Briefly Noted: Durham Has Interviewed John Podesta, Other Top Clinton Campaign Officials
Who knows what to think of this, except that to all appearances Durham is committed to doing a thorough job. The big question, of course, is whether these interviews—done by investigators/prosecutors, not in front of a Grand Jury—were the result of specific suspicions or were done more or less on speculation. By that last I mean, interviews done because the interviewee was in proximity to the suspected criminal activity or was a close associate of, for example, a person suspected of or charged with a crime. Sussmann is an obvious example, but there are lots more who haven’t been charged.
Another example: Rodney Joffe. Margot Cleveland has pointed out that, as confirmed by Durham, Joffe has steadfastly invoked his 5th amendment rights. In practical terms, that means that Joffe won’t be testifying on behalf of Sussmann because Durham isn’t giving Joffe immunity. That leaves Joffe still under the threat of indictment. At the end of the day—or maybe I should say, at the end of yesterday—all we know is that John Podesta is among the “high ranking HFA [Hillary for America] officials” who have been interviewed by Durham’s team and have said they didn’t know about Chris Steele. You can be sure their statements are being checked against a mountain of documentation and communication records for any discrepancies.
Wait and see.
https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/07/will-the-court-allow-special-counsel-john-durham-to-see-clinton-campaign-documents/
Follow the link for more discussion of developments in the Sussmann case--especially the ongoing dispute re attorney client privilege. Basically it comes down to this:
Team Clinton--because that's what we're really talking about, even though they're not parties to this case--is asserting that just about everyone remotely connected to the campaign was acting in some legal capacity and therefore large numbers of docs (~1000) that discuss their campaign activities are privileged, i.e., Durham can't see them.
While there are complexities (which Cleveland discusses) the basic idea of attorney client privilege is that it only applies to communications “that a client conveys to his attorney for the purpose of security for an opinion on law, legal services, or assistance in a legal proceeding.” Clinton is claiming that that's what Fusion GPS was doing (Cleveland discusses the rationale). Durham has strong arguments against--Fusion was engaged in a PR hit job, not in any legal capacity.
Why has Joffe been pleading the Fifth Amendment?
My guess is that he and his fellows violated his government contract's regulations forbidding him to snoop on individuals. Apparently, the US Government granted to Joffe and to his fellows extraordinary capabilities to study Internet communications. For sure, the US Government restricted very strictly the use of such capabilities.
Despite such restrictions, Joffe and his fellows snooped on Donald Trump and on his associates.
That is why Joffe is pleading the Fifth Amendment.