Barr and Durham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some posters seem to confuse oppo research with sharing known false info with the FBI to start an investigation on a potential and sitting president ( including wiretapping) and continuing to perpetuate the lie. Can’t think of any other candidate who has done that but I am will be ok if proven wrong- please enlighten me on where this has happened before.

The info sussmanm brought was not known false info. Expert cyber researchers thought it showed real communications and many of them still think they do.

This.

It was all bunk. And, it would surprise me not at all if the data they had was actually concocted by these same fraudsters.

And, Sussmann is being charged for lying to the FBI - bringing information (false or not) and saying he was just a concerned citizen when, in fact, he was working on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
Durham has the receipts for this charge. Sussmann's own texts, statements, and billing records.

[Anonymous]

Marc Elias, who was attorney for the Clinton campaign testified that they didn’t ask him to go to the FBI and didn’t want it to go to the FBI. They would rather the NYT or other national media investigate and write about it. They knew the FBI would sit on it until after the election. Comey only talked about ongoing FBI investigations if it hurts Hillary Clinton.

The FBI knew Sussmann did work for the DNC. They know leakers have motives. This is normal. It isn’t equal to even 1% of the crazy shady fraud that Rudy Giuliani did for Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some posters seem to confuse oppo research with sharing known false info with the FBI to start an investigation on a potential and sitting president ( including wiretapping) and continuing to perpetuate the lie. Can’t think of any other candidate who has done that but I am will be ok if proven wrong- please enlighten me on where this has happened before.

The info sussmanm brought was not known false info. Expert cyber researchers thought it showed real communications and many of them still think they do.

This.

It was all bunk. And, it would surprise me not at all if the data they had was actually concocted by these same fraudsters.

And, Sussmann is being charged for lying to the FBI - bringing information (false or not) and saying he was just a concerned citizen when, in fact, he was working on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
Durham has the receipts for this charge. Sussmann's own texts, statements, and billing records.

Why are you even posting if you don't know anything at all about the claim? Not even a tiny little bit?

[Anonymous]

If you read the transcripts that have been released, you will see that Sussman is not going to be going to jail or anything close.

I wouldn't be surprised to see this case ended before Memorial Day.

Durham is a joke.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some posters seem to confuse oppo research with sharing known false info with the FBI to start an investigation on a potential and sitting president ( including wiretapping) and continuing to perpetuate the lie. Can’t think of any other candidate who has done that but I am will be ok if proven wrong- please enlighten me on where this has happened before.

The info sussmanm brought was not known false info. Expert cyber researchers thought it showed real communications and many of them still think they do.

This.

It was all bunk. And, it would surprise me not at all if the data they had was actually concocted by these same fraudsters.

And, Sussmann is being charged for lying to the FBI - bringing information (false or not) and saying he was just a concerned citizen when, in fact, he was working on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
Durham has the receipts for this charge. Sussmann's own texts, statements, and billing records.

And presumably you believe that all FBI tipsters are 100% honest about their motives and 100% accurate on the facts. It certainly would make law enforcement easier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some posters seem to confuse oppo research with sharing known false info with the FBI to start an investigation on a potential and sitting president ( including wiretapping) and continuing to perpetuate the lie. Can’t think of any other candidate who has done that but I am will be ok if proven wrong- please enlighten me on where this has happened before.

The info sussmanm brought was not known false info. Expert cyber researchers thought it showed real communications and many of them still think they do.

This.

It was all bunk. And, it would surprise me not at all if the data they had was actually concocted by these same fraudsters.

And, Sussmann is being charged for lying to the FBI - bringing information (false or not) and saying he was just a concerned citizen when, in fact, he was working on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
Durham has the receipts for this charge. Sussmann's own texts, statements, and billing records.

We all know that the right way to handle this is to take the information to a foreign government that is in a war. You tell that government that they need to open an investigation. You then get the sitting president to threaten to cut off military aid if they don’t. Sussmann did not do this. Instead, like an idiot, he took the information to the FBI.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like they manufactured evidence and Podesta stated in a deposition that the Trump dossier was paid 50% by the DNC and 50% by the Clinton campaign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like they manufactured evidence and Podesta stated in a deposition that the Trump dossier was paid 50% by the DNC and 50% by the Clinton campaign.

Except the 50% that was paid for by the Bush 2016 campaign.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like they manufactured evidence and Podesta stated in a deposition that the Trump dossier was paid 50% by the DNC and 50% by the Clinton campaign.

Except the 50% that was paid for by the Bush 2016 campaign.

Wrong. Christopher Steele, the author of the dossier, wasn't even hired until the Clinton campaign and the DNC started funding the research.

The Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee helped fund research that resulted in a now-famous dossier containing allegations about President Trump’s connections to Russia and possible coordination between his campaign and the Kremlin, people familiar with the matter said.

Marc E. Elias, a lawyer representing the Clinton campaign and the DNC, retained Fusion GPS, a Washington firm, to conduct the research.

After that, Fusion GPS hired dossier author Christopher Steele, a former British intelligence officer with ties to the FBI and the U.S. intelligence community, according to those people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the company in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Before that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by an unknown Republican client during the GOP primary.

The Clinton campaign and the DNC, through the law firm, continued to fund Fusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/clinton-campaign-dnc-paid-for-research-that-led-to-russia-dossier/2017/10/24/226fabf0-b8e4-11e7-a908-a3470754bbb9_story.html

During the Republican primaries, a research firm called Fusion GPS was hired by The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website, to unearth potentially damaging information about Mr. Trump. The Free Beacon — which was funded by a major donor supporting Mr. Trump’s rival for the party’s nomination, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida — told Fusion GPS to stop doing research on Mr. Trump in May 2016, as Mr. Trump was clinching the Republican nomination.

After Mr. Trump secured the nomination, Fusion GPS was hired on behalf of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and the D.N.C. by their law firm, Perkins Coie, to compile research about Mr. Trump, his businesses and associates — including possible connections with Russia. It was at that point that Fusion GPS hired Mr. Steele, who has deep sourcing in Russia, to gather information.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/25/us/politics/steele-dossier-trump-expained.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like they manufactured evidence and Podesta stated in a deposition that the Trump dossier was paid 50% by the DNC and 50% by the Clinton campaign.

How is the dossier relevant to the Sussmann case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like they manufactured evidence and Podesta stated in a deposition that the Trump dossier was paid 50% by the DNC and 50% by the Clinton campaign.

How is the dossier relevant to the Sussmann case?

DP.

Not directly relevant, but it is all related.
The Clinton campaign and the DNC had to find a way to manufacture dirt on Trump to try to win an election.
And, when that didn't work, they continued with the ruse to try to damage Trump's presidency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like they manufactured evidence and Podesta stated in a deposition that the Trump dossier was paid 50% by the DNC and 50% by the Clinton campaign.

How is the dossier relevant to the Sussmann case?

DP.

Not directly relevant, but it is all related.
The Clinton campaign and the DNC had to find a way to manufacture dirt on Trump to try to win an election.
And, when that didn't work, they continued with the ruse to try to damage Trump's presidency.

So not relevant at all then. Nothing that Sussmann submitted was "manufactured."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like they manufactured evidence and Podesta stated in a deposition that the Trump dossier was paid 50% by the DNC and 50% by the Clinton campaign.

How is the dossier relevant to the Sussmann case?

DP.

Not directly relevant, but it is all related.
The Clinton campaign and the DNC had to find a way to manufacture dirt on Trump to try to win an election.
And, when that didn't work, they continued with the ruse to try to damage Trump's presidency.

But the Trump campaign did communicate with Russia and Russians did interfere in the election. The Clinton campaign did not manufacture that.

Wait until you hear about Trump and Rudy Giuliani coercing a foreign government for political dirty tricks, working with corrupt foreign officials and Russian oligarchs to smear an honest U.S. Ambassador, and dozens of other political frauds by Trump campaign and government officials.

[Anonymous]

The people who think Durham is acting as a fair and impartial player in this are truly idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sounds like they manufactured evidence and Podesta stated in a deposition that the Trump dossier was paid 50% by the DNC and 50% by the Clinton campaign.

Wrong. If it were about "manufactured evidence," then surely Durham would be going after him for that. But he isn't. And if it were a crime to fund opposition research, Durham would be on that as well. But, opposition research is NOT a crime.

The *only* thing Durham has right now is that he thinks Sussman lied when he said he was a concerned citizen when he went to the FBI. That's it. That's all. And it's pretty weak.