Recent PostsForum Rules
Next Topic Sign In to ReplyPrev Topic
Sussmann Trial Update
1. Author: Burner02Date: Sun, 5/22/2022, 3:04PM EST
Thought I would provide a few updates for the left. Through this past Fri, the five left leaning networks have reported zero minutes on the trial.

It is totally amazing that they are still providing top cover for lying Hillary.
2. Author: Burner02Date: Sun, 5/22/2022, 3:11PM EST
Former Top FBI Official Testifies Sussmann ‘100%’ Hid Ties To Clinton Campaign During 2016 Meeting

By Tim Pearce, May 20, 2022-DailyWire.com

Former FBI general counsel James Baker is “100% confident” that cybersecurity attorney Michael Sussmann told him during a 2016 meeting that Sussmann was representing himself only and hid his ties to the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.

Baker is a key witness in Sussmann’s trial over prosecutors’ allegation that Sussmann lied to the FBI about his motivations for requesting the September 2016 meeting with Baker. Sussmann is accused of hiding his clients, the Clinton campaign and tech executive Rodney Joffe, from Baker when Sussmann asked the FBI official to pass along false allegations of the Trump Organization keeping a backchannel with Russia’s Alfa-Bank during the 2016 meeting.

“Michael started to explain why he was there. He said he was not appearing before me on behalf of any particular client. In essence, in the meeting, he said, ‘I’m not here on behalf of any particular client.’ … I’m 100% confident that he said that in the meeting,” Baker said on Thursday, according to the Washington Examiner.

Baker said he “believed it and believed the statement was truthful” because Sussmann was a former colleague and friend. Baker said he probably would not have agreed to meet with Sussmann if he knew that Sussmann was acting on behalf of the Clinton Campaign.

“That would raise very serious questions, certainly in my mind, about the credibility of the source and the veracity of the info — heightening, in my mind, whether we were going to be played or pulled into the politics,” Baker said, according to the New York Post. “We were aware of and wary of being played – having the fact of our investigation being the thing to enable the press to report on something flawed or incomplete.”

The former FBI general counsel, who now works on Twitter’s legal team, said that reporters will sometimes use FBI investigations to report on allegations that the reporter cannot verify.

“If reporters learn that we are investigating something, and it is of interest to them, then yes, sometimes they will publish things, for sure,” Baker said, according to the Examiner. “There’s also a concern at the FBI … where we would be worried that sometimes reporters would want to report about the fact that the FBI was investigating something even if they did not have confidence in the underlying information. … They’re not reporting necessarily about the thing. They’re reporting about the FBI investigating the thing.”

3. Author: Burner02Date: Sun, 5/22/2022, 3:19PM EST
Top Clinton Campaign Official Robby Mook Says Hillary Clinton Approved Handing Alfa-Bank Claims To Media Despite Doubts

By Tim Pearce, May 20, 2022-DailyWire.com

Former top Hillary Clinton lieutenant Robby Mook did his old boss few favors in court Friday, testifying that Clinton knew the Alfa-Bank claims lacked solid evidence while also reading into evidence a Clinton tweet thought to be barred from admission into the trial.

Mook testified in a federal court in Washington, D.C., in the trial of cybersecurity attorney Michael Sussmann. Sussmann is accused of lying to a top FBI official during a September 2016 meeting in which he made false claims about a purported backchannel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa-Bank.

During the 2016 presidential election, Mook served as former Clinton’s campaign manager. Sussmann was then an attorney at Perkins Coie, which contracted with the Clinton campaign as its general counsel.

During his Friday testimony, Mook said that Clinton herself approved sharing the false claims against the Trump Organization and former President Donald Trump with the media, according to Fox News.

Mook said that at the time, the campaign knew the evidence against Trump was shaky, but campaign officials thought a reporter could investigate and potentially substantiate the claims. He said he discussed the issue at the time with Campaign Chairman John Podesta, Senior Policy Advisor Jake Sullivan, and Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri.

Mook also ran the plan by Clinton, who signed off pushing the collusion claims despite the relatively weak evidence. Mook said that he and other top campaign officials agreed not to alert the FBI to claims because of the shaky basis, however.

“I discussed it with Hillary as well,” Mook testified. “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.”

“She agreed,” he said.

The admission speaks to special counsel John Durham’s theory of the case, which posits that the false Alfa-Bank claims were pushed by the Clinton campaign in order to hurt her political opponent at the time, Trump. The theory continues that Sussmann lied to the FBI in order to spark an investigation that could make the Alfa-Bank story more palatable to the press

At another point in his testimony, Mook also read off an October 31, 2016, tweet from Clinton’s account featuring a statement from Sullivan, was at that time her senior policy adviser. The tweet and statement was touting a story from Slate that had come out earlier that day reporting on the alleged connection between the Trump Organization and Alfa-Bank.

“Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank,” Clinton said in the tweet. Mook testified that he did not know if Clinton drafted the tweet herself.

The Clinton tweet was thought to be excluded from the trial. Judge Christopher Cooper had blocked the tweet from coming in as evidence in pretrial arguments between prosecutors and defense attorneys. Cooper allowed the tweet into evidence on Friday, however, after Mook read it off to the jury.

Mook testified that the Slate story bolstered the campaign’s belief in the Alfa-Bank claims because they took the publication of the story to mean its details had been vetted by a news outlet.
4. Author: SunoverbeachDate: Sun, 5/22/2022, 10:48PM EST
What goes in dry and hard and exits soft and wet?
Bubble gum
5. Author: Burner02Date: Mon, 5/23/2022, 3:44PM EST
Sussmann trial: MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC ignore testimony that Clinton OK’d leaking of Trump-Russian allegations

By Brian Flood, May 23, 2022 - Fox News

Clinton's former campaign manager Robby Mook spilled the beans

MSNBC, ABC News, NBC News and CBS News all ignored Friday’s bombshell testimony in which former Hillary Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook testified Clinton approved the dissemination of materials to the media alleging a secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank, despite campaign officials not being "totally confident" in the legitimacy of the data.

"Left-wing media outlets shout from the rooftops that disinformation matters and is a threat to democracy. Unless, of course, it makes Democrats or the press look bad," radio host Jason Rantz told Fox News Digital.

The mainstream media has largely avoided covering the trial of ex-Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who has been charged with making a false statement to the FBI. He told former FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016 that he was not doing work "for any client" when he requested and attended a meeting where he presented data and white papers allegedly demonstrating a backchannel between the Trump Organization and the Kremlin-tied Alfa Bank.

MSNBC, ABC News, NBC News and CBS News have ignored the trial since it began on May 15 and continued the blackout after Friday’s stunning revelation.

Baker previously testified that the bureau investigated the data alleging a Trump connection to the Kremlin-linked bank, and found "there was nothing there." Mook was called to the stand by Sussmann’s defense, and during cross-examination he 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 the campaign was not totally confident in the legitimacy of the data but eventually admitted Clinton herself approved "the dissemination" of the information to the media.

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

MSNBC, ABC News, NBC News and CBS News didn’t report the news on air through Sunday night, according to a search of transcripts. None of the networks have mentioned the names "Mook" or "Sussmann" since the testimony.

Rantz called it "pathetic" that mainstream news organizations are so hypocritical. He feels ignoring Mook’s testimony isn’t the first time the media botched the story, as it liberal news outlets shouldn’t have reported what Clinton’s team provided ahead of the 2016 election in the first place.

"They didn't even bother to dig deep into the claims by campaign officials; they just ran with them," Rantz continued. "It was one of many examples of press release journalism -- just taking what they're told by the campaigns they support. How utterly pathetic."

Many of the outlets that have ignored the Sussmann trial spent years pushing the Russian collusion narrative before it fell apart. Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation concluded there was no evidence of conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian officials during the 2016 presidential election. Prior to Mueller declaring there was no proof of collusion, MSNBC and other outlets spent years hyping it up and painting Trump as being compromised by Russia.

DePauw University professor Jeffrey McCall said this is "a classic case of journalism of omission."

"This is an intentional ignoring of a legitimate news matter in order to support the ideological drift of the editors and producers. The establishment media are generally unwilling to report on the Durham probe and current legal developments because to do so would necessarily acknowledge the journalistic malpractice committed for two years while pushing the misguided Russia collusion narrative," McCall told Fox News Digital.

Observers have noticed the latest developments go uncovered, too.

"The Clinton campaign fabricated a completely false story about Trump having a secret server with a Russian bank," journalist Glenn Greenwald tweeted. "When major news outlets spread outright lies – not just one day, but repeatedly affirming them – they just stay silent and pretend it never happened when the proof emerges they lied."

Billionaire Elon Musk chimed in, writing "bet most people still don’t know that a Clinton campaign lawyer, using campaign funds, created an elaborate hoax about Trump and Russia."

"The HIllary Clinton campaign and DNC, with her approval, conducted a disinformation operation to falsely taint another candidate as having illicit ties to Russia, in one of the dirtiest political tricks in modern history. Worse than that, the disinformation operation froze an incoming administration for several years and provided pretext for a 'Resistance' movement that refused to accept the outcome of the election," Cornell Law School professor William A. Jacobson told Fox News Digital.

"This should be the biggest media story of the century, but most of the mainstream liberal media is staying away because they were complicit," Jacobson continued. "Hillary Clinton's fraudulent Russia narrative was parroted endlessly on major networks and cable news, and throughout digital media."
6. Author: MACSDate: Mon, 5/23/2022, 4:27PM EST
Trump was telling the truth... we wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on an investigation into crap they KNEW full well was made up.

And the left is too damn cowardly to admit it.
7. Author: Stogie1020Date: Mon, 5/23/2022, 5:00PM EST
MACS wrote:
Trump was telling the truth... we wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on an investigation into crap they KNEW full well was made up.

And the left is too damn cowardly to admit it.

Wait, I thought you became a Democrat..??..
8. Author: RayRDate: Mon, 5/23/2022, 5:40PM EST
$32,000,000 PISSED AWAY FOR NOTHING, ON A LIE!.
The Clinton crime family should pay it back!
9. Author: Burner02Date: Mon, 5/23/2022, 6:30PM EST
‘Should Be Held Fully Accountable’: Republicans Hammer Clinton For Peddling False Russia Collusion Claims

By Tim Pearce, May 23, 2022-DailyWire

GOP lawmakers hammered former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton after her former campaign manager revealed her central role in disseminating false claims about former President Donald Trump and Russia’s Alfa-Bank during the 2016 presidential election.

Court testimony in the trial of cybersecurity attorney Michael Sussmann revealed that Clinton personally approved the dissemination of later-debunked claims of a secret backchannel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa-Bank to the press. Clinton’s 2016 campaign manager, Robby Mook, said that the Clinton campaign’s evidence of the backchannel was dubious, but Clinton approved sending it to reporters anyway.

“Hillary Clinton and Jake Sullivan knew the Trump-Russia collusion dossier was false but pretended to play dumb with the American people,” Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) said. Sullivan, currently the White House national security adviser, worked on Clinton’s 2016 campaign as a senior policy adviser.

“Everyone involved in cooking up the false Trump-Russian collusion narrative should be held fully accountable — including Hillary Clinton,” she added.

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) said in a radio interview over the weekend that Mook’s testimony is a “major scandal” and has shown that Clinton’s involvement in the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion conspiracy theory is greater than previously known, according to The New York Post.

“They used individuals who had contracts with our Defense Department to mine this data and develop some kind of inference that Trump was colluding with Russia so that they could report that to the FBI [which could then] … report that to the American public as an October surprise,” Johnson said.

Special counsel John Durham has argued that Sussmann went to the FBI on behalf of the Clinton campaign to generate a federal investigation into Trump’s alleged connections to Alfa-Bank, and in the process, make the Alfa-Bank story more palatable to reporters. Sussmann, charged with lying to the FBI about representing the Clinton campaign during a 2016 meeting pitching the Alfa-Bank material, has claimed he did not attempt to hide his client despite texting then-FBI general counsel James Baker the day before the meeting requesting that he was not acting on behalf of anyone, according to Baker.

The Clinton campaign used server data gathered by tech executive Rodney Joffe, who had contracted with the federal government to advise it on cybersecurity, to evidence its claim of a backchannel. Both the FBI and CIA looked into the server data and dismissed it as any evidence of a secret backchannel.

“The fact that the Hillary Clinton campaign manufactured this entire Russian collusion hoax and the FBI … concluded that this is preposterous — it’s BS … And yet they set up the Mueller probe,” Johnson said. “Hillary Clinton on the issue of Alfa Bank said, ‘I just heard about this on the news.’ No! Their campaign planted it in the news, and, of course, those news outlets that had the story.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH), the ranking member on the House Judiciary Committee, hammered Clinton in a radio interview last week.

“You get [Fusion GPS co-founder] Glenn Simpson to peddle it to the press. You get Michael Sussmann, who’s working for you as your campaign lawyer, to take it to the FBI. And then you act like, oh, we don’t know where this came from,” Jordan said. “We were the ones supposedly peddling disinformation and making things up when in fact, it was them who did it all along. And frankly, the only thing we were kind of wrong about was it was a little bit worse than we even thought. Everyone was in on this.”
10. Author: Burner02Date: Mon, 5/23/2022, 6:38PM EST
Wow, more top cover from the left.


Sussmann trial: Washington Post defends Clinton, claims she didn’t trigger Trump-Russia probe


By Brian Flood, May 23, 2022-Fox News

Former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook testified Friday that Hillary Clinton approved of leaking Trump-Russia allegations to media

The Washington Post was accused of bias on Monday after publishing a piece that claimed there is "no evidence" Hillary Clinton triggered the Russian probe despite her former campaign manager testifying that she approved distributing materials alleging a secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank to the media, despite not being "totally confident" in the legitimacy of the data.

On Friday, ex-Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook testified that his former boss approved the move when grilled during the trial of ex-Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who has been charged with making a false statement to the FBI. Mook was called to the stand for testimony by Sussmann’s defense, and during cross-examination he 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 the campaign was not totally confident in the legitimacy of the data but eventually admitted Clinton herself approved "the dissemination" of the information to the media.

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

MSNBC, ABC, NBC and CBS are among the mainstream news outlets that have completely ignored the bombshell testimony, but Washington Post nation correspondent Phillip Bump took a different strategy and provided cover for Clinton.

The Post’s piece headlined, "Again: there’s no evidence Hillary Clinton triggered the Russian probe," began by criticizing a Wall Street Journal editorial board column that condemned the 2016 Democratic nominee for harming the country by pushing the narrative that Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia.

"The editorial is titled: ‘Hillary Clinton Did It,’" Bump wrote of the Journal’s piece. "A fiery, furious bit of rhetoric. Also rhetoric that is indefensible given the evidence. It is rhetoric aimed at scratching a long-frustrating itch rather than accurately informing readers."

Bump declared Mook’s testimony was the "trigger" for the editorial to be written before defending the 2016 presidential runner-up at all costs.

"Mook told the jury that Clinton had approved the leak of an allegation tying Donald Trump’s private business to a Russian bank as the election neared. This, the Journal argues, is what Clinton ‘did,’" Bump wrote. "The criminal trial centers on whether the attorney, Michael Sussmann, was working for the Clinton campaign when he brought the rumored digital link between Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization to the FBI and, if so, whether he failed to disclose that relationship to the bureau. Special counsel John Durham — appointed by Trump Attorney General William P. Barr to investigate the origins of the Russia probe, which so annoyed the then-president — appears to be hoping to bolster the idea elevated by the Journal: that Clinton was a primary trigger for allegations about Trump and Russia."

Bump informed Washington Post readers that Trump’s alleged ties to the Alfa bank were quickly debunked, and that nothing suspicious or election related was involved.

Bump went on to claim that "a community of fervent conspiracy theorists" thought Trump and Russia had some sort of strange relationship well before Clinton got involved.

"Why was there already so much chatter about Trump and Russia? Because so many things had emerged to draw attention to the unusual nature of the candidate’s approach to that country," Bump wrote before listing examples of Trump rumored ties to Russia.

Bump attempted to make the case that things including WikiLeaks publishing Democratic National Committee emails, George Will pondering why Trump wouldn’t release his taxes and ex-campaign manager Paul Manafort all helped the public believe there could have been more to the Trump-Russia story.

"Law enforcement also understood that Russia was continuing to try to influence the election, publishing a warning in early October about possible threats to state elections systems. By that point, a federal probe of possible campaign-Russia ties was already underway," Bump wrote.

Essentially, the Post’s national correspondent feels Clinton couldn’t have triggered the Russian probe, despite Mook’s damning testimony, because people were already curious about the collusion narrative.

"The Clinton campaign was following the conversation to undercut its opponent, not leading it," Bump wrote. "Put another way: Hillary Clinton didn’t do it."

The House Judiciary Committee’s Republicans are among the critics of the liberal newspaper’s framing.

"Can’t make up the bias sometimes," the House Judiciary GOP tweeted.
11. Author: Burner02Date: Mon, 5/23/2022, 6:47PM EST
Not from the trial but a very astute observation.



Emily Compagno blasts Robert Mueller following Clinton bombshell: His team should be 'extremely embarrassed'

Fox News Staff, May 23, 2022

Former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook testified Friday that Hillary Clinton approved of leaking Trump-Russia allegations to media.

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 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.

EMILY COMPAGNO: They used 19 special prosecutors, more than 40 FBI agents. We footed that entire bill. They produced three separate reports that basically said, 'well, we can't prove a connection between Trump and Russia, but we can't disprove it.' All it would have taken is five minutes spent in a room with this guy who could have said, ‘yes, actually, it was greenlit by Hillary Clinton. Actually, yes. There was not one modicum of truth to this.’

And instead, this really important person is the one who approved of and spearheaded it being leaked to the media. And listen, if I was one of the attorneys on Mueller's team, I would not only be extremely embarrassed right now, but I would have a lot of questions. Because either they did know and it didn't make it into the report, or they didn't know. And either of those answers are absolutely unacceptable.
12. Author: HockeyDadDate: Mon, 5/23/2022, 8:28PM EST
I am shocked to hear the Clinton campaign weaponized Obama’s FBI against Trump.
13. Author: SunoverbeachDate: Mon, 5/23/2022, 10:06PM EST
How many rabbits does it take to keep warm?
It depends on how big their skins are
14. Author: MACSDate: Mon, 5/23/2022, 10:36PM EST
Stogie1020 wrote:
Wait, I thought you became a Democrat..??..


That was some serious disinformation... perpetrated by democrats.
15. Author: Mike3316Date: Mon, 5/23/2022, 10:43PM EST
I'm pretty sure there IS no trial going on .... otherwise the MSM would be all over it!!! If its not on CNN/MSNBheehaw/ABC/NBC/CBS then it MUST be Russian disinformation. Think
16. Author: ZRX1200Date: Mon, 5/23/2022, 10:53PM EST
MACS isn’t a democrat, but he did pay to have his dog pee on a Russian hooker at the dog park.
17. Author: Mr. JonesDate: Tue, 5/24/2022, 7:29AM EST
I'm pretty sure ...

In fact I am positive....


Nothing will come of this at all...

They have TEFLON SKIN...BOTH...
NOTHING STICKS ...

PLUS, I AM UNDER THEIR PROTECTION FROM FELON MURDERS AT THE FBI-SSG...SINCE I SAVED THEIR LIVES IN THE 2015?16? ON A PRIMARY SEASON GREYHOUND BUS 1/4 MILE AWAY FROM THE LANCASTER, PA AIRPORT....

HOW ?? YOU ASK....

RESEARCH MY POSTS NEAR APRIL ? MAY OF 2015?2016?
CANT REMEMBER EXACT YEAR...
18. Author: Speyside2Date: Tue, 5/24/2022, 7:59AM EST
Burner, good to see you. You are the rock of the Cbid political forum!
19. Author: Burner02Date: Tue, 5/24/2022, 9:06AM EST
HockeyDad wrote:
I am shocked to hear the Clinton campaign weaponized Obama’s FBI against Trump.




It is amazing that approximately half of our country allowed themselves to be duped over a period of 4-5 year by the left leaning media. What is even more amazing to me is that at least 25% of those same individuals are still being duped by the same media outlets.
20. Author: Burner02Date: Tue, 5/24/2022, 9:13AM EST
Speyside2 wrote:
Burner, good to see you. You are the rock of the Cbid political forum!




Ah, a little sarcasm this morning. Or maybe a lot.

I’m just doing my little part to ensure the left has a taste of actual news.

21. Author: Speyside2Date: Tue, 5/24/2022, 10:34AM EST
Actually just a little, my intent was to make you laugh.
22. Author: Burner02Date: Tue, 5/24/2022, 11:18AM EST
Mission accomplished.
23. Author: ZRX1200Date: Tue, 5/24/2022, 1:56PM EST
I’m not seeing this on my TV or news feed so I’m pretty sure none of this happened….::
24. Author: Burner02Date: Tue, 5/24/2022, 5:04PM EST
FBI leadership was 'fired up' about alleged secret channel between Trump-Russian bank: Sussmann trial
,
By Brooke Singman, Jake Gibson, David Spunt, May 24. 2022-Fox News

One agent said opening the Trump-Russia investigation was 'not an option—we must do it'

WASHINGTON, DC – FBI leadership, including then-Director James Comey, was "fired up" about the alleged covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank in the days after Michael Sussmann brought the allegations to the bureau, according to testimony and documents revealed in the trial.

Sussmann, on Sept. 19, 2016, set up a meeting with then-FBI General Counsel James Baker where he brought two thumb drives of data and white papers alleging the Trump Organization was using a secret back channel to communicate with Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank in the weeks leading up to the presidential election.

Sussmann is charged with making a false statement to the FBI. During that meeting, Sussmann allegedly told Baker he was not bringing the allegations on behalf of any specific client, but rather as a citizen concerned with national security. Durham’s team alleges they have evidence that Sussmann later billed Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign for his FBI meeting.

Baker passed the thumb drives and white papers along to the head of the bureau’s counterintelligence division, Bill Priestap. An investigation was formally opened at first in the FBI’s cyber division.

Messages submitted as evidence in the trial this week between a supervisory agent for the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe, also known as "Crossfire Hurricane," Joe Pientka, and FBI Special Agent Curtis Heide revealed that the top brass of the FBI called for an investigation into the data.

"People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server," Pientka messaged Heide. "Did you guys open a case? Reach out and put tools on?"

Multiple current and former FBI officials during the Sussmann trial testified that "the 7th floor" was a reference to FBI leadership, as that is where the offices of the director and deputy director are located at FBI headquarters.

Pientka added: "If not I will call Dan as Priestap says its not an option—we must do it."

Officials said the investigation into the data "must" take place in the counterintelligence division, following a review by the FBI’s cyber division, which determined there was no cyber "equity" and that the conclusions that were drawn in the white papers were erroneous.

"Roger," Heide replied. "We are opening a CI [counterintelligence] case today."

Baker, in testimony last week, said he immediately notified Priestap, and later, briefed then-FBI Director James Comey and then-FBI Deputy Director Andy McCabe following his meeting with Sussmann.

"The FBI was already conducting an investigation into alleged connections between the Trump campaign and Russians at this point in time, so that was a matter of great concern to all of us," Baker said.

"Here was another type of information between Trump and Russia that had come to me," Baker said, describing it as "concerning" and "time sensitive."

"It seemed to me of great urgency and great seriousness that I would want to make my bosses aware of this information," Baker said. "I think they were quite concerned about it."

"Trump, at the time, was a candidate for office of the president of the United States, so, the FBI is investigating allegations related to his potential interactions, and those people on his campaign, with the government of the Russian Federation," Baker said.

He added: "And that was of high, high importance to the FBI at this point in time."

But on Tuesday, Heide testified that after weeks of investigating, the FBI was "unable to substantiate any of the allegations in the white paper."

FBI Special Agent Scott Hellman, last week, testified that the data revealing the alleged covert communications channel between Trump and Russia that Sussmann brought to the FBI turned out to be untrue, and said he did not agree with the narrative.

Hellman testified that whoever drafted the narrative describing the DNS data was "5150," and clarified on the stand that meant he believed the individual who came to the conclusions was "was suffering from some mental disability."

And Baker testified last week that the FBI's investigation "did not reveal there was some kind of surreptitious communications channel."

"We concluded there was no substance. We couldn’t confirm it. We could not confirm there was a surreptitious communications channel," Baker said, noting the investigation was "several weeks, maybe a month, maybe a month and a half."

"There was nothing there," he said
25. Author: SunoverbeachDate: Tue, 5/24/2022, 9:49PM EST
What do you call Snoop Dogg in a hot air balloon?
Higher than usual
26. Author: ZRX1200Date: Wed, 5/25/2022, 10:55AM EST
We were all excited, now though we don’t like prison, and f*** America.

*ZRX1200 translator app*
27. Author: burning_sticksDate: Wed, 5/25/2022, 1:46PM EST
Between the judge and the jury, I'm afraid the fix is already in on this one.
28. Author: SunoverbeachDate: Wed, 5/25/2022, 10:05PM EST
What do you call an awful thief named Tom who goes around scaring kids and the elderly?
Tom.
29. Author: Burner02Date: Thu, 5/26/2022, 6:12AM EST
Sussmann may testify in trial charging that he lied to FBI, pending judge's ruling

By Brooke Singman, Jake Gibson, David Spunt, May 25, 2022-Fox News

Sussmann's attorneys claimed the FBI knew he was working for a client when he delivered the Trump-Alfa Bank allegations

Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann could testify in his own defense beginning Thursday, his attorneys said, should the judge rule to bar government prosecutors from questioning him about pre-indictment negotiations between his counsel and Special Counsel John Durham’s office.

The defense filed a motion under seal Tuesday night, which requests that if Sussmann were to testify, the judge would rule to block the government from asking him questions during cross-examination about materials submitted to the government before charges against him were filed.

The materials in question were likely submitted to persuade the government not to move forward with its case, and its indictment of Sussmann.

U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper is set to decide on that motion by Thursday morning.

Sussmann defense attorney Sean Berkowitz said Sussmann’s decision on whether to testify depends on Cooper’s ruling.

Should Sussmann testify, the government and defense will likely begin delivering their closing arguments next Tuesday. If Sussman does not testify, closings could be delivered this week.

Sussmann’s attorneys on Wednesday attempted to poke holes in Durham’s charge by bringing witnesses to the stand to testify in his defense.

Tashina Gauhar, a former official in the deputy attorney general’s office in 2016 and 2017, was the first defense witness called to the stand Wednesday.

Gauhar was asked about a meeting with several senior FBI and DOJ officials on March 6, 2017, which served as a briefing for then-Acting Attorney General Dana Boente about the Trump-Russia investigation.

Gauhar testified that then-FBI Deputy Director Andy McCabe was present for the meeting, as well as then-Assistant Director for the FBI’s counterintelligence division Bill Priestap, and his deputy, Peter Strzok. From the Justice Department, Boente, Gauhar and a senior official from the Justice Department’s national security division Mary McCord, as well as a number of other top staffers attended the meeting.

Defense attorneys showed the jury notes they say Gauhar took during that March 2017 meeting.

Gauhar testified that she did not remember the meeting, but said the notes appeared to be her own.

The notes showed that an "attorney" brought the "Alfa" matter to the FBI on "behalf of his client."

Durham has charged Sussmann with making a false statement to the FBI when he met with then-FBI General Counsel James Baker on Sept. 19, 2016. During that meeting, Sussmann brought two thumb drives and white papers which alleged a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank. Sussmann allegedly told Baker that he was not bringing the information on behalf of any client, but rather as a citizen concerned with national security.

Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.

The defense also called Mary McCord, a former career prosecutor at the Justice Department. She served as the assistant attorney general for national security in 2017.

McCord testified Wednesday that she remembered being at the March 6, 2017 meeting, and recalled that McCabe briefed Boente on the Trump-Alfa Bank allegations.

McCord also took notes during that meeting, which state that the allegations came to the FBI from an "attorney" who "brought to Jim Baker and did not say who client was."

Sussmann’s defense stressed to the jury that these notes show that the FBI knew, and was telling their DOJ counterparts, that Sussmann came to Baker on behalf of a client, and that he did not lie to Baker, and that he did not say he was not there on behalf of any client.

The claims are in direct conflict with the testimony of James Baker who took the stand as a government witness last week. Baker testified that Sussmann told him during the Sept. 19, 2016, meeting that he was not there on behalf of any client.

The government also brought into evidence notes from Priestap, who met with Baker after the Sussmann meeting, and took notes that Sussmann was not bringing the allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client.

One key piece of evidence for the government’s case against Sussmann is a text message from Sussmann to Baker on the eve of their meeting, in which Durham’s team alleges Sussmann put his "lie in writing."

The text message stated: "Jim — it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss," the text message stated, according to Durham. "Do you have availability for a short meeting tomorrow? I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau. Thanks."

Baker replied, "OK. I will find a time. What might work for you?"

Sussmann replied: "Any time but lunchtime you name it."

"2:00pm in my office? Do you have a badge or do you need help getting into the building?" Baker responded.

"I have a badge. Please remind me of your room #," Sussmann said.

The government, before resting Wednesday morning, showed the jury billing records that they say prove Sussmann billed the Clinton campaign for his FBI meeting.

On one of Sussmann’s bills, dated Sept. 19, 2016, the Clinton campaign is listed as the client, the time is listed as 3.3 hours, and the memo states: "work and communications regarding confidential project." Other testimony revealed Sussmann charged approximately $800 per hour.

Durham’s team also produced a receipt from a Staples near Perkins Coie in Washington, D.C., from Sept. 13, 2016. On the receipt was a two pack of flash drives.

The prosecution alleged the receipt was included in an expense report from Sussmann, and the billing code on the report connects the expense to the Clinton campaign as the client.

But during cross-examination of the government’s summary witness Kori Arsenault, a paralegal with Durham’s office, defense attorney Michael Bosworth noted that during meetings Sussmann had at the FBI in years prior, he would specifically make reference to the FBI in the bill's "memo" section.

Bosworth noted that the Sept. 19, 2016, bill only specifies "work and communication regarding confidential project."

"There’s no reference to the FBI in that entry is there?" Bosworth asked Arsenault.

"There is not," Arsenault answered.

The defense also brought two character witnesses to testify in defense of Sussmann Wednesday afternoon.

30. Author: Burner02Date: Thu, 5/26/2022, 9:09AM EST
Change in plans, Sussmann will not testify.
31. Author: Burner02Date: Fri, 5/27/2022, 3:19PM EST
Michael Sussmann Trial Goes To Jury After Former Clinton Attorney Declines To Testify

By Tim Pearce, May 27, 2022-DailyWire

Testimony in the case of former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann wrapped up Friday after the defendant decided against taking the stand.

Special counsel John Durham’s team of prosecutors and Sussmann’s defense team made closing arguments on Friday morning before Judge Christopher Cooper handed the case over to the jury for deliberation. Sussmann is charged with one count of lying to the FBI during a September 2016 meeting with then-FBI general counsel James Baker.

Prosecutors told the jury that the evidence of Sussmann’s guilt is “overwhelming,” according to Politico.

“The defendant knew that he had to hide his clients if there was any chance of getting his allegations into the FBI,” assistant special counsel Jonathan Algor said. “It wasn’t about national security. It was about promoting opposition research against the opposition candidate Donald Trump.”

“There are sometimes close cases,” prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis added. “This is not even close to a close case.”

Defense attorneys portrayed Sussmann as a victim and said prosecutors were manipulating facts to make Sussmann appear guilty of a crime he never committed.

“The special counsel’s office bought a snow-making machine and blew that over the lawn, and they want you to think it snowed,” defense attorney Sean Berkowitz said, according to Fox News. The attorney described the prosecution’s case as “misdirection” and “smoke and mirrors.”

Berkowitz said Sussmann is a “serious national security lawyer who received what he believed to be credible data from a world-leading DNS expert,” referring to tech executive Rodney Joffe, who was one of Sussmann’s clients at the time of the 2016 meeting.

Sussmann is alleged to have lied to Baker in 2016 about representing the Clinton campaign and Joffe during their meeting over later-debunked claims that the Trump Organization was keeping a backchannel with Russia’s Alfa-Bank.

The charge itself is over the narrow question of whether Sussmann lied in the meeting itself. During the trial, prosecutors presented evidence from before and after the meeting showing and suggesting that Sussmann presented himself to Baker as a concerned citizen, not as operating on behalf of Clinton’s 2016 campaign for president.

The day before the meeting, Sussmann sent Baker a text requesting a meeting with him over “sensitive” material he wished to show the bureau.

“Jim — it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss. Do you have availability for a short meeting tomorrow? I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau. Thanks,” Sussmann’s text says, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Baker responded: “Ok. I will find a time. What might work for you?”

Baker did not take contemporaneous notes during the meeting, though he testified that he is “100%” positive Sussmann continued to characterize himself as a concerned citizen. Baker met with two FBI officials after the meeting with Sussmann, and notes from each say that, in Baker’s recollection, Sussmann presented the Alfa-Bank data on behalf of himself only.


32. Author: Mr. JonesDate: Fri, 5/27/2022, 8:25PM EST
Sussman will fry

Clinton's will not
33. Author: Mr. JonesDate: Fri, 5/27/2022, 8:28PM EST
Is this JAMES BAKER
THE INFAMOUS REAGAN JAMES BAKER?
THE BOHEMIAN GROVE FESTIVAL BUTT BOYEEE WorSHIPPER OF THE GREAT OWL?
And people believe him?

All's I know, is when this James Baker kicks the bucket...
Party Reagan better go into major global hiding because he hates her guys and put a contract out on her...

alledgedly
34. Author: Mr. JonesDate: Fri, 5/27/2022, 8:29PM EST
Patty Reagan
35. Author: Mr. JonesDate: Fri, 5/27/2022, 8:29PM EST
Hates her guts
36. Author: Stogie1020Date: Tue, 5/31/2022, 1:49PM EST
Not guilty...

Geez, the guy puts it in writing that he is not working on behalf of a client (text message) and then bills the campaign, but the jury acquitted him.
37. Author: zitotczitoDate: Tue, 5/31/2022, 2:29PM EST
Stogie1020 wrote:
Not guilty...

Geez, the guy puts it in writing that he is not working on behalf of a client (text message) and then bills the campaign, but the jury acquitted him.


What od facts have anything to do with this. The trial was in D.C. and the jury was virtually all Democrat and some Hillary supporters. Now we all know for a fact that many Democrats love murder, crime, racism and lying. You did not really believe that Democrats have any sort of integrity.

This was a "Not Guilty" verdict before the trial even started.

There are so many vile Democrats it is getting very hard to identify the few reasonable ones.
38. Author: BrewhaDate: Tue, 5/31/2022, 2:47PM EST
zitotczito wrote:
What od facts have anything to do with this. The trial was in D.C. and the jury was virtually all Democrat and some Hillary supporters. Now we all know for a fact that many Democrats love murder, crime, racism and lying. You did not really believe that Democrats have any sort of integrity.

This was a "Not Guilty" verdict before the trial even started.

There are so many vile Democrats it is getting very hard to identify the few reasonable ones.

It's fair to say that there is a lot of correction in government - but let's not suggest the it is only one side of the house.

What, did you think Donald J Trump was an alter boy?
39. Author: zitotczitoDate: Tue, 5/31/2022, 3:15PM EST
Brewha wrote:
It's fair to say that there is a lot of correction in government - but let's not suggest the it is only one side of the house.

What, did you think Donald J Trump was an alter boy?


I agree that there is corruption on both sides and also whoever is in charge at the time takes care of their own. I also agree that President Trump was not anything close to an altar boy but I did like his policies for the most part.

My point is that I was hoping (.0001% chance) that the jury would show some integrity but alas that was not to be.

If I were to commit a crime as a Republican and go before a jury of Republican members, they would acquit, or convict based on the facts. If I go before a jury of Democrat members, they will convict me solely because I am Republican regardless of the facts.
40. Author: Burner02Date: Tue, 5/31/2022, 3:38PM EST
Jury Clears Former Clinton Attorney Michael Sussmann Of Lying To FBI

By Tim Pearce, May 31, 2022-DailyWire

A Washington, D.C., jury acquitted former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann of lying to the FBI on Tuesday in the first legal test of special counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Trump/Russia collusion conspiracy theory.

Sussmann was charged with lying to the FBI during a September 2016 meeting with former FBI general counsel James Baker. Sussmann pleaded not guilty to the charges, arguing that he never lied to the FBI, and even if he did, the lie did not impact the FBI’s operations at all. Sussmann decided last week against testifying in his own defense.

Durham released a statement after the verdict, saying, “While we are disappointed in the outcome, we respect the jury’s decision and thank them for their service. I also want to recognize and thank the investigators and the prosecution team for their dedicated efforts in seeking truth and justice in this case.”

Durham alleged in Sussmann’s charging documents that the cybersecurity attorney intentionally misrepresented himself to gain an audience with Baker. Sussmann told the then-FBI lawyer that he was coming to the bureau as a good citizen, when in reality Sussmann was passing shaky opposition research on behalf of his clients: the Clinton campaign and tech executive Rodney Joffe.

Sussmann gave Baker later debunked evidence of a secret backchannel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank. The FBI agents tasked with looking into the matter dismissed the data and Sussmann’s claims within a matter of days of investigating the probe.

As many as three donors to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sat on the jury, including one who also donated to Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Judge Christopher Cooper overruled objections from prosecutors to sit one of the Clinton donors after the man said he would “strive for impartiality as best I can.” It was not immediately clear whether the jurors in question took part in deciding the case or sat as alternates.

Prosecutors pushed Cooper to remove another juror from the panel after she revealed that her high school daughter participates on the same crew team as Sussmann’s daughter. The juror said she was unaware of the connection during jury selection, and Cooper said her willingness to cooperate evidenced how serious she took her responsibilities as a juror.

Baker said during testimony that he is “100% confident” that Sussmann hid his clients during their September 19, 2016 meeting. Sussmann’s defense attorneys pointed out that Baker has made several conflicting statements about his recollection of the meeting before, however.

The charge in the indictment focuses narrowly on whether or not Sussmann lied to the FBI during the meeting with Baker, not whether Sussmann lied to Baker at all. A text Sussmann sent Baker the night before the meeting that Durham obtained after charging Sussmann shows the Clinton campaign attorney telling Baker that: “I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau.”

After the meeting with Sussmann, Baker passed Sussmann’s information along to other FBI officials. Those officials wrote in contemporaneous notes in their meetings with Baker that Sussmann had represented himself to Baker as a concerned citizen, according to the FBI attorney.

Durham’s team of prosecutors presented billing statements that Sussmann had sent to the 2016 Clinton campaign for work he did the day of his meeting with Baker on a campaign “confidential project.” Sussmann was involved in a campaign effort to get the Alfa-Bank allegations into the press. Around the same time he was organizing the meeting with Baker, Sussmann was also shopping the Alfa-Bank evidence to a reporter at The New York Times.

Sussmann’s defense attorneys attempted to undercut prosecutors’ claims aboout the billing statement by pointing out that it does not detail exactly what Sussmann was doing or reference the FBI.

One of the FBI agents who investigated Sussmann’s purported evidence of an Alfa-Bank backchannel told jurors last week that the FBI’s top brass had claimed that the Sussmann’s data came from the Department of Justice, not the Clinton campaign lawyer. Heide and FBI agent Allison Sands initiated the investigation into the Alfa-Bank claims citing a “referral” from the Justice Department, according to electronic communications viewed by the jury.

41. Author: BrewhaDate: Tue, 5/31/2022, 3:39PM EST
^#39

Yeah, its like there aint no more justice in the world.....
42. Author: Burner02Date: Tue, 5/31/2022, 3:47PM EST
Michael Sussmann's not guilty verdict wasn't a surprise. Here's why

Opinion by Andrew McCarthy, May 31, 2022-Fox News

Sussman's trial was complicated by what happened between FBI headquarters and agents in the field

The acquittal of Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann by a Washington, D.C., jury comes as no surprise. In a false-statements case, the government has to prove that the statement in question was both false and material. Prosecutors had problems on both scores, especially the latter.

On falsity, the government must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that an untrue statement was made. Here, although prosecutors had a text message – a statement, directly from Sussmann, in which he falsely claimed he was not representing any client in purveying to the FBI derogatory information about Donald Trump. But that is not how the case was indicted.

Special counsel John Durham did not have the text message when the charge was filed in September 2021, flush up against the statute of limitations. Consequently, in March 2022, when he obtained a copy of the text from James Baker (the FBI’s former general counsel who received the text from Sussmann), Durham could not go back to the grand jury to add a new charge or substantially change the indictment.

That meant the jury could not rely on the text itself to find the false statement. Instead, it had to find what was charged in the indictment, namely, that Sussmann had made the false statement at the meeting with Baker the day after the text message.

The proof of this was not nearly as strong: It was a one-on-one meeting over five years ago, there was no recording or contemporaneous note-taking, and Baker’s accounts of what was said have varied over time. The text message before the meeting, coupled with the notes of FBI officials with whom Baker spoke immediately after the meeting, were evidence that Sussmann probably denied during the meeting that he was representing a client. But it was no sure thing.

More of a problem for prosecutors was materiality – i.e., evidence that the false statement made a difference in how investigators handled the information.

Durham’s case was badly damaged by significant evidence that the FBI knew (a) Sussmann was a top Democratic lawyer, and (b) if he was peddling anti-Trump information just six weeks before Election Day, he was doing so out of partisan motivations.

This was illustrated by the fact that FBI headquarters concealed Sussmann’s identity as the source of the information – i.e., the Internet data conveyed to Baker, which was falsely claimed to prove that then-candidate Donald Trump had established a communications back channel with the Kremlin through servers at Russia’s Alfa Bank. This was deeply frustrating to the Chicago cybercrime agents. Any good investigator wants to know where information comes from; the motivation of the source is often a good barometer of the reliability of information.

In addition, FBI headquarters directed that agents should open a counterintelligence investigation based on the Alfa Bank information, even though the agents had quickly determined there was no validity to the back communications channel claim. This enabled defense lawyers to argue that any statements Sussmann may have made about whom he was representing were immaterial – the FBI was determined to probe the Alfa Bank data regardless.

Even worse, the FBI itself inserted a false statement in its investigation-opening documentations, ludicrously asserting that the information about Alfa Bank had come, not from Sussmann, but from the Department of Justice.

Sussmann’s counsel were thus able to argue to the jury that the FBI agents who tried to investigate the Alfa Bank lead were misled by their own bosses in Washington, not by a well-known Democratic lawyer.

It is ironic that prosecutors could convincingly prove a defendant made a false statement to the FBI and yet lose a case because of the FBI’s own machinations. But that is what happened.

43. Author: SunoverbeachDate: Tue, 5/31/2022, 8:58PM EST
What do you call someone dressed as a clown who falls down the stairs?
An ambulance.
44. Author: RayRDate: Wed, 6/1/2022, 8:37AM EST
burning_sticks wrote:
Between the judge and the jury, I'm afraid the fix is already in on this one.


True True...the trial was rigged with Clinton Crime Family money and supporters.
45. Author: SunoverbeachDate: Wed, 6/1/2022, 9:25PM EST
I used to be a banker …
But I lost interest.
46. Author: Burner02Date: Thu, 6/2/2022, 8:11AM EST
I wonder how long it will take for the Clinton camp to label Robby Mook a lier.

If I were Robby, I would be checking 6 from here on.
47. Author: RayRDate: Thu, 6/2/2022, 9:40AM EST
Yup...the Clinton syndicate might hire a wet boy and Mook could end up sleeping with the fishes. 🐟☠️⚰️🐟☠️⚰️🐟☠️⚰️🐟

Fears Mount for Robby Mook after Exposing Hillary Clinton's Russia Hoax

23rd May 2022

Quote:
Fears are starting to mount for the safety of Robby Mook after the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign manager gave a bombshell testimony exposing his former boss last week. On Friday, Mook testified under oath that Hillary Clinton approved the Russia Hoax and ordered her team to spread it in the media. Mook said that Clinton wanted the hoax, which falsely linked President Donald Trump to Russia's Alfa Bank, to be pushed to the media even though her campaign doubted the information. The news comes after years of claims from the Left that Russia was working with President Trump to steal the election from Hillary Clinton.
On Friday, one of Clinton's inner circle finally went on the record to confirm Hillary was behind the hoax. However, many are now warning that Mook may be in danger after his explosive testimony.

More...

https://neonnettle.com/news/19136-fears-mount-for-robby-mook-after-exposing-hillary-clinton-s-russia-hoax
48. Author: Burner02Date: Thu, 6/2/2022, 1:05PM EST
Did not take long.
49. Author: Mr. JonesDate: Thu, 6/2/2022, 8:47PM EST
Mookie better watch his 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12

A lot...
50. Author: SunoverbeachDate: Thu, 6/2/2022, 10:38PM EST
What do you call a cat with no legs?
A cat.
Sign In to Reply
Next TopicJump to TopPrev Topic