The Durham Indictment
-
Andy McCarthy says that Durham is playing the long game, and this week's indictment of Sussmann was only because the statute of limitations for lying to the FBI was about to expire (this weekend)
The special counsel’s final report on the Clinton campaign’s manufacturing of the Trump–Russia collusion narrative will be very interesting reading.
There is a long game and a short game going on in special counsel John Durham’s indictment of Democratic Party lawyer Michael Sussmann on a false-statements count.
The short of it is this: A false statement was allegedly made by Sussmann to the FBI’s then-general counsel, James Baker, on September 19, 2016. In federal law, the false-statement crime has a five-year statute of limitations, meaning it had to be charged by this Sunday (September 19, 2021). >
Consequently, even if Durham would probably have preferred to wait until his full investigation was concluded before filing indictments, by delaying beyond Sunday, he would have lost what appears to be an eminently provable felony charge. If he was going to indict Sussmann on this conduct, it was now or never.
Now, more critically, the long game.
It is unusual for a one-count false-statement charge, which can be alleged in a paragraph, to be presented as a 27-page speaking indictment. But Durham wrote a highly detailed account of the facts and circumstances surrounding the false-statements charge. It is significant in that it tells us far more about his investigation.
Here is where the prosecutor appears to be going: The Trump–Russia collusion narrative was essentially a fabrication of the Clinton campaign that was peddled to the FBI (among other government agencies) and to the media by agents of the Clinton campaign — particularly, its lawyers at Perkins Coie — who concealed the fact that they were quite intentionally working on the campaign’s behalf, and that they did not actually believe there was much, if anything, to the collusion narrative. It was serviceable as political dirt but would not amount to anything real for criminal or national-security purposes.
-
With luck, he'll get the same stiff punishment that was dished out to Andrew McCabe and Kevin Clinesmith.
@george-k said in The Durham Indictment:
With luck, he'll get the same stiff punishment that was dished out to Andrew McCabe and Kevin Clinesmith.
Exactly. I would want to understand why it is such a long slog.
And its a reminder to democrats how process crimes always end up, they really do get hysteric in the moment. Papadakos was that his name, the 25 yo who was plotting to bring down civilization as we know it. LOL
-
@george-k said in The Durham Indictment:
Here is where the prosecutor appears to be going: The Trump–Russia collusion narrative was essentially a fabrication of the Clinton campaign that was peddled to the FBI (among other government agencies) and to the media by agents of the Clinton campaign — particularly, its lawyers at Perkins Coie — who concealed the fact that they were quite intentionally working on the campaign’s behalf,
That gave me a little woodie.
I still believe the Russian collusion bullshit originated with Hildabeast herself as a way to divert attention from her email scandal.
You will never convince me otherwise.
-
Special Counsel John Durham has issued a new set of subpoenas, including to a law firm with close ties to Hillary Clinton's 2016 campaign, an indication that Durham could be trying to build a broader criminal case, according to people briefed on the matter. So far, Durham's two-year probe into the FBI's Russia investigation hasn't brought about the cases Republicans has hoped it would.
The grand jury subpoenas for documents came earlier this month after Durham charged Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann with lying to the FBI in a September 2016 meeting. During that meeting, Sussmann handed over data purporting to show links between the Trump Organization and Russia's Alfa Bank. That tip became part of the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election but the FBI ultimately couldn't find evidence of a link.
In seeking additional documents from Sussmann's former law firm, Perkins Coie, investigators from the special counsel's office appear to be sharpening their focus on the Democratic political machinery during the 2016 campaign and efforts to tie Trump to Russia.
Perkins Coie's clients in 2016 included the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The law firm also hired on the campaign's behalf a research company that commissioned the dossier from ex-British spy Christopher Steele that alleged that Trump was compromised by Russia.
Durham has already accessed reams of the law firm's records, such as billing records, meeting calendars and a log of documents that the firm protects under attorney-client privilege. Some of the newly sought-after documents have been guarded so far by attorney-client privilege.
An attorney for the law firm didn't respond to requests for comment.
Durham's new subpoenas could lead to a court fight over privileged information and draw more about the Clinton campaign into the open.
While working for Perkins Coie, Sussmann also represented Rodney Joffe, a cybersecurity expert referred to in Durham's indictment as "Tech Executive-1." In 2016, Joffe, who has not been previously identified, worked with researchers to collect internet data about the Trump Organization that Sussmann took to the FBI.
Durham's continued use of the federal grand jury in Washington, DC, signals that he could be interested in adding to Sussmann's charges or bringing cases against additional defendants.
Still, more than two years after being commissioned by then Attorney General William Barr to investigate whether federal authorities improperly targeted the Trump campaign, Durham has little to show for his efforts. His special counsel probe, which has lasted longer than Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, has so far brought only two lying charges against little-known figures, including the case against Sussmann, who has pleaded not guilty.
The results have underwhelmed Trump supporters who had hoped former top FBI and intelligence officials would be prosecuted for "spying" on Trump and his campaign.
Already the scope of Durham's probe has narrowed after Barr announced last year that investigators had found no wrongdoing by the CIA. Yet Durham has continued his investigation, largely in secrecy, working out of a non-descript office building near trendy Washington's Union Market.THIS, is CNN:
"no wrongdoing by the CIA. Yet Durham has continued his investigation, largely in secrecy, working out of a non-descript office building near trendy Washington's Union Market."
LOL, "trendy."
-
