A reminder of old material

Remember the BS story that the FBI opened an investigation into the Trump campaign because of what Papadopoulos said to Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer?

watch this very short clip:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1525992228321169409


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

and from 2019,

https://www.theepochtimes.com/...198.html?slsuccess=1

David Kramer, a longtime associate of the late Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), revealed in an unsealed deposition that he had contact with at least 14 members of the media regarding the Steele dossier—a collection of 17 memos containing unverified allegations against Donald Trump.

Additionally, Kramer gave a full copy of the unverified dossier to then-Senior Director for Russian Affairs at the National Security Council Celeste Wallander, Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), and then-House Speaker Paul Ryan’s chief of staff, Jonathan Burks. Kramer also provided a briefing in early December 2016 on the dossier to both Wallander and Victoria Nuland, then the assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eurasian Affairs.

Kramer also provided ongoing updates to Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson, former MI6 spy and dossier author Christopher Steele, and other members of the media regarding McCain’s meeting with FBI Director James Comey.

Kramer, in his deposition, confirmed that he was BuzzFeed News’ source for the dossier. BuzzFeed published the dossier online in January 2017, resulting in a defamation lawsuit by Aleksej Gubarev, whose company XBT/Webzilla was mentioned in the dossier

McCain famously denied ever providing a copy of the dossier to BuzzFeed, telling the Daily Caller on Oct. 18, 2017: “I gave it to no one except for the director of the FBI. I don’t know why you’re digging this up now.”

Kramer, who is an affiliated senior fellow at the McCain Institute, revealed in his deposition that he had been in contact with 14 journalists and producers about the dossier. These contacts included:

ABC News: Brian Ross, Matt Mosk
BuzzFeed: Ken Bensinger
CNN: Carl Bernstein
The Guardian: Julian Borger
McClatchy: Peter Stone, Greg Gordon
Mother Jones: David Corn
NPR: Bob Little, Rachel Martin
The Washington Post: Tom Hamburger, Rosalind Helderman, Fred Hiatt
The Wall Street Journal: Alan Cullison

Kramer, who doesn’t appear to have spoken with The New York Times, noted that both Simpson and Steele were speaking to the Times directly because “they felt it required investigation by a serious news outlet, and they seemed to have chosen The Times at that point.”

Noted earlier he’s married to attorney Amy Jeffress. She is none other than the attorney for Lisa Page of Peter storzk sexting fame in page’s civil suit vs FBI. And in private practice with his father in law they defended senior Saudi gov officials by families of 9/11 victims

biggest danger to the case is a leftist DC jury

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...ic-lawyer-marc-elias

A jury was seated Monday in the trial of former Clinton attorney Michael Sussmann — the first trial stemming from Special Counsel John Durham’s years-long investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe — and opening arguments are expected to be presented by both the government and the defense Tuesday morning, as well as testimony from Democratic lawyer Marc Elias.

U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper on Monday presided over the first day of the Sussmann trial, which consisted of nearly eight hours of jury selection.

Special Counsel John Durham was in the courtroom for the entirety of jury selection, but was not seated with the prosecution team. Instead, Durham sat in the first row of the courtroom, behind the government’s table.

Sussmann is charged with making a false statement to the FBI and has pleaded not guilty.

The jury includes one federal government employee who told the judge they donated to Democrats in 2016 and another government employee who told the judge they "strongly" dislike former President Trump—both of those jurors told the judge they could be impartial throughout the trial. The jury also includes a teacher, an illustrator, a mechanic and more.

The overwhelming majority of jurors selected told Cooper they had not heard of the case prior to jury service.

"Picking a jury is more of an art than a science," Cooper said Monday, urging the individuals who were not selected to serve on the jury to "take nothing from the fact that you’re being excused."

Cooper, in dismissing the jury Monday evening, instructed jurors against doing "any independent research about the case," and instructed them not to discuss the case even amongst fellow jurors.

Representing the government are federal prosecutors Andrew DeFilippis, Michael Keilty, Deborah Brittain Shaw, and Jonathan Edgar Algor IV.

Representing Sussmann are defense attorneys Sean Berkowitz, Michael Bosworth, Catherine Yao, and Natalie Hardwick Rao.

Both the prosecution and the defense are expected to deliver opening arguments Tuesday morning, beginning at 9 a.m. ET.

long video. about the actual jury selection.

Not very promising

https://youtu.be/Zy50mMxOkIM

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
biggest danger to the case is a leftist DC jury

Well, this judge is something else too.

********

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.

The Conservative Treehouse reminds us of the conflicts of interest that Judge Cooper has:

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.

On top of this, current corrupt AG Merrick Garland resided over their marriage.

Judge Cooper is why we have laws about conflicts of interest.

He first refused to allow a Hillary Clinton tweet be used in the case against Sussmann where Hillary claimed candidate Trump was connected to Russia. We now know that this entire story was a lie.

On Monday TGP reported that Judge Cooper has allowed some Hillary Clinton donors be admitted in the jury pool.

This is not shaping up to be a fair trial.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.c...actions-now-showing/

reporting from the testimony today:

(from John Haughey tweets)

FBI Special Agent Scott Hellman, who said this morning that he and another agent determined the data and conclusions provided by Sussmann to Baker was bogus within a day of receiving the thumb drives.

Unresolved evidentiary issues are being discussed before Judge Cooper. Prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis said FBI agent Marin's testimony will be restricted to "what DNS data is and what a person can conclude from that data alone."

Cooper has ruled that Martin and FBI Supervisory Special Agent Scott Hellman can only discuss technical matters in an explanatory way and cannot discuss whether the data was concocted or "spoofed."

Judge Cooper is an obama guy all the way

Lengthy discussion regarding the infamous #SteeleDossier ...former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele cannot be compelled to testify so the dossier will enter the case tangentially in testimony from several witnesses, including #FusionGPS employee Laura Seago.

There will actually be 16 jurors seated during the trial with four not knowing that they are alternates and will not be "in the room" when the case goes to the jury for a verdict.

Shaw: The case involves “a look, a leap, and a lie.” The look was meeting with Steele to look into what he had, the leap was reaching out to friendly media outlets to publish the allegations, and when that didn’t happen, Sussmann went to the FBI.

FBI Special Agent David Martin is first up. He is chief of the agency's cyber technical analysis unit. He will explain what DNS (Domain Name Server) data means, but cannot stray into the validity of the DNS data Sussmann gave Baker in September 2016.

Martin is explaining what he does as a cyber technical analysis expert -- Cooper just asked him to slow down. He came with a PowerPoint presentation. Heads are nodding, eyelids drooping

Martin says the Domain Name System (DNS) “works kind of the same way, a bit more complex, as a phone book." DNS includes the numerical IP addresses that computers use to talk to each other. Otherwise, the court and jury get a primer in computer science 101.

Defense begins cross-examination of Martin, who never specifically addressed anything related to the DNS data Sussmann gave the FBI in September 2016 and then to the CIA in February 2017

Hellman said it took him and another agent less than a day to ascertain the data and “white papers” on two thumb drives Sussmann gave Baker did not support the Trump-Alfa Bank “secret connection” allegation.

The gist of Hellman's testimony is the data Sussmann provided was flawed and the "narrative" that came with it -- white papers with conclusions -- had no merit

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

https://nypost.com/2022/05/16/...inton-lawyers-trial/

As many as three Hillary Clinton donors — including one who also supported US Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — are among the prospective jurors for former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann’s trial.

Special counsel John Durham’s team objected to putting one Clinton contributor on the panel after the man said he would “strive for impartiality as best I can.”

But the prosecution was overruled by Washington, DC, federal Judge Christopher Cooper, who said the man — who works in public policy for Amazon and appeared to be in his 40s — “expressed a high degree of confidence” that he could be impartial.

Another Clinton supporter, a former bartender who appeared to be in her 20s, said she’d also donated to progressive firebrand Ocasio-Cortez (D-The Bronx, Queens) but was put on the panel after a Sussmann defense lawyer told her that neither Clinton nor former President Donald Trump were on trial and asked if she could be impartial.

“Yes, knowing that,” she said.

Another woman, who appeared to be in her 40s, said she likely donated to Clinton’s 2016 campaign but wasn’t entirely sure.

Although the woman told prosecutor Michael Keilty that she had “a strong preference of one candidate over the other” in the election, she insisted she could be impartial.

A prospective juror who works at an engineering firm and appeared to be in her 30s said that her husband worked for Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign but was allowed to remain on the panel after saying it wouldn’t affect her ability to be impartial

Another prospective juror who works for the Sierra Club and appeared to be in her 30s was questioned by Keilty about saying on a pre-screening questionnaire that she thought the criminal justice system was racist and “the police should be defunded.”

When asked why she had concerns about the FBI, the woman said, “They dismantled the Black Panther movement,” but neither side objected to her after she said she didn’t have strong feelings against current bureau probes.

A man who works at the Library of Congress and appeared to be in his 30s was questioned about donations he made to the libertarian Cato Institute and Reason Foundation think tanks, the latter of which publishes Reason magazine.

Neither side objected to him, either.

Cooper decided to eliminate one potential juror who works as an accountant and prepared tax returns for a former FBI official, lawyer James Baker, who figures prominently in the case against Sussmann.

During Monday’s proceedings, one prospective juror, an early education teacher who appeared to be in her 20s, told Cooper that she was underwhelmed when she learned about the nature of the trial before filling out a questionnaire last week.

“I thought it was a pretty boring case, honestly,” she said.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

more details here:

https://twitter.com/SarahNLync.../1526635819695579142

quote:

This is not shaping up to be a fair trial....
Judge Cooper is an obama guy all the way

And the finger will never be pointed at the government or its' agents...

Special Prosecutor Frames the Background of the Sussmann Case, The FBI Was Manipulated, Duped by Clinton Campaign

New York Times narrative engineer Charlie Savage is tweeting from within a packed media center at the E. Barrett Prettyman courthouse in Washington DC for the government case against Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann. [TWEET THREAD] The mentions and notations, while skewed toward the self interest of media, give us a good insight into what is taking place in the courtroom.

First things first. All media reporting of this case will be done through the prism of their own cooperation in the perpetration of the fraud. The MSM knew along with everyone else inside and outside of government, that their efforts to create the Trump-Russia conspiracy and collusion narrative were based on fraudulent pretext manufactured by the Clinton campaign. They all knew it. They all acted collaboratively and they all engaged purposefully.

As noted by Charlie Savage, prosecutor Deborah Shaw, a member of the Durham team, delivered the opening remarks to frame the government position in the case.

The telling remarks came early: “Shaw addresses “the elephant in the room” – tells jury their feelings about Russia, Trump, Clinton can’t play a role in the case. This is about “our FBI” which should not be used as a tool by anyone, Republicans or Democrats.” In essence, prosecutor Shaw is telling the jury the FBI were duped into the Trump-Russia conspiracy investigation by outsiders connected to the Clinton campaign.

That’s a critical baseline from the government we must understand and accept. That baseline now indicates that none of the DOJ and FBI operatives involved in the fraudulent scheme will be held accountable by the Durham team. “Our FBI should not be used as a tool by anyone,” yet they were, so sayeth the United States Government.

There you have it folks. For those who tried to avoid the uncomfortable reality of the situation. The Durham prosecution has set down the cornerstone establishing the DOJ/FBI was used and tricked.

The prosecution cannot later turn toward DOJ and FBI officials who were victimized by the Clinton outside group, reverse the predicate motive of the prior trial, and then hold the DOJ and FBI legally accountable.

That’s that.

The Durham accountability focus is now narrowed to the Clinton team, starting with Michael Sussmann.

This outcome was always visible when we accept the totality of the Robert Mueller probe as an overlay into this entire scenario. Put into a question I have asked for two years:

How could John Durham hold DOJ and FBI officials accountable for participating in the Trump-Russia fraud, when those same DOJ and FBI officials were part of the Robert Mueller cover-up operation?

Answer, they can’t. If Durham were to connect the conspiracy of the outside government and inside government collusion, he would be penetrating an impregnable firewall that would take down multiple DC government institutions simultaneously.

Durham is being permitted to give the illusion of accountability, but he was not authorized or permitted to expose the Dept of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, or any other institution.

The vehicles of our justice institutions are rusted and broken.

Bill Barr was the Bondo application. John Durham is the spray paint.

The question asked two years ago is answered.

TheLastRefuge @TheLastRefuge2
How does the office of a U.S. president; and more importantly the republic itself; survive a coordinated coup effort involving all three branches of government; while simultaneously those in charge of exposing the corruption fear the scale is too damaging for them to reveal?

https://theconservativetreehou...ampaign/#more-233169

Third day of testimony

James Baker (former FBI General Counsel):

In response to prosecutor DeFilippis, Baker says he is “100% confident” that Sussmann told him in Sept 2016 FBI mtg that he wasn’t there for client.

Baker says his impression was that Sussmann was there as a good citizen bringing the FBI important information. Prosecutor using this testimony to match with text Baker received from Sussmann saying “coming on my own — not behalf of a client or company — want to help the bureau”

in any "normal" case, this is very bad for Sussmann. Driving factors now are an obama judge and DC DEM jury

tweets from Andrew Goudsward

Key moment as Baker testifies that he's "100% confident" that Sussmann told him in Sept. 2016 meeting he wasn't there on behalf of any client.

"Michael's a friend of mine and a colleague. I believed and trusted that the statement was truthful," Baker testifies.

Baker said Sussmann told him major news outlets had info about Alfa Bank allegations. Baker said he was under impression that Sussmann hadn't given info to press. Sussmann had been communicating with reporters during this time.

Chuck Ross: He was hearing these "rumors" because he and his conspirators at Fusion GPS were the ones feeding the story to reporters

Baker said he "vouched" for Sussmann in meeting with top FBI counterintelligence official that day. Says he relayed that Sussmann was serious lawyer "who could understand importance and validity of information that had been brought"

Baker says he knew Sussmann had clients in Democratic Party, but believed the meeting was in a "different capacity." Likens him to confidential human source.

BTW Rodney Joffe was was an FBI CHS

Baker emphasizes a couple of times that FBI was already investigating possible Trump-Russia connections at time of meeting and was concerned about press reporting things that could affect that probe.

Baker testifies that he sought to protect Sussmann's identity after the meeting, but if he perceived he was working with a client he would not have. He says in that case, the client would have been the person needing protecting, not lawyer.

Baker says he discussed press issue with FBI leadership and they decided to ask Sussmann if he knew reporters so they could ask them to hold off on the story

Juror comes forward to say that she learned that her daughter is on the same crew team as Sussmann's daughter. Juror hasn't meet Sussmann and says she can be fair. Judge is going to let her stay on, over prosecution's objections.

Baker is back on stand and prosecutor is walking him through detailed account of FBI's conversations with NYT to try to get them to hold off on Alfa Bank story while bureau investigated.
Baker testifies that FBI leadership had another meeting with NYT where they said they could not confirm that data they investigated showed secret communications between Trump Org and Alfa Bank

Baker says FBI's ultimate conclusion on Alfa Bank matter was there was "nothing there."

Baker now sounding a bit upset as he recounts experience of testifying about Trump-Russia investigation before Congress. "It sucked," he said calling the behavior of members of Congress "appalling."

says a guy in the middle of the FBI framing Donald Trump

Baker also says he felt he had "dragged Michael into a maelstrom" by mentioning meeting with Sussmann in House interview.

From a white paper that Sussmann helped to write:

I wasn't sure where to post this. If it needs to be moved let me know.

General Flynn Files $50 Million Claim Against Feds

Flynn has promised to sue if the claim is dismissed

https://nationalfile.com/gener...-claim-against-feds/

Retired General Michael Flynn has filed a claim of $50 million against several federal offices and agencies over bogus “lying to the FBI” charges brought against him stemming from the Robert Mueller fishing expedition. Flynn, who briefly served as Trump’s National Security Advisor, has promised to sue if his demand is rejected.
General Flynn quietly filed the Form 95 Civil Claim on Feb. 24 of this year, according to PJ Media. It names the FBI, the DOJ, the Executive Office of the President, the Special Counsel’s Office, and the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s Office.

Flynn is seeking “Compensatory damages including but not limited to lost past and future earnings/revenue, emotional distress, lost opportunity to be President’s National Security Advisor, significant restraints of personal liberty, attorney fees/expenses and court costs in defending against malicious prosecution, abuse of process, false arrest, et al. activities of FBI, DOJ, and the White House.”

The seven-page addendum details General Flynn’s years-long ordeal that ultimately led to him being charged with a number of process crimes. Robert Mueller never revealed anything close to “collusion” between Trump and the Russian government, but he did charge numerous Trump associates with various filing-related offenses that Clinton associates were not charged for.

Flynn states that in July 2016, the FBI began to contemplate ways in which it could “hamper” then-candidate Donald Trump, and began targeting Flynn “as part of these efforts.”

General Flynn went on to claim that former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe had been targeting him since 2014 over bad blood between the two. McCabe’s disdain for Flynn was politically motivated, the addendum claims.

The former NSA chief believes that his foreign policy advice made him a target of retaliation from Obama officials. Former President Obama had urged Trump not to hire Flynn, who has remained a loyal ally throughout the ordeal.

The Obama White House “calculatingly, and with actual malice and corrupt motives, conspired to and did use the tremendous power of their positions in the Executive Office of the President (and their influence of the DOJ and FBI) to personally oppress and harm Flynn. The outrageous conduct they determined to take, along with the FBI and other allies in the Department of Justice, was executed knowingly, purposely, and in complete disregard of Flynn’s rights,” says the claim.

General Flynn was ultimately charged was charged with lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation during an interview where agents lied to Flynn about the nature of the inquiry. President Trump later granted him a full pardon, calling the ordeal a “political witch hunt.”

quote:

That’s a critical baseline from the government we must understand and accept. That baseline now indicates that none of the DOJ and FBI operatives involved in the fraudulent scheme will be held accountable by the Durham team.

Absent further evidence and another grand jury anyway.

Elon Musk tweets out about the Sussmann trial. Elon Musk

why important ? Elon Musk has 94 million followers

Replying to @Jim_Jordan
"All true.

Bet most people still don’t know that a Clinton campaign lawyer, using campaign funds, created an elaborate hoax about Trump and Russia.

Makes you wonder what else is fake."

w link to

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61488556.amp

Michael Sussmann: Clinton lawyer 'lied to manipulate FBI over Trump'

This message has been edited. Last edited by: sdy,

https://www.foxnews.com/politi...tions-sussmann-trial

Hillary Clinton approved dissemination of Trump-Russian bank allegations to media, campaign manager testifies

Former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook testified Friday that then-Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton approved the dissemination of materials alleging a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank to the media, despite campaign officials not being "totally confident" in the legitimacy of the data.

Former FBI General Counsel James Baker testified Thursday that the bureau investigated the data alleging a Trump connection to the Kremlin-linked bank, and found that "there was nothing there."

Mook was called to the stand for testimony by Michael Sussmann’s defense Friday.

During cross-examination by government prosecutor Andrew DeFillippis Friday, Mook was asked about the campaign’s understanding of the Alfa Bank allegations against Trump and whether they planned to release the data to the media.

Mook said he was first briefed about the Alfa Bank issue by campaign general counsel Marc Elias, who at the time was a partner at lawfirm Perkins Coie.

Mook testified that he was told that the data had come from "people that had expertise in this sort of matter."

"experts" who lied

Mook said the campaign was not totally confident in the legitimacy of the data, but had hoped to give the information to a reporter who could further "run it down" to determine if it was "accurate" or "substantive."

He also said he discussed whether to give the information to a reporter with senior campaign officials, including campaign chairman John Podesta, senior policy advisor, now White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, and communications director Jennifer Palmieri.

"I discussed it with Hillary as well," Mook said.

"I don’t remember the substance of the conversation, but notionally, the discussion was, hey, we have this and we want to share it with a reporter," Mook said.

The government asked Mook if Clinton approved "the dissemination" of the data to the media.

"She agreed," Mook testified.

Mook later said he "can't recall the exact sequence of events," when asked if he shared the idea to give the Trump-Alfa Bank allegations to the media with Clinton before or after the decision was made.

"All I remember is that she agreed with the decision," Mook testified.

Mook, earlier in questioning from the defense, was asked whether he or anyone on the Clinton campaign approved or gave Sussmann permission to bring the allegations to the FBI, to which he said: "No."

Later, the defense further questioned Mook, asking if Hillary Clinton herself approved Sussmann going to the FBI.

"I'm not aware," Mook testified.

When asked again, he said: "I don't know…I don't know why she would."



"statement from Jake Sullivan" Jake Sullivan - biden's National Security Advisor

some of this gets repetitious

https://technofog.substack.com...trategy-revealed?s=w

while this trial is about Sussmann’s false statements to the FBI, it’s also more than that.

This is Special Counsel John Durham telling the public the story of the Clinton opposition research machine, and how the campaign, through their lawyers and contractors (Fusion GPS), developed and spread lies to the media to influence the election. It’s the story of Clinton Campaign lawyers to using the FBI to further that strategy of deception.

With that in mind, do not forget the Igor Danchenko case. Is it the case that Charles Dolan , a Hillary Clinton friend and supporter, was coincidentally feeding false information to Christopher Steele’s primary sub source?

And on that thread, what are the odds that another Clinton ally - Alexander Downer - took his “info” to the FBI? Downer’s tip was referenced in the opening of the Alfa Bank-Trump investigation, seen below. (Note that the FBI misrepresents both the Downer tip and Mifsud’s purported statement to George Papadopolous.)

Are we to believe the Clinton Campaign and it’s agents had nothing to do with Dolan and Downer? When it comes to the broader Trump/Russia matter, there are too many Clinton links to ignore

Q: Okay. In connection with the general focus on Mr. Trump and Russia, did there come a time when you learned of potential links between the Trump organization, Mr. Trump’s business, and a Russian bank called Alfa-bank?

Mook: I did. Yes, I was briefed on that.

Q: Who participated in the briefing, if you remember?

A: Myself, Marc Elias, Jen Palmieri, Jake Sullivan, John Podesta. There might have been others, but those are the ones I definitely recall being there.

Q: In the Summer of 2016, was Mr. Trump’s relationship with Russia something that the campaign focused on?

A: Yes. I mean, it was frankly something we were focused on before that time. But absolutely.

Q: And once you learned about it [the Trump-Russia allegations], you started discussing with the campaign whether the campaign should affirmatively push it in the media, right?

A: Correct.

Q: Okay. You had a discussion with Mr. Sullivan?

A: Yes, I recall, yes.

Q: Whether to push it in the media right?

A: Correct.

Q: With Ms. Palmieri?

A: Correct.

Q: With Mr. Podesta?

A: Correct.

Q: But in any event, the decision to provide this to the media was authorized by the campaign, correct?

A: We authorized a staff member of the campaign to provide it to the media.

https://www.washingtonexaminer...-in-2017-durham-says

Sussmann told CIA similar 'client' lie in 2017, Durham says

Michael Sussmann told the CIA he was "not representing a client" when he pushed debunked Trump-Russia collusion allegations in early 2017, a former agency officer testified Friday.

Kevin P., who retired from the CIA a few years ago after more than 32 years of service, testified Friday about a Feb. 9, 2017 , meeting Sussmann had requested and obtained with the CIA and said, “He said he was not representing a client.”

The comments are similar to the lie special counsel John Durham accuses Sussmann of making to the FBI in 2016.

The special counsel said Sussmann pushed the Russian bank allegations and also claimed data he had access to “demonstrated that Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare, Russian-made wireless phones,” called YotaPhones, “in the vicinity of the White House and other locations.” Durham found "no support for these allegations” and revealed the CIA “concluded in early 2017” that the Alfa-Bank and YotaPhone information was not “technically plausible."

A senior officer in counterintelligence missions at the time, Kevin P. said Sussmann told him other lawyers at Perkins Coie represented Clinton and the Democratic National Committee, but “he made it clear that he did not have any connection with that.” He noted that “he had contacts that provided him the information” related to the Alfa Bank allegations, as well as what the CIA veteran referred to as “secondary information” on “another technical security threat.”

Sussmann provided the CIA with thumb drives and white papers, similar to what he had done with the FBI. Kevin P. said, “In the meeting, I said to Mr. Sussmann that it was likely this information would be forwarded to the FBI.”

After the meeting, Steve M., a CIA employee who was also at the meeting, sent a draft memo to Kevin P. that day. A final version of that memo, corrected by Kevin P., reads, “Mr. Sussmann advised that he was not representing a particular client and the information he was volunteering to us was not privileged. His contacts wished to provide information to the [U.S. government] through Mr. Sussmann, preferring anonymity citing a potential threat from the Russian Intelligence Services.”

Kevin P. stressed Friday that Sussmann “did not refer to them as clients in the meeting — he referred to them as contacts.” The retired officer said he had used his contemporaneous notes to refresh his recollection back in 2017 when editing the memorandum.

Another witness Friday, Mark Chadason, also a former CIA employee, said he was asked by a friend to meet with Sussmann, meeting on Jan. 31, 2017 , for breakfast at a hotel in northern Virginia. He said he took notes of the meeting and typed it up into a memorandum the same day.

At that meeting, Chadason testified that Sussmann told him he had a client and that his client would go to the New York Times if the CIA wouldn’t meet with Sussmann.

Chadason’s memorandum stated, “Sussmann said that he represents a CLIENT who does not want to be known, but who had some interesting information.”

Chadason wrote that Sussmann would not provide the client’s identity but that he “was able to elicit that the CLIENT is an engineer with number of patents, and is most likely a contractor to the [intelligence community]” and that “Sussmann also said that [the] CLIENT is a Republican.”

this is Rodney Joffe

Joffe was a confidential human source for the FBI at the time but was cut off in 2021 due to revelations in Durham’s investigation, although the judge said the jury could not be told about his termination. Shortly after Clinton’s loss to former President Donald Trump in November 2016, Joffe said in an email, "I was tentatively offered the top [cybersecurity] job by the Democrats when it looked like they'd win. I definitely would not take the job under Trump." The jury is not allowed to see that email either.

Chadason sent an email to CIA employees that day, writing, “Please remember this guy is a partisan lawyer who works closely with DNC. So I am not sure what the real story here is — but I am sure you guys will figure it out.”

He also sent the CIA his memo about the Sussmann meeting.

Kevin P. testified Friday that he didn't recall reading that particular memo before meeting Sussmann himself but said he would've expected the lawyer to say he was representing a client if he had read the emails stating that he was.

Defense attorney Sean Berkowitz asked Kevin P. whether he had read Chadason’s memo, which used the word “CLIENT” over a dozen times, prior to meeting with Sussmann, and he replied, “I do not recall reading it, but I may have read it.” Berkowitz also pointed to a Jan. 31, 2017, email from Chadason that labeled Sussmann a “prominent lawyer who is representing a client.”

Kevin P. said he didn’t recall reading that email beforehand but insisted again that Sussmann told him he was not there for a client.

The CIA said Sussmann told them he had met with Baker “on a similar, though unrelated , matter." But Durham said that was “misleading” because information regarding the Alfa-Bank allegations that he had pushed to the FBI was among the materials Sussmann provided to the CIA.

Sussmann lies again

keep in mind the CIA and FBI knew this Alfa story was BS. But they let Donald Trump get pounded by the press over and over. they never said a word in defense of the President of the United States.

Man this makes my ears smoke. All these details & I’m afraid 90% of Americans will just go “oh hum.” What will it take to get this across.

Lawyers say deny, deny, deny or I can’t remember and that seems to suffice. Frustrating.

The best part about this is that the FBI will sell out anyone to save themselves. Yes the corrupt deep state FBI and all its malfeasance and incompetence should be exposed. But they will do everything they can to implicate anyone else and pretend they were innocently duped.

That means they will put as much of this as they can on Hillary, and if I had to make this deal myself to immunize the FBI to convict Hillary, I would do it gladly.

"Damn good deal!" Lt. Aldo Raine, 1st Basterds.

Judge Cooper's wife donated $2,700 to the Clinton campaign in May 2016

from Paul Sperry:

Judge Cooper himself has given at least $29,500 to (only) Democrats, including $ 5000 to the DNC. The DNC whom Sussmann represented while digging dirt on Donald Trump

Cooper is corrupt or he would have recused


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

from Conservative TreeHouse:

Clinton's team made it all up, Durham found out easily, and Clinton's team admit it now. Yet, no one seems curious as to how Mueller/Weissmann could spend two years, $40 million, 2,800 subpoenas, use 40 agents, 19 DOJ lawyers, 500 witnesses and not figure that out.

side issue that has not gotten much attention

from Hans Mahncke

"On or about September 19, 2016, FBI received a referral of information from US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE , detailing an unusually configured email server in Pennsylvania belonging to the TRUMP ORGANIZATION"

Sep 19, 2016 was the day when Sussmann took the exact same info to the FBI




coordinated, simultaneous, "apparently" independent reports all reinforcing a fabricated lie. This is a sophisticated approach from people / organizations who push false stories for a living. Fusion GPS fit right in. So did Christopher Steele, Perkins Coie, Rodney Joffe, Clinton campaign, and obama's CIA, DoJ & FBI