ban on me — seemingly for a post that denounced the New York Times's fake news coverage of the Durham report. Specifically, I had posted a response to Meredith Kopit Levien, the president and chief executive officer of the Times, expressing my hope that the newspaper would return its Pulitzer Prize for reporting on the Russia-collusion hoax in the wake of special counsel John Durham's final confirmation that the story was entirely fabricated by the Hillary Clinton campaign with help from powerful government agencies. Durham Report Is [Bad], So Where Are All The Indictments? Just for the record, this is far worse than Watergate. And that ended Richard Nixon's presidency, even though he neither planned nor approved of the break-ins against the Democratic Party offices in the famed Watergate Hotel. What will the perpetrators of this crime get? The FBI launched its now-infamous "Crossfire Hurricane" investigation of alleged Russian "influence" on the Trump campaign in July 2016. The premise for the investigation was a "dossier" of information from former British spy Christopher Steele that implicated Donald Trump and several of his supporters as being improperly influenced by Russia's government. The only problem: The dossier was found to be false, "misinformation" of the worst kind, but nonetheless reported as the "truth" by nearly all mainstream media outlets. The Union Is Not a Suicide Pact. Now that Mr. Durham has gotten around to confirming what most of us have known for nearly seven years — namely, that Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John Brennan, Jim Comey, James Clapper, and the State-aligned press corps doing the Intelligence Community's bidding all conspired to push the fraudulent Russian collusion narrative in an attempt to take down a duly elected president — there are quite a few people calling for the FBI to be either reformed or disbanded. Surprisingly, some of these people now calling for the FBI's demolition are even elected officials. My response is simple: that should be just the beginning. The federal government is rotten to its core. By the terms of the U.S. Constitution, it has accumulated powers and authorities far beyond anything enumerated and vested to it. It funds a massive administrative state that should not exist. The Durham Report and coverup: Where is Professor Mifsud? [Video clip only.] The Russia Collusion Hoax Is Just the Beginning. There was no collusion and Crossfire Hurricane should never have happened. That's the gist of Special Counsel John Durham's bombshell-filled report on his probe of the FBI's decision to open an investigation into allegations that former President Donald Trump's 2016 campaign colluded with Russians to defeat Hillary Clinton. [...] You probably also knew that, as Durham's report made clear again, "the FBI's handling of important aspects of the Crossfire Hurricane matter were seriously deficient" because the U.S. Department of Justice and FBI "failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law." Instead, a hoax was perpetuated at the highest levels of America's federal government despite the fact that "neither U.S. nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation." Durham called his probe's findings and conclusions "sobering," but that's barely the half of it. On the one hand, the Durham report is a vindication of those castigated as conspiracy theorists for daring to call out the politicization of federal law enforcement. In clear terms, with extensive sourcing from interviews of those with the power in the FBI and at the DOJ, Durham shows how unchecked partisan power turned what is supposed to be blind enforcement of the law into a reality in which Lady Justice uses her scales as a step stool to aid Democrats and a weapon to knock down Republicans. On the other hand, however, it's [an] indictment of our federal government and its vast administrative state made up of unelected bureaucrats who, at key points in their careers and in the history of our country, become some sort of in-kind employees of the Democrat Party. Even worse, there's little to no reason for Americans of any political stripe to think things have changed. The Deep State stabbed Donald Trump in the back during the 2016 election. You don't have to read all of special counsel John Durham's report to get to the heart of the matter: On the third page of the executive summary, he writes: "The speed and manner in which the FBI opened and investigated Crossfire Hurricane during the presidential election season based on raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence also reflected a noticeable departure from how it approached prior matters involving possible attempted foreign election interference plans aimed at the Clinton campaign." There you have it, the final verdict on the 2016 presidential election: A corrupt FBI tried to rig the outcome by favoring one candidate over the other. Thank God it failed, but not before Republican Donald Trump and others on his team got smeared in a vicious probe while Democrat Hillary Clinton and her team got free passes on several issues that potentially involved criminal conduct. That's the bottom line and everything else is detail. What the Durham Report is really worth. Kudos to The Washington Times for its May 16 story suggesting rescission of the Pulitzer Prizes that went to The New York Times and The Washington Post for reporting the (false) story alleging Trump-Russia collusion. [...] By mid-October 2016, the FBI should have known that Operation Crossfire Hurricane — the operation to crush Trump — was a piece of Democrat disinformation. But they did not want to abandon the chance to help Hillary become president. The truth is that Operation Crossfire Hurricane was an example of political projection to the Nth degree — the bad guys not being the Russians, but American intel left-wing zealots. The Trump-Russia Collusion Conspiracy Was a Coup D'état. The bottom line is that everything the Obama justice department, IC and FBI did, to include support from Republicans in congress during the 2016 election and aftermath, was a coup d'état against U.S. President Donald Trump and his administration. This is the truth of the thing. The U.S. media participation and subsequent denial of their culpability looks increasingly pathetic in the aftermath of the report outlined by Special Counsel John Durham. However, it doesn't take a media admission of the coup effort for the demonstrable actions and evidence of the coup to be factual. Read the report, all the evidence is there. The truth stands alone, regardless of the discomfort it creates. Durham Releases Report on the Russian Collusion Investigation. The report notes that the treatment of the unsubstantiated allegations in the Steele Dossier, funded by the Clinton Campaign, was "markedly different" from the government's level of interest in Clinton's campaign when it faced such allegations. Durham's report confirmed that the FBI ignored intelligence it received from "a trusted foreign source pointing to a Clinton campaign plan to vilify Trump by tying him to Vladimir Putin so as to divert attention from her own concerns relating to her use of a private email server." Durham noted that "The speed and manner in which the FBI opened and investigated Crossfire Hurricane during the presidential election season based on raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence also reflected a noticeable departure from how it approached prior matters involving possible attempted foreign election interference plans aimed at the Clinton campaign." Durham Found Zero Merit to Trump Russia Claims, So What Was Mueller Doing for Two Years? People ask why I find it difficult to write about the Durham report empirically confirming everything we previously outlined in the past five years. Here's my answer. Eventually, after the shock & awe of the Durham confirmations wear off, I am hopeful that people will stand back and realize the bigger question that covers all of the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy nonsense. This was a United States government operation to conduct full-throated surveillance on a U.S. presidential candidate, and then remove that candidate from the office of the presidency after his victory in the 2016 election. With John Durham outlining in granular details how the FBI, DOJ and larger intelligence apparatus acted politically to weaponize government on behalf of an allied presidential candidate in Hillary Clinton, a bigger question remains. There never was any merit to the Trump-Russia nonsense, so what exactly were Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann doing for two years? What Durham Didn't Tell Us. The FBI is fatally corrupt. The justice system is totally broken. That's what we can conclude from the Durham Report. Special counsel John Durham's report hammers home two separate points time and again: the FBI opened an investigation into the Trump campaign entirely without reason or any underlying predication and the FBI protected Hillary Clinton's campaign at the same time that they aggressively pursued Donald Trump. But the Durham Report also is deeply flawed. There are no convictions, or referrals of major Russiagate plotters and players. Democrats will be able to rebut Durham's report simply by saying "If Durham's findings were so damning, why was no one convicted?" And why were so many major figures such as former FBI Director James Comey, former FBI agent Peter Strzok, and Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson not compelled to sit for interviews? Why did Durham fail to utilize classified information in his analysis? Why did he limit his scope primarily to the actions of the FBI? The Barr Appointment Order and the DNC Hack. US Attorney John Durham was appointed by Attorney General Barr as Special Counsel in October 2020. The appointment order stated Durham was authorized to investigate the intelligence and law enforcement "directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns, individuals associated with those campaign, 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." Initially, that appointment order got our attention because it mentioned the 2016 "campaigns": Durham would be reviewing investigations "directed" at the Hillary Clinton campaign. What investigations were those? [Paywall] Here's Everything The FBI Deliberately Ignored To Get Trump In Russian Collusion Hoax, According To Durham. Special Counsel John Durham released a 306-page report on Monday detailing how Democrat operatives packaged and sold a lie to the all-too-believing Obama administration FBI that former President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election. For more than six years now, corrupt corporate media and Democrats have rallied around that allegation as evidence that Trump shouldn't hold office. But Durham's latest report, much like previous investigations into the Russian collusion hoax, once again found that there was no evidence of collusion from the beginning. "Indeed, based on the evidence gathered in the multiple exhaustive and costly federal investigations of these matters, including the instant investigation, neither U.S. law enforcement nor the Intelligence Community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion in their holdings at the commencement of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation," Durham wrote in the opening pages of his bombshell report concluding three years of investigation. The gravity of the misconduct uncovered by Mr. Durham cannot be overstated. [Thread reader] The LEAST one can say of it is that it involved a malicious use of federal law-enforcement officers to conduct a contrived investigation utterly lacking any valid, factual foundation from the very beginning. That is itself incredibly troubling — and also unconstitutional. But this was SO MUCH WORSE than that. It was an effort to use use a powerful, long-respected, federal law-enforcement agency to render a presidential candidate unelectable — entirely in the absence of any valid, good-faith basis for doing so. So make no mistake — this can't be dismissed as mere carelessness or even a severe example of garden-variety misconduct. No — this is as corrupt and as subversive of the Constitution as it gets. 'Russia case' against Trump was a shocking conspiracy that continues today. In Agatha Christie's "Murder on the Orient Express," detective Hercule Poirot observes, "The impossible could not have happened, therefore the impossible must be possible in spite of appearances." That may be the best summary of the findings of special prosecutor John Durham in his 305-page report issued yesterday. Not only did the impossible happen, but they all did it: the Clinton campaign, the FBI, and the media. In hindsight, it would appear impossible. A political campaign hatches a plot to create a false claim of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Making this even more implausible is that the CIA and FBI know about the plot. FBI Lacked 'Any Actual Evidence of Collusion' between Trump Campaign, Russia When Crossfire Hurricane Launched, Durham Finds. The Department of Justice and the FBI did not have "any actual evidence of collusion" between Russian officials and Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, and began their Crossfire Hurricane probe of Trump's campaign based on "raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence," according to a report released on Monday by special prosecutor John Durham. Durham scolded federal law enforcement and counter-intelligence officials for failing to "uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to the law" as part of their investigation. He wrote that at least one FBI agent criminally fabricated language in an email that was used to obtain a FISA surveillance order. And he accused FBI leaders of displaying a "serious lack of analytical rigor" and relying significantly on "investigative leads provided or funded (directly or indirectly) by Trump's political opponents," referring to staffers and allies of Hillary Clinton, then the Democratic presidential nominee, whose campaign funded the Steele dossier through its law firm Perkins Coie. This is end of republic stuff and America can't survive it. The Durham investigation has concluded what most of us knew all along. There was no legal basis for the FBI's 2016 probe into the Trump campaign or the Mueller investigation that followed. It was all a lie. The FBI, once a highly-revered American institution, teamed up with the Hillary Clinton campaign to (try to) rig the presidential election. And they were all in on it. Then-President Barack Obama was briefed on the plan by his CIA Director John Brennan in July 2016. Two months later, Brennan alerted then-FBI Director James Comey and then-Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok to the scheme via a CIA investigative referral. Still, they allowed the charade to go on for nearly three years until former President Donald Trump's Attorney General, William Barr, intervened in the spring of 2019 to bring the investigation to an end. Had Barr not interceded, there's no telling how long the probe would have continued. The Durham Report:
A quick analysis. The Durham Report has been released. Here are some of the
main findings:
Durham Report Condemns the FBI's Russia Probe — But Don't Expect It to Make a Difference. In the 305-page report released Monday, special counsel John Durham concluded that the Trump-Russia investigation was launched without a required minimal level of evidence and shattered a host of departmental standards. Let that sink in: The Justice Department — as well as the media that covered it — effectively shut down a duly elected presidency, based on what turned out to be a politically engineered hoax. That would make anyone angry. 'Treason': Trump Sounds Off After Durham Report Reveals FBI Malfeasance. Former President Donald Trump sounded off on Monday in response to the long-awaited report from Special Counsel John Durham showing that the FBI should have never launched its investigation into the 2016 Trump presidential campaign. In a series of posts on the former president's Truth Social account Monday, Trump called the actions of certain FBI agents as being tantamount to "treason" and how a "great fraud" had been pushed on the American people. The FBI's integrity has been fatally compromised. The FBI's 2016 investigation into alleged collusion between Donald Trump's presidential campaign and Russia began with a single unverified account of a months-old conversation in a bar with an unpaid foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, according to Durham's report. Without even speaking to the primary source of information, and in a departure from FBI standards, a full investigation was opened despite the FBI having no information that anyone from the Trump campaign had ever been in contact with Russian intelligence officials. What the U.S. intelligence community did learn in the months after the FBI began spying on the Trump campaign was that Hillary Clinton's campaign had hatched its own plan to create a fake scandal tying candidate Trump to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Russian hackers who compromised the Democratic National Committee's computers. Everybody lied. Everybody. This is why we need independent media! The Durham Report came out yesterday afternoon, and at over 300 dense pages with footnotes I can confidently assure you that nobody has digested everything in the report, and that definitely includes me. [...] There will surely be much more to come. At least there will be much more in the independent media. In the MSM? It will be more of a squib than a bombshell. Nobody wants to do a deep dive because pretty much everybody was in on the long con. The Clinton campaign started the Russia hoax, the Obama Administration backed her up, the CIA knew it was BS but supported the narrative, and the FBI opened a multi-year investigation based upon what it knew from the beginning to be politically motivated lies. The Durham Report lays out what a fraud it all was, and frankly, some of what was done should count as treason. As in the hanging kind. Think Peter Strzok, to begin with. Add in Adam Schiff. They, in my judgment, committed treason. Strzok is making bank and Schiff will be rewarded with a seat in the Senate. ABC/NBC Still Insist the Trump-Russia Probe Was Needed, Despite Durham Report. On Monday [5/15/2023], Special Council John Durham's long-awaited report into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation fell out of the blue. The report faults the FBI and says they should never have opened Crossfire Hurricane since it was entirely based on "leads provided or funded by Trump's political opponents." Despite how Durham spelled out the fact that the Trump-Russia probe was based on "raw, unanalyzed and uncorroborated intelligence," ABC's World News Tonight and NBC Nightly News stood behind it. ABC chief Justice correspondent Thomas reported that Durham's report found the FBI "never should've launched a probe in the first place, since 'neither U.S. law enforcement nor the intelligence community appears to have possessed any actual evidence of collusion.'" He noted: "The bureau relied on 'raw, unanalyzed and uncorroborated intelligence.' Noting that 'there was significant reliance on investigative leads provided or funded (directly or indirectly) by Trump's political opponents.'" He even admitted the infamous Steele Dossier was part of that effort. FBI Offered To Pay Steele $1M For Anti-Trump Evidence. The FBI offered to pay Christopher Steele, the author of the infamous anti-Trump "dossier," up to $1 million for evidence linking Donald Trump to Russia, and paid Steele's primary subsource hundreds of thousands of dollars even after the source was unable to provide evidence for any of his claims, according to a report from Special Counsel John Durham. Embattled FBI agent Brian Auten travelled to Rome to meet with Steele on October 3, 2016, and made the offer despite knowing that his dossier relied primarily on one person, or "subsource." The Bureau then paid that "subsource," Igor Danchenko, $220,000 even after Danchenko was unable to provide evidence for a single one of his claims. Pulitzer Prize-Winning Media Malpractice: Russian Hoax Confirmed by the Durham Report. Seven years later, we learn from Special Counsel John Durham's report what was obvious seven minutes into this nonsense: The Russian hoax story was a childish prank. The puerile document was created by political opponents of Donald Trump. Duh — and double duh. Those who perpetuated it helped avert peace abroad and destroy tranquility at home. Divide countries, divide the public, and engender paranoid hate; that's one heck of a prank. In 2016 this Hilary Clinton paid-for schlock piece of fabulist political fantasy was discussed in a White House briefing. Were these a confederacy of dunces, devils, or serious intelligence analysts? You be the judge. Sen. Josh Hawley Responds to Durham Report: Hillary Needs to be Prosecuted — FBI Needs to Be Disbanded. Earlier today Special Counsel John Durham released his final report concluding the FBI had no verified intel when it opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation into Trump in 2016, according to Just the News. This was Durham's final report. There will be no arrests. The American people were lied to for years as the intel community worked feverishly to accomplish their coup on President Trump. And THEY ALL KNEW it was a lie. Tonight Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) joined Jesse Watters on FOX News to discuss the final Durham Report. Hawley says the FBI should be disbanded. [Video clip, transcript.] The Editor says... 'There's Nothing To This, But We Have To Run It To The Ground,' Anti-Trump FBI Agent Strzok Said: Durham. Days after opening a full FBI investigation into connections between Donald Trump and Russia, lead FBI investigator Peter Strzok told a subordinate that "there's nothing to this, but we have to run it to the ground," the subordinate — a top official in the Bureau's London outpost — told Special Counsel John Durham. Strzok opened a full investigation — skipping preliminary steps — based on nothing but a brief and "vague" account by an Australian diplomat of a conversation in a London bar, and within hours had traveled to London. But when he explained why he had opened the investigation, neither the FBI employees there nor their British counterparts could believe it, according to a report released by Durham on Monday [5/15/2023]. Durham, Master of the Obvious: The Russia Hoax Really Was A Hoax. So that's the big news after all these years — the Russia Hoax really was a hoax. As if anyone with an IQ above room temperature ever doubted it. [...] The investigation should never have taken place simply because there was no reasonable basis for it. None. "No verified intelligence or evidence." And this stuff was reviewed by the best legal minds the FBI and DoJ could come up with. Do you really think they were fooled into believing there was a reasonable basis? Durham proves that Hillary and the FBI tried to rig the 2016 election. The IRS on Monday removed the "entire investigative team" from its long-running tax fraud probe of first son Hunter Biden in alleged retaliation against the whistleblower who recently contacted Congress to allege a cover-up in the case, The [New York] Post has learned. The purge allegedly was done on the orders of the Justice Department, the whistleblower's attorneys informed congressional leaders in a letter. "Today the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Criminal Supervisory Special Agent we represent was informed that he and his entire investigative team are being removed from the ongoing and sensitive investigation of the high-profile, controversial subject about which our client sought to make whistleblower disclosures to Congress. He was informed the change was at the request of the Department of Justice," Mark Lytle and Tristan Leavitt wrote. Trump says there 'must be a heavy price to pay' for Comey, Democrats after release of Durham report. Former President Trump said Monday that former FBI Director James Comey and Democrats need to be held accountable for spending years investigating alleged collusion between Trump and Russia now that Special Counsel John Durham has released a report that says the Trump-Russia probe never should have been launched. "I, and much more importantly, then American public have been victims of this long-running and treasonous charade started by the Democrats — started by Comey," Trump told Fox News Digital. "There must be a heavy price to pay for putting our country through this." Durham's report found that the Department of Justice and FBI "failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law" when it launched the Trump-Russia investigation. In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, Trump said the activities surrounding the FBI's original Trump-Russia investigation were "a total disgrace," and said "public anger over this report is at a level that I have not seen before." Durham's final report is released. Special Counsel John Durham found that the FBI did not have enough 'factual evidence' to investigate allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, in scathing report obtained by DailyMail.com Monday. Durham's report, which is over 300 pages, is a comprehensive summary of findings related to whether the then-Trump campaign in 2016 colluded with Russia to meddle with the election outcome. It found that the the Department of Justice and the FBI 'failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law' when launching the Trump-Russia probe. Durham's In-Your-Face Danchenko Gambit. In the larger drama we'll call "Russiagate" Igor Danchenko gets nowhere near top billing. Even today, after his week-long trial, not one American out of ten could identify this FBI informant by name. Fewer still could tell you word one about the drama's other walk-ons, Sergei Millian and Charles Dolan. Although the Democrats and major media are anxious to see all three of these minor players vanish into the ether, Special Counsel John Durham made future stars out of them all. Danchenko was accused of lying to the FBI about his relationships with both Millian and Dolan. These are lies, said Durham's co-counsel Michael Keilty in his opening statement that "the FBI should have uncovered but never did." So saying, team Durham put Washington on notice. This trial was not really about Danchenko at all. It was about the FBI, the Department of Justice, and, finally, the Mueller investigation. Durham Wrapping Up. [Scroll down] Every single person in Washington DC, across the broad spectrum of institutions from all branches — including media, would speak plainly that Mueller's team objective (from May 2017 to April 2019) was to use the authority of his appointment to block any review of the preceding events he was presumably investigating. Yes, in private conversation everyone stated a similar core truth, Mueller was the tool for DC to protect itself against accountability. That reality was a bitter pill to swallow, because accepting that common response in private stood in contrast to those same voices talking publicly about the honor and respect of Robert Mueller. The charade was clear. Publicly everyone stated Robert Mueller and his team were embarked upon a valid enterprise. However, privately everyone acknowledged Robert Mueller and his team were operating to cover-up the prior corrupt activity of the DOJ, specifically the DOJ National Security Division, and FBI — specifically the FBI counterintelligence operation. Durham's last stand. President Trump predicted three years ago that John Durham's inquiry into the origins of the Russia collusion investigation would reveal "really bad things" and result in major indictments. Last month, Mr. Trump announced lower expectations for Mr. Durham. He said Americans are eagerly awaiting a report on his conclusions. As Mr. Durham begins what is expected to be his final act with the trial starting Tuesday of Russian analyst Igor Danchenko, the burning question is why the much-heralded investigation produced such meager results. Mainly, was Mr. Durham on a wild goose chase or did he blow it? November Surprise? Adults understand that politics is a crooked business, but through the whole of US history until now filters existed in the public arena that allowed for enough sorting out of truth from untruth to enable the formation of a reality-based consensus — which, in turn, allowed daily life to operate coherently. The Party of Chaos has thrown the kill-switch on that crucial function by corrupting the news business and subverting the new social media. The result is a public culture of pervasive and immersive lying, and a stupendous institutional failure of the courts to correct any of that behavior. Case-in-point: the John Durham Special Counsel Investigation on the origin of the RussiaGate fraud. It now apparently terminates in the prosecution of the tiniest minnow (Igor Danchenko) in that vast inland sea of corruption. Some of the figures who carried out the perfidious seditions of RussiaGate are still employed in the Department of Justice and the FBI, and to this day are active in the continued cover-up of the crimes committed to overthrow President Trump, notably: Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, Associate Attorney General Vanita Gupta, DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, FBI Director Christopher Wray, and others. Thanks for nothing, John Durham. [Scroll down] FBI directors Comey, Mueller, and Wray are all sitting down to a nice dinner about now, not a care in the world. Even though they tried mightily to take down a sitting, duly elected president. Proven liars and co-conspirators like Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page are probably smiling at this moment as they review their bank statements. Vile trolls like the CIA's John Brennan and James Clapper, although furiously promoting every rumor, falsehood, and slander under the sun against Pres. Trump, are no doubt busy scheduling their next high-paying TV gigs. Barry and Hillary, undoubtedly the prime movers of those seditious and anti-American plots, are surely relaxing in their luxe mansions at this very moment, contemplating their next lucrative podcast or appearance. All the Democrat pols, their billionaire donors, Big Tech, and our mendacious left-wing media, haven't a care in the world. They conspired to remove one of the most effective presidents in my lifetime, and they know they've gotten away with it. Recap: Theories 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 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. Durham also revealed he has unearthed a text message showing Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann falsely told the FBI he was not working on behalf of any client when he delivered now-discredited anti-Trump research in the lead-up to the 2016 election. In fact, he was working for the Clinton campaign and another client, prosecutors say. Attorney General Expects Durham Report 'Relatively Soon'. Attorney General Merrick Garland shared on Tuesday his expectations for when a report from John Durham's special counsel investigation will be completed, and it doesn't appear to be that far off in the future. The rare update on Durham's inquiry into potential misconduct in the Trump-Russia probe came during testimony before a Senate committee. Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) asked Garland about why former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann, who was found not guilty of lying to the FBI in a blow to Durham's investigation, apparently had a badge to get into the bureau's headquarters in the run-up to the 2016 election. "On the particular question about Sussman, I think we're going to have to wait until Mr. Durham finishes his report, which should be relatively soon," Garland said. "I certainly don't in any way want to interfere with him," Garland continued. "And he's the one who would know the answer to that. On the more general question, I can certainly ask my team to look into how lawyers have special badges." Durham has been working on this investigation for nearly four years, dating back to the Trump administration. Kudos to John Durham for exposing the truth of 'Russiagate'. A prosecutor can be an agent of sunlight or an agent of cover-up. John Durham is letting the sun shine. The Russiagate special prosecutor has taken on a tough case: indicting Igor Danchenko, the principal sub-source for the discredited "Steele dossier," which was penned by former British spy Christopher Steele and commissioned by the Hillary Clinton campaign to smear her GOP rival, Donald Trump, as a Kremlin mole. The peddling of a false narrative of Trump collusion with Russia was a product of the Clinton campaign and the FBI. Voluminous reports by the Justice Department's inspector general have demonstrated that the bureau's hierarchy was seized by anti-Trump animus. The FBI knowingly allowed itself to be fed partisan opposition research that was sensational, salacious, often flat-out ridiculous, but always — because it portrayed Trump as a traitorous lout — too good to check. Main Trump-Russia Dossier Source Acquitted of Lying to FBI. Igor Danchenko, a primary contributor to the Trump-Russia dossier, has been acquitted of lying to the FBI regarding his sources for some claims in the document. After nearly ten hours of deliberation, the jury declared the source, an analyst who compiled the bulk of the dossier drafted by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele and which alleged collusion between former president Trump's 2016 campaign and Moscow, not guilty on all charges. Danchenko was accused of having made false statements regarding the sources of some information that he provided to a U.K. investigative firm in 2017 that was later passed to the FBI. Special counsel John Durham originally charged the Russian national with five counts of lying to the intelligence agency but one was tossed out Friday. Danchenko's case is expected to be the last connected to Durham's three-year investigation into the origins of the FBI's probe into the alleged Russiagate scandal. Danchenko trial: Jury finds Steele dossier source not guilty on all counts. A jury on Tuesday found Russian national Igor Danchenko, the primary sub-source of the anti-Trump dossier, not guilty on all four counts of making false statements to the FBI. The charges had been brought by Special Counsel John Durham, who is investigating the origins of the FBI's original Trump-Russia investigation. The Danchenko trial is the second out of Durham's years-long investigation, and the second time a jury delivered an acquittal. Former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann was found not guilty of making false statements to the FBI in June. "We've known all along that Mr. Danchenko was innocent," Danchenko's attorney, Stuart Sears, said Tuesday. "We're happy now that the American public knows that as well." Will James Comey and Robert Mueller Be Prosecuted for Lies John Durham Uncovered? While special counsel John Durham's prosecution of Steele dossier source Igor Danchenko appears to be headed toward acquittal, Durham has used the trial to make public a number of revelations that cast the entire Trump-Russia collusion narrative in a fresh light. Most prominently, Durham revealed that on Oct. 3, 2016, the FBI had offered dossier author Christopher Steele up to $1 million to provide any information, physical evidence, or documentary evidence that could back up the claims in his dossier. But despite the huge reward on offer, Steele did not provide any such information. Crucially, despite Steele's failure to back up his dossier, a mere 18 days later the FBI proceeded to obtain a FISA warrant against Trump 2016 presidential campaign adviser Carter Page. In its application to the FISA court, the FBI used the Steele dossier — specifically, its claim that Page was acting as an agent of Russia — as evidence. Dem operative admits under oath he lied about Team Trump in Steele dossier. Democratic operative Charles Dolan Jr. testified Thursday that he lied to Igor Danchenko in 2016 when he claimed to have information from a GOP insider about why Paul Manafort resigned from the Trump campaign. The false claim actually had been pulled from a cable news talking head, Mr. Dolan said at the federal trial of Mr. Danchenko, a Russian analyst who was the primary subsource for the so-called Steele dossier. The accusation ultimately found its way into that salacious unverified dossier of anti-Trump accusations compiled by British ex-spy Christopher Steele and attributed to "an American political figure associated with Donald Trump." Durham Trial: [the] 'Salacious and Unverified' Trump-Russia Dossier Story [was] Too Juicy for FBI to Check. An FBI intelligence analyst testifying in the special counsel probe by John Durham says he never really checked the fake story about the so-called "Steele dossier" in the Trump Russia collusion hoax — including the infamous and non-existent "pee tape" — and assumed FBI sources were telling the truth. This, even though the FBI offered a $1 million payday to verify it (it went uncollected), proving the FBI knew it was "salacious and unverified" in the words of former FBI chief James Comey. But knowing that, the FBI used the dossier against Donald Trump anyway and lied to the nation's top spy court to get a warrant to spy on his campaign. Senior FBI Analyst: Bureau Offered Christopher Steele $1 Million to Corroborate Dossier. The FBI offered former British spy Christopher Steele "up to $1 million" if he could prove the claims in his infamous dossier, according to a senior FBI analyst's testimony on Tuesday in Special Counsel John Durham's criminal probe into the origins of Russiagate. FBI supervisory counterintelligence analyst Brian Auten's testimony came during the first day of Durham's criminal trial against Igor Danchenko. Danchenko, a paid FBI informant and Steele's primary source for the dossier, is accused of lying to the FBI. Or, to put it another way... Who authorized the $1 million FBI payment offer to Christopher Steele revealed in court testimony? The testimony of FBI supervisory analyst Brian Auten in the trial of Igor Danchenko is shocking. [...] [FBI supervisory analyst Brian] Auten was questioned mostly by Special Counsel John Durham. But nowhere have I seen reference to a question about the authorization for such an offer. Who were the "several top FBI officials"? Did any of them have the authority to offer a million dollars in cash to a source? I've never worked at the FBI or for any federal agency. But my understanding is that authorization for a one-million-dollar payment is not a routine use of petty cash. One characteristic of federal agencies is that bureaucrats protect themselves from questions about misuse of funds by documenting everything involved in spending money — all the more so when an individual is to be offered a life-changing sum such as a million bucks. Durham team gives FBI a pass for Trump-Russia collusion probe, blames Danchenko's 'lies'. Special counsel John Durham, in what is likely the final trial of his probe into the origins of the FBI's Trump-Russia collusion investigation, let the bureau off the hook for misconduct, casting it as a hapless victim of a dishonest Russian analyst named Igor Danchenko. Mr. Danchenko, a critical source for the anti-Trump dossier, lied to FBI officials and spurred their "troubling" behavior while going after the Trump campaign in 2016, prosecutors said Tuesday in opening statements at Mr. Danchenko's trial. "The Steele dossier caused the FBI to engage in troubling conduct. The defendant's lies played a role in that conduct," prosecutor Michael Keilty told the jurors in a federal courtroom in Alexandria, Virginia. Special Counsel Durham's Protect-The-Establishment Approach Is Destroying The Country. Special Counsel John Durham continues to ignore the FBI's malfeasance in the Crossfire Hurricane targeting of Donald Trump, a Friday court filing by prosecutors in the criminal case against Igor Danchenko confirms. While that approach may have been prudent and in the country's best interests three and a half years ago, when then-Attorney General Bill Barr tasked Durham to investigate the origins of the Russia collusion hoax, it is no longer judicious. The special counsel's failure to appreciate this reality threatens the government's case against Danchenko, but more significantly has spurred the Biden administration, the D.C. deep state, and partisan state officials to further weaponize the criminal justice system against their political enemies. Since May of 2019, when the public first learned that Barr had tasked Durham — who at the time was the U.S. attorney for Connecticut — to investigate the origins of Crossfire Hurricane, there have been only three criminal prosecutions. John Durham's final act: exposing the FBI. Russiagate special counsel John Durham is in the homestretch. His grand jury wrapped up work last week, apparently with no new indictments on the horizon. Attorney General Merrick Garland is said to anticipate receiving his final report by the end of the year. And Durham is gearing up for his last trial: the prosecution of Igor Danchenko, the principal source for the discredited Steele dossier. That last one should be grabbing our attention. We now know that the so-called dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele was a Clinton campaign production. It is one of the great dirty tricks in modern political history: The 2016 Democratic presidential campaign colluded with the incumbent Democratic administration's law enforcement and intelligence apparatus to portray their partisan opposition, Donald Trump, as a Kremlin mole, then made the smear stick to the point of forcing Trump to govern for over two years under the cloud of a special-counsel investigation. This enterprise included substantial reliance by the FBI on the bogus Steele dossier in obtaining spying authorization from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) — on sworn representations that the bureau believed Trump was in a "conspiracy of cooperation" with Vladimir Putin's anti-American regime. 'Tear apart' DOJ and FBI: Devin Nunes implores Republicans to act on John Durham bombshell. Republicans in Congress need to "tear apart" the Justice Department, a former chairman of the House Intelligence Committee declared in reaction to explosive new claims by special counsel John Durham. Devin Nunes, who is now CEO of former President Donald Trump's media venture, Trump Media and Technology Group, made the statement Thursday when reacting to the prosecutor's claim in court that the alleged source for disgraced former British spy Christopher Steele's infamous anti-Trump dossier was a paid confidential human source for the FBI. "I'll tell you: Now more than ever, if the Republicans get control of Congress, this is going to be a monumental task that they have — to tear apart the Department of Justice and the FBI," Nunes said during an interview on Real America's Voice. Durham shocker: Danchenko was a paid FBI informant. Today, Special Counsel John Durham moved to unseal this motion in limine in the false statements case against Igor Danchenko. This motion provides new information on the details of Danchenko's lies to the FBI, further information on how Special Counsel Mueller ignored Danchenko's false statements, expected testimony from Clinton-connected executive Charles Dolan, and one crazy development. But we'll start with the the most damning development: Danchenko was on the FBI payroll as a confidential human source (CHS) from March 2017 through October 2020. Russiagate: Special Counsel Durham's Motion to Unseal Steele 'Primary Source' Evidence is Granted. Special Counsel John Durham's request to unseal a motion in limine pertaining to the trial of Igor Danchenko, who has been identifed as the "primary source" behind ex-British spy Christopher Steele's dossier, has been granted. A motion in limine is a "pretrial motion asking that certain evidence be found inadmissible, and that it not be referred to or offered at trial," according to Cornell's Legal Information Institute. The Special Counsel's motion to include the evidence against Danchenko reveals that the FBI was aware of his activities as early as July 2016. "Beginning in or about July 2016 and continuing through December 2016, the FBI began receiving a series of reports from former British government employee Christopher Steele and his firm, Orbis Business Solutions, that contained derogatory information on then-candidate Trump concerning Trump's purported ties to Russia," the motion states. Durham's Lead Prosecutor Withdraws from Danchenko Case. Special Counsel John Durham's lead prosecutor withdrew from the criminal case against Igor Danchenko, the main source for the Trump-Russia dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton's camp. The trial against Danchenko is set to begin in October. Assistant special counsel Andrew DeFilippis withdrew from the case late Sunday evening, the Washington Times reported. Recall, DeFillipis oversaw the cases against Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann and FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith. Durham Takes Leading Role In Upcoming Trial Of Steele Dossier Key Figure. The findings from the examination into the origins of the Democratic establishment's attempts to destroy President Donald Trump by accusing him of colluding with key members of the Russian government — better known as The Durham Investigation — have always hinged on one key aspect of the hoax: The Steele Dossier. It was the cornerstone card upon which the entire farcical house of cards was built. In October, one of the key enablers of the dossier's eventual prominence, Igor Danchenko, will stand trial for making false statements to the FBI. And while Special Counsel John Durham has clearly been deeply involved with all the pieces of the Russia Hoax puzzle, based on what we've learned this week, Mr. Durham will be even more involved with the Danchenko trial. Appearing in federal court on Monday [8/1/2022] for a hearing on the Danchenko trial, Mr. Durham did more than just stand by and observe the proceedings as he's done in the past. New Lawsuit Levies Major Accusation Against DOJ Concerning Hunter Biden And Durham Probes. A government ethics watchdog is now filing a lawsuit against the Department of Justice, accusing the department of "hiding" information from the public concerning the withholding of records about potential bias and conflicts of interest involving high-profile cases such as the Durham investigations and the probe into Hunter Biden and his business dealings. Just the News is reporting that in June 2021, Protect the Public's Trust filed a Freedom of Information Act request to the DOJ in order to obtain records from the agency's Justice Management Division. It's now been over a year and the department has not bothered to inform the watchdog whether or not it will comply with the request. 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. Why 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. Deep 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. 9 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." Durham 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. John 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. Is 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. Ex-Clinton 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. Michael Sussmann 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. Sussmann 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. Michael 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. Sussmann 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. The 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." FBI ignored 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. Stolen 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. Why 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. Court 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. Sussmann 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. Sussmann 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. FBI 1 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. Most 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. Sussmann 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. 'Typo' 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." Emily Compagno blasts Robert Mueller following Clinton bombshell: His team should be 'extremely embarrassed'. Emily Compagno sounded off on special counsel Robert Mueller following the bombshell testimony from former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook. The "Outnumbered" co-host said Monday [5/23/2022] it is "absolutely unacceptable" that Mueller's report didn't mention Hillary Clinton approved of leaking the Trump-Russia allegations to the media, given the extensive resources for Mueller's investigation. 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. Sussmann 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. Durham 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 opposition research. FBI 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. Professor 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. John Durham 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. How 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. Commentary 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. They 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. Clinton 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. Tale 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. Report: 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. Robby 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. FBI 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." Why 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. Hillary 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. FBI 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. Sussmann-Durham 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. [The] 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. It's 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! Devin 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. Court 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. The 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. Judge 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. One 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. Fusion 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." Ex-Clinton 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. Spygate 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. Judge 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. Sussmann 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. Special 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. Top 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." Durham 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. Michael Sussmann 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. Durham 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. Durham's latest: 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." John 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? Ratcliffe 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. Special 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. Durham 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. Court 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. Newly 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. Hillary 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. Sussmann 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. Rep. Andy Biggs: Without information, Hunter Biden scandal looks like a 'cover-up' Video. House Oversight Committee member Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., discusses the Hunter Biden laptop scandal and the latest on the Durham Investigation. [Video clip] Durham 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 not guilty. It 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. Durham 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. Durham 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." Latest 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. Durham 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 States (EOP)." Here's 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." Federal 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. One 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. Will 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. Durham 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. Durham 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. Durham: 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. Democratic 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. Clinton 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. Clinton 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. John 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. John 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. Durham 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. In 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. Durham 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. Document 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. Durham-related 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." Special 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. Special 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. 5 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. Durham 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. John 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. Spygate 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.'" 4 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. Liberals 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. Quick 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. Clinton, 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. Durham 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. Let's 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. John 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. 'Mainstream' 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. Michael 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. Why 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. Hillary 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. John 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. Hillary's 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. Papadopoulos 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. Durham 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. 11 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). Clinton's 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. Media 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." Hillary 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. John 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. Senator Josh Hawley asks Biden's AG Garland to make sure Jake Sullivan, his wife and anyone in his office associated to Hillary's campaign is fully recused from the Durham probe. Republican Sen. Josh Hawley is asking Attorney General Merrick Garland to ensure that the wife of National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan anyone who might be 'implicated' in John Durham's probe recuse themselves from the matter. The Missouri Republican pressed Garland in a letter Wednesday after Durham included new 'spying' charges in the 'Factual Information' section of a court filing in a related case. The explosive filing signaled a new turn in Durham's probe of the origins of the Russia probe, prompting Republicans to accuse Clinton of 'spying' on Donald Trump. Establishment 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." Two 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] Desperation 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. Biden 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? What 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? The Durham 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. Tulsi 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] Kash 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. Sussmann 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. Devin 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. Tech 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. Biden's 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. 8 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. Former 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. A 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. Stunning 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. Durham 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). John 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. Trump 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." Durham: Clinton 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. The 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. Durham 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. Clinton 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. Trump 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. Durham 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. Durham 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. Durham 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. Durham 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. Latest 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.) John 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. Durham 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. Durham 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. It's official: 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. Igor 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. Here Comes 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. The 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? Kash 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] Why 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. New 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. Fiona 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. Durham 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. Was 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. This 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 of Brookings. National 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. Stop 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. Kash 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. Durham's 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 Sussmann. 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. John 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. Lawyer: '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. Why 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 a fraud. Steele 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. Steele's 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. Steele 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. Durham 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. The 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. Igor 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. Arrest 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. Special counsel John Durham's investigators arrest analyst behind Steele dossier which claimed Donald Trump had been compromised by Russian intelligence. A key source who provided information to British ex-spy Christopher Steele for his 'dirty dossier' of allegations against Donald Trump has been arrested in the US. Igor Danchenko, a Russian-born analyst living in the United States, was arrested on Thursday by federal agents assigned to John H. Durham's special counsel inquiry into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation, according to the New York Times. Danchenko was the primary researcher for Steele's dossier alleging that Trump's 2016 presidential campaign conspired with Russia in a covert operation to beat Hillary Clinton. John 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. John 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. Exclusive: 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. Ratcliffe 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. Durham 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. 44 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. To 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. New 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. Durham 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." Durham 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. The 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 campaign. 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. Glenn 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. 44 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." Witnesses 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. Senate 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. About 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. Durham 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 public view. Andrew 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. 67 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. John 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. John 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. Why 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. John 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. FBI 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 watchdog's findings. John Durham Resigns as US Attorney, Effective February 28th, Before Biden AG Takes Office. John Durham announced on Friday he will resign as US Attorney effective on February 28 at midnight. Durham was investigating the Mueller Russia-Collusion coup against President Trump and his administration. He was appointed as Special Counsel in October. He resigned as US Attorney in Connecticut. Former 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. John 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." Why 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. President 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?" Trump 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." Special 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. Intel Chief Urges John Durham To Release Interim Report In Order To Protect Investigation. John Ratcliffe, the director of national intelligence, urged U.S. Attorney John Durham on Sunday to release an interim report on his investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, saying that the American public should have record of the investigation in case the Biden administration shuts it down. Durham 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. Ratcliffe 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. Adam 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. Does Special Counsel Appointment Block President Trump's Ability to Declassify Documents? With the recently made public appointment of John Durham as a special counsel, does that appointment mean President Trump is unable to declassify documents in the same way the Robert Mueller special counsel blocked declassification? The likely answer is yes. AG 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? The 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." Devin 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. Durham 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. Source: 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. Report 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. Jonathan 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. DC Legal Circles Rumor Says Member of Mueller's Prosecution Team Has "Flipped" for Durham. Something has happened in the Durham investigation of the origins of the Russia rumor hoax, and a rumor circulating among Washington, D.C., federal criminal defense attorneys is that a former member of Robert Mueller's Special Counsel's Office (SCO) has "flipped" and is providing information to the investigators regarding the work of the SCO. Ron 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 three-and-a-half years." Bartiromo: "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. Huge: 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 at times. Claims 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. Nora 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. Durham 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). Attorney 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. What's 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. Tom Fitton sharply criticizes the Durham probe.. Something is wrong. Durham is NOT investigating. Looks like a sham. [Video clip] Former US Attorney Joe DiGenova Says John Brennan Is Clearly Part of Durham Investigation While Criticizing NPR and Other MSM Reporting. Former US Attorney Joe DiGenova says he believes that Obama's CIA Director John Brennan is included in the Durham Investigation and believes NPR and the MSM's reporting is not accurate. Former US Attorney Joe DiGenova was again on Mornings at the Mall on Monday morning [8/10/2020]. In his discussion this week, it was noted that reports came out this past week that John Brennan was not a likely candidate in John Durham's investigation of the Russia collusion crimes. Durham's 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. New 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. Durham, 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. No, 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. Report: Durham Under Pressure to Wrap Up Spygate Investigation, Could 'Punt it to After the Election'. John Durham, the US Attorney from Connecticut appointed to investigate the origins of Spygate, is reportedly under pressure to wrap up his probe by the end of summer. However, according to two sources who spoke to Fox News, Durham could wait to initiate prosecutions or reveal his findings until after the 2020 presidential election. Durham 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. NYT: 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. William 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. U.S. 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." Trump: '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. Enough 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? Australian 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." Mark 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. The 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. Report: 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. Media 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. Baghdadi 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. The 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. Former 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." Justice 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. Reports: 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. Durham 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? Durham's 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. Laws 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. Durham's 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. It 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. Brennan And 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. NY 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. Durham 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." The 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. John 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 interrogation" methods. Durham 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". DiGenova: Durham's investigation moving at 'lightning speed,' bad actors in DOJ, FBI will be held accountable. Former U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova is optimistic about the investigation into the origins of the Russia probe, noting that the process is moving at "lightning speed." Along with his wife and partner, Victoria Toensing, diGenova spoke with Fox Business Network's Lou Dobbs about U.S. Attorney John Durham and his examination of the FBI's Russia inquiry which is now a criminal investigation. DOJ 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. Reluctant 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 'I Don't Do Evidence' Brennan Appears to be Spooked By Durham's Plans to Interview CIA Officials. [Scroll down] The question is, was this just a fictional story manufactured to promote the Russia hoax? Since not even Mueller's team of angry Democrats were able to uncover any concrete evidence, the answer may be yes. Political analyst and former U.S. intelligence office Ray McGovern thinks so. Report: 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. DOJ 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. GOP: Dem fears rising as 'Bull' Durham's 'Russiagate' probe expanded to three levels of Obama corruption. A pair of Republican lawmakers who joined host Dan Bongino on Fox News Friday [6/7/2019] said that the Trump Justice Department's probe into the origins of the Obama-era "Spygate" coup attempt has risen to three levels of corruption as Democrats on Capitol Hill grow increasingly nervous about what's about to come out. John 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. Barr 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. Christopher 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. Christopher Steele Refuses to be Questioned by DOJ Investigator John Durham. Reuters is reporting the DNC paid Dossier author, Christopher Steele, is refusing to be questioned by DOJ investigator John Durham. This follows a pattern of Chris Steele refusing to talk to congress and also refusing to talk to Inspector General Michael Horowitz. Time to 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. Unraveling 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. The 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. Barr's 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 leadership. Which 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. 'Both 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. Joe 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." Bill Barr's probe has Brennan, Clapper and Comey ratting on each other. According to the latest reports, the rats are scurrying about, as the ship of deep state appears to be scuttled. This will be a lot of fun to watch. The tables appear to be turning. Expect 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 investigators. John 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. New 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. What 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. Is This The Man To Bring The Anti-Trump Deep State Down? If you don't know the name John Durham now is the time to remember the name, John Durham[.] Attorney 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. Barr 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. AG 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." William 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. 
|