John Durham filed his reply to Michael Sussmann’s motion to dismiss the complaint. It shouldn’t be a big deal, and it’s mostly 16 pages of discussion of well known legal principles. Really no new revelations. Two lawyers sum it up:
Ryan M made an interesting discovery, which illustrates the complexity of the Russia Hoax conspiracy, and also sheds light on what’s been taking Durham so long. What Ryan M discusses is the sort of the thing no investigator can simply pass over—it has to be followed out, and that takes time. Especially because in the Russia Hoax one thing leads to another—and another.
What I’m going to do is paste in Ryan M’s thread, which comes in two parts:
And here is an important piece better served in an article with wide publication:
1) Mikey Dickerson was working with Podesta prior to the election, and was also a Fusion GPS contractor. 2) He was later involved in the Jones investigation, working with Joffe. 3) He was implicated in a fake Russian twitter bot false flag operation in 2017 - with funds coming through Jones’ TDIP..leading to an obvious question of the authenticity of the fake Russian twitter bots in 2016. 4) What does this guy know?
For reference -
Cont.
Callback to the New Yorker article for “Paul” and “Leto” who appear to have been unmasked as Mikey Dickerson and Matt Weaver - newyorker.com/magazine/2018/…
An examination of long-ignored records by RealClearInvestigations, however, shows that Halper has added to the mystery by appearing to consistently misrepresent his background and experience on resumes. There is, for example, no public evidence for his claim, on a resume he submitted to the Ford White House, that he was class president at Stanford University in 1967, or a Fulbright scholar. Nor is there any for the claim on another resume that he held the prestigious position in the Ford administration listed.
Halper declined to speak with RCI when asked for an interview in person at his Virginia home. He also declined to respond to a letter from this reporter subsequently sent to his attorney, inquiring about discrepancies documented in this article. <<<
>>> Quote:
But their interactions with Halper were off-putting. “[Halper] was like a guy who was pretending to be a Republican, but he really was not on our team at all,” Ledeen said. “He was on Stef Halper’s team.” Michael Ledeen added, “He was unreliable … a very murky person.” <<<
>>> Quote:
Richard Perle: “He was the sort of person who would befriend people with ulterior motives." <<<
>>> Quote:
But Halper rose from the ashes almost immediately. Still working at Cambridge, he began a lucrative side gig in 2012 writing research papers for the Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment. Ultimately he would earn more than $1 million over the next few years for foreign policy studies that appear to have made little impact until another IG report cited them as evidence of deep problems at ONA. The 2019 report notes that the cost basis for a study of potential Russian-Chinese collaboration against the U.S. included travel to Moscow and Beijing where Halper would interview key players. “None of the 851 footnotes” in that study, the IG found, “attributed source material to an interview conducted by Professor Halper.”
Halper was awarded his largest ONA contract – $411,575 for two studies on the Chinese economy – on September 26, 2016. At that same time, he was also working for the FBI. How he rekindled that relationship remains a mystery. Halper reported to the FBI after meeting with two men affiliated with the Trump campaign who were invited to events at Cambridge: George Papadopoulos, whose supposed knowledge of Russian “dirt” on Hillary Clinton was cited as the cause for initiating the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign, and Carter Page, whose Russian business dealings led the Department of Justice to surveil him even though he had assisted the FBI in an earlier investigation.
It’s been widely speculated the ONA was being used as a cutout for intelligence services to pay informants, as well as for other dubious services. <<<
How about THEM apples?
What is significant is the power held by people who know someone's credentials are fake over the person faking the credentials. They can ruin their career at any time, much like a spy who recruits a dimwitted asset who filches some insignificant documents; the spy now own that asset, because they can burn him anytime the like.
Halper was similarly putty in the hands of whomever was running him, if they knew his creds were exaggerated.
This is a huge reason not to trust anything Halper says or does, until his dirty secrets are out in the open, and even then I'd count my silverware if he's in the room with me.
He also reminds me of le Carre's sociopathic Magnus Pym in his novel "A Perfect Spy."
As an aside:
From a Durham Motion today:
>> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FNCt3v3X0AArLk8?format=jpg&name=medium <<
WTF????
How does Ukraine fit into the Sussmann trial? What does Durham know that we don't?
Looks like another shoe is about to drop, and it could be a big one.
Any ideas what he's alluding to?
One more teaser:
>> https://twitter.com/Heminator/status/1501195938848817158 <<
>>>Quote:
An examination of long-ignored records by RealClearInvestigations, however, shows that Halper has added to the mystery by appearing to consistently misrepresent his background and experience on resumes. There is, for example, no public evidence for his claim, on a resume he submitted to the Ford White House, that he was class president at Stanford University in 1967, or a Fulbright scholar. Nor is there any for the claim on another resume that he held the prestigious position in the Ford administration listed.
Halper declined to speak with RCI when asked for an interview in person at his Virginia home. He also declined to respond to a letter from this reporter subsequently sent to his attorney, inquiring about discrepancies documented in this article. <<<
>>> Quote:
But their interactions with Halper were off-putting. “[Halper] was like a guy who was pretending to be a Republican, but he really was not on our team at all,” Ledeen said. “He was on Stef Halper’s team.” Michael Ledeen added, “He was unreliable … a very murky person.” <<<
>>> Quote:
Richard Perle: “He was the sort of person who would befriend people with ulterior motives." <<<
>>> Quote:
But Halper rose from the ashes almost immediately. Still working at Cambridge, he began a lucrative side gig in 2012 writing research papers for the Department of Defense’s Office of Net Assessment. Ultimately he would earn more than $1 million over the next few years for foreign policy studies that appear to have made little impact until another IG report cited them as evidence of deep problems at ONA. The 2019 report notes that the cost basis for a study of potential Russian-Chinese collaboration against the U.S. included travel to Moscow and Beijing where Halper would interview key players. “None of the 851 footnotes” in that study, the IG found, “attributed source material to an interview conducted by Professor Halper.”
Halper was awarded his largest ONA contract – $411,575 for two studies on the Chinese economy – on September 26, 2016. At that same time, he was also working for the FBI. How he rekindled that relationship remains a mystery. Halper reported to the FBI after meeting with two men affiliated with the Trump campaign who were invited to events at Cambridge: George Papadopoulos, whose supposed knowledge of Russian “dirt” on Hillary Clinton was cited as the cause for initiating the FBI’s investigation of the Trump campaign, and Carter Page, whose Russian business dealings led the Department of Justice to surveil him even though he had assisted the FBI in an earlier investigation.
It’s been widely speculated the ONA was being used as a cutout for intelligence services to pay informants, as well as for other dubious services. <<<
How about THEM apples?
What is significant is the power held by people who know someone's credentials are fake over the person faking the credentials. They can ruin their career at any time, much like a spy who recruits a dimwitted asset who filches some insignificant documents; the spy now own that asset, because they can burn him anytime the like.
Halper was similarly putty in the hands of whomever was running him, if they knew his creds were exaggerated.
This is a huge reason not to trust anything Halper says or does, until his dirty secrets are out in the open, and even then I'd count my silverware if he's in the room with me.
He also reminds me of le Carre's sociopathic Magnus Pym in his novel "A Perfect Spy."