News this morning (April 26) via The Epoch Times: John Durham Issues Trial Subpoenas to Members of Clinton Campaign, DNC. Looks like a good step to me.
Well, not really news. This goes back to last week, really. What a lot of this has to do with is that Durham wants to call government witnesses (FBI for sure, possibly CIA) who will testify that the Alfa Bank Hoax was, indeed, a hoax. Each of those agencies, when provided with Sussmann/Joffe's dossier came to that realization pretty much as soon as they looked at the nonsense.
Yesterday there was a ruling. I won't go into all of it here, but here's the down and dirty: Durham basically wins, but what happens at trial could depend on what Sussmann attempts. Depending on what Sussmann attempts, Durham could be allowed to present quite a bit more evidence/testimony. In particular the CIA stuff:
Leslie McAdoo Gordon  
@McAdooGordon
The judge’s ruling basically allows Durham to do what he said he wanted to with the expert on the data (an FBI Agent), but only being able to discuss certain things if Sussman “opens the door” is how litigators term it. Durham had already agreed to that in his notice.
As predicted, Judge Cooper did not preclude Durham’s expert (as some commentators on the left thought ). His ruling makes it seem like he’s giving Sussman something, but in reality it basically tracks what Durham proposed.
I see. Thank you, Mark! I very much appreciate how you understand, research, and explain these moves in common language, without resorting to legalese. That helps me make sense of it all, and I'm sure that goes for many others as well. God bless! :-)
Sundance covered the April 2017 FISA report from Judge Collyer at length. It revealed that there had been many thousands of illegal NSA database searches by unauthorized FBI contractors. This is some of the info that NSA's Adm Rogers revealed to Trump. He then shut down that access. I wonder how the list of redacted FBI contractors in Collyer's report overlapped with the Alpha Bank activity?
I saw Sundance's theory earlier. He was fairly tenative--as he should be. There are databases and databases, access and access. The people who use the NSA databases are totally separate from the people like Joffe who had access to (yes, sensitive) DNA logs. I don't see Joffe involved in the 702 searches. Rather, I see contractors of various types working for CIA and FBI as the ones involved there. The big question to me is whether someone like Nellie Ohr was such a contractor--because we know she had been.
The legality of what the fbi contractors did with database searches is arguable, and the AG, Intel agencies, Fisa court, Congress, etc would defend. How dare you take away a tool necessary to fight terrorism! And useful for political blackmail…
That Kevin McCarthy phone call being released may have been a reminder, don’t mess with the Intel agencies. All US phone calls are recorded / stored in that nsa data warehouse.
What Durham is proving is solid legally, and going after huge political targets. I am surprised that AG Garland has not shut Durham down yet.
I get what you're saying, but in no way were those 702 searches legal. That's why Adm Rogers shut them down (wanna bet whether they were resumed?). We have learned at great length that there is "legal" and there is "permitted"--depending upon which side you're on. I still haven't allowed myself to buy into Durham actually delivering real justice. I'll bet our Puppet Master-in-Chief (Obama) would like to put Hillary away, but I suppose it depends upon whether he feels like he can carve and serve the old sow without risking Arkancide.
It's one thing to say that the 702 searches were not legal/authorized under NS law--I agree. But Durham is a prosecutor, not an oversight guy looking to make sure that everything is done by the book. As such, he's looking for criminal intent rather than administrative overreach. I suspect he doesn't see criminal intent that he could prove beyond a reasonable doubt at a jury trial. Going back to FISA origins--as I did several years ago--this is exactly the kind of thing that Judge Bork warned would happen if FISA were passed--there would be abuses and the perps would skate.
Mark, I love Durham’s use of the term “joint venture,” with dual overtones of a partnership in pursuit of gain ($$$), and a criminal undertaking! Merriam Webster:
1 : a cooperative business agreement or partnership between two or more parties that is usually limited to a single enterprise and that involves the sharing of resources, control, profits, and losses
— compare COMBINATION
2 : a criminal undertaking by two or more persons in which each intentionally takes part —used in the law of Massachusetts
Fusion’s Seago’s flipped as you note. GT David Dagon’s offered immunity, Joffe’s pleading the 5th, Elias considered a “witness” leaves Sussman no choice but to either flip or fall on the sword.
THEN Durham proceeds with DARPA fraud case (1502) and likely RICO (see Ship’s tweets) nabbing Joffe with time to spare 7 years SOL now.
Don't jump the gun here. I've been very adamant with CTD re RICO. Note the tentative wording of SWC:
*moving in the direction of sniffing around the idea*
That's very, very tentative--a long way from seeking an indictment. Note, too, that SWC says *To the extent the effort involved any violations of Sec. 1512*. That also presumes evidence for which we have no evidence at this point. We do know there are witnesses who have been immunized but, as far as we know, are not in hiding and have no special protection. It's a long way from proof--as far as we can tell.
1512 is about witness tampering.. Would the Clinton org engage in witness tampering? Sure. However, look at what's involved:
*Whoever kills or attempts to kill another person*
*Whoever uses physical force or the threat of physical force against any person*
both with specific intent.
So far the only killing that could be connected would be Seth Rich. But we've seen no evidence of progress on that front. Doesn't mean there isn't, but we would need real evidence that somebody like Sussmann or Elias knew about Rich's killing--I don't see any of the others connected, not Simpson, not Joffe, not Danchenko, and two lawyers seems unlikely to me. They would insulate themselves. Durham keeps his cards close to the vest, but if Rich was a hit job, then there's a lot of evidence concealing that's been going on. It would be very hard to prove at this point.
Physical force or threats thereof? Threats of Arkancide, in other words?
Again, proving this is not easy without texts/emails or recorded phone calls by people who are smart enough not to leave those sorts of tracks. He said/he said won't be enough.
Yes, of course Durham can and will explore all possibilities, but you can see from SWC's wording that 1) this is speculative and 2) proof is difficult.
Therefore, Durham has centered his case on a conspiracy which--as you can see from the jury instructions--is far easier to prove and far more flexible in bringing pressure on members.
Your opponent can’t talk when your fist is in his mouth.
And I’m sure Durham strategized his releases for the Clinton habit of hitting back fast and hard, so his investigation won’t be slowed down, derailed, or killed.
Ray, again I disagree. I think Durham is going where the facts lead him. As for his releases of information, I think he's simply following standard practice in a case like this where you have unindicted targets at large--don't release any information that you don't have to before you have to do so. The Clinton org shot its wad years ago and are reduced to dubious legal quibbling, not hitting back fast and hard. The type of responses they've come up with re A/C privilege doesn't come close to hitting back fast and hard and makes no impression on the general public.
Durham in his filings has been releasing an incredible amount of details. Much more than is normal. My guess is to bullet proof his accusations against push back.
The Clinton’s media strategy does not work as well as it did, due to a changing media environment. They can’t lie and spin as they were able to do so in the past.
The current Clinton strategy outside of court filings, seems to have the media ignore Durham. The Clinton’s have not tried to destroy Durham’s reputation, and portray him as being on a Clinton Crusade, as they did past critics / investigations.
I am surprised Durham has gotten this far. I am sure there is Biden Administration / uniparty politics that allowed this, but I have no idea what they are.
I think you're both spot on. Following standard investigate practices while whipping out the motions, statements, and accelerating the escalation of the conspiracy.
The only questions that matters are: does Durham plan to indict and bring Hillary to trial? Will any living person live long enough to see that happen? Will she? Probably not.
News this morning (April 26) via The Epoch Times: John Durham Issues Trial Subpoenas to Members of Clinton Campaign, DNC. Looks like a good step to me.
https://www.theepochtimes.com/john-durham-issues-trial-subpoenas-to-members-of-clinton-campaign-dnc_4424881.html
Well, not really news. This goes back to last week, really. What a lot of this has to do with is that Durham wants to call government witnesses (FBI for sure, possibly CIA) who will testify that the Alfa Bank Hoax was, indeed, a hoax. Each of those agencies, when provided with Sussmann/Joffe's dossier came to that realization pretty much as soon as they looked at the nonsense.
Yesterday there was a ruling. I won't go into all of it here, but here's the down and dirty: Durham basically wins, but what happens at trial could depend on what Sussmann attempts. Depending on what Sussmann attempts, Durham could be allowed to present quite a bit more evidence/testimony. In particular the CIA stuff:
Leslie McAdoo Gordon  
@McAdooGordon
The judge’s ruling basically allows Durham to do what he said he wanted to with the expert on the data (an FBI Agent), but only being able to discuss certain things if Sussman “opens the door” is how litigators term it. Durham had already agreed to that in his notice.
As predicted, Judge Cooper did not preclude Durham’s expert (as some commentators on the left thought ). His ruling makes it seem like he’s giving Sussman something, but in reality it basically tracks what Durham proposed.
I see. Thank you, Mark! I very much appreciate how you understand, research, and explain these moves in common language, without resorting to legalese. That helps me make sense of it all, and I'm sure that goes for many others as well. God bless! :-)
Sundance covered the April 2017 FISA report from Judge Collyer at length. It revealed that there had been many thousands of illegal NSA database searches by unauthorized FBI contractors. This is some of the info that NSA's Adm Rogers revealed to Trump. He then shut down that access. I wonder how the list of redacted FBI contractors in Collyer's report overlapped with the Alpha Bank activity?
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2019/04/23/the-obama-use-of-fisa-702-as-a-domestic-political-surveillance-program/
https://clintonfoundationtimeline.com/april-26-2017-doj-oversight-conducted-a-review-of-section-702-acquired-information-between-november-2015-may-2016-and-found-85-of-u-s-persons-queries-were-unlawful-or-non-compliant/
I saw Sundance's theory earlier. He was fairly tenative--as he should be. There are databases and databases, access and access. The people who use the NSA databases are totally separate from the people like Joffe who had access to (yes, sensitive) DNA logs. I don't see Joffe involved in the 702 searches. Rather, I see contractors of various types working for CIA and FBI as the ones involved there. The big question to me is whether someone like Nellie Ohr was such a contractor--because we know she had been.
The legality of what the fbi contractors did with database searches is arguable, and the AG, Intel agencies, Fisa court, Congress, etc would defend. How dare you take away a tool necessary to fight terrorism! And useful for political blackmail…
That Kevin McCarthy phone call being released may have been a reminder, don’t mess with the Intel agencies. All US phone calls are recorded / stored in that nsa data warehouse.
What Durham is proving is solid legally, and going after huge political targets. I am surprised that AG Garland has not shut Durham down yet.
I get what you're saying, but in no way were those 702 searches legal. That's why Adm Rogers shut them down (wanna bet whether they were resumed?). We have learned at great length that there is "legal" and there is "permitted"--depending upon which side you're on. I still haven't allowed myself to buy into Durham actually delivering real justice. I'll bet our Puppet Master-in-Chief (Obama) would like to put Hillary away, but I suppose it depends upon whether he feels like he can carve and serve the old sow without risking Arkancide.
It's one thing to say that the 702 searches were not legal/authorized under NS law--I agree. But Durham is a prosecutor, not an oversight guy looking to make sure that everything is done by the book. As such, he's looking for criminal intent rather than administrative overreach. I suspect he doesn't see criminal intent that he could prove beyond a reasonable doubt at a jury trial. Going back to FISA origins--as I did several years ago--this is exactly the kind of thing that Judge Bork warned would happen if FISA were passed--there would be abuses and the perps would skate.
Mark, I love Durham’s use of the term “joint venture,” with dual overtones of a partnership in pursuit of gain ($$$), and a criminal undertaking! Merriam Webster:
1 : a cooperative business agreement or partnership between two or more parties that is usually limited to a single enterprise and that involves the sharing of resources, control, profits, and losses
— compare COMBINATION
2 : a criminal undertaking by two or more persons in which each intentionally takes part —used in the law of Massachusetts
Fusion’s Seago’s flipped as you note. GT David Dagon’s offered immunity, Joffe’s pleading the 5th, Elias considered a “witness” leaves Sussman no choice but to either flip or fall on the sword.
THEN Durham proceeds with DARPA fraud case (1502) and likely RICO (see Ship’s tweets) nabbing Joffe with time to spare 7 years SOL now.
Don't jump the gun here. I've been very adamant with CTD re RICO. Note the tentative wording of SWC:
*moving in the direction of sniffing around the idea*
That's very, very tentative--a long way from seeking an indictment. Note, too, that SWC says *To the extent the effort involved any violations of Sec. 1512*. That also presumes evidence for which we have no evidence at this point. We do know there are witnesses who have been immunized but, as far as we know, are not in hiding and have no special protection. It's a long way from proof--as far as we can tell.
1512 is about witness tampering.. Would the Clinton org engage in witness tampering? Sure. However, look at what's involved:
*Whoever kills or attempts to kill another person*
*Whoever uses physical force or the threat of physical force against any person*
both with specific intent.
So far the only killing that could be connected would be Seth Rich. But we've seen no evidence of progress on that front. Doesn't mean there isn't, but we would need real evidence that somebody like Sussmann or Elias knew about Rich's killing--I don't see any of the others connected, not Simpson, not Joffe, not Danchenko, and two lawyers seems unlikely to me. They would insulate themselves. Durham keeps his cards close to the vest, but if Rich was a hit job, then there's a lot of evidence concealing that's been going on. It would be very hard to prove at this point.
Physical force or threats thereof? Threats of Arkancide, in other words?
Again, proving this is not easy without texts/emails or recorded phone calls by people who are smart enough not to leave those sorts of tracks. He said/he said won't be enough.
Yes, of course Durham can and will explore all possibilities, but you can see from SWC's wording that 1) this is speculative and 2) proof is difficult.
Therefore, Durham has centered his case on a conspiracy which--as you can see from the jury instructions--is far easier to prove and far more flexible in bringing pressure on members.
I get it. Will be interesting to see other charges (potentially) and escalation/reaction.
Durham has surprised more than once. I'm all in favor of more surprises.
1512 not 1502
Hmm…
Docs: Spygate Researchers Did Work For Former Special Counsel Robert Mueller
BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND
APRIL 22, 2022
https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/22/docs-spygate-researchers-did-work-for-former-special-counsel-robert-mueller/
Yes, these wheels seem to grind very fine. I just wish they didn't grind quite so slowly.
Durham has gotten further than I expected.
And it seems a while lot more juicy stuff will be coming out before the midterms.
And Kosh Patel believes Durham is stirring the pot to get an over reaction from Hillary:
https://justthenews.com/podcasts/john-solomon-reports/kash-patel-john-durham-investigation-letting-clinton-machine-firing
Kinda did with H for A response from Robby Mook who’s NOW given a subpoena for trial due to HoA affidavit.
To me this doesn't look like "stirring the pot" so much as a very logical and methodical investigative approach.
Bill Clinton has a saying:
Your opponent can’t talk when your fist is in his mouth.
And I’m sure Durham strategized his releases for the Clinton habit of hitting back fast and hard, so his investigation won’t be slowed down, derailed, or killed.
Ray, again I disagree. I think Durham is going where the facts lead him. As for his releases of information, I think he's simply following standard practice in a case like this where you have unindicted targets at large--don't release any information that you don't have to before you have to do so. The Clinton org shot its wad years ago and are reduced to dubious legal quibbling, not hitting back fast and hard. The type of responses they've come up with re A/C privilege doesn't come close to hitting back fast and hard and makes no impression on the general public.
Mark,
Durham in his filings has been releasing an incredible amount of details. Much more than is normal. My guess is to bullet proof his accusations against push back.
The Clinton’s media strategy does not work as well as it did, due to a changing media environment. They can’t lie and spin as they were able to do so in the past.
The current Clinton strategy outside of court filings, seems to have the media ignore Durham. The Clinton’s have not tried to destroy Durham’s reputation, and portray him as being on a Clinton Crusade, as they did past critics / investigations.
I am surprised Durham has gotten this far. I am sure there is Biden Administration / uniparty politics that allowed this, but I have no idea what they are.
I think you're both spot on. Following standard investigate practices while whipping out the motions, statements, and accelerating the escalation of the conspiracy.
The only questions that matters are: does Durham plan to indict and bring Hillary to trial? Will any living person live long enough to see that happen? Will she? Probably not.
As usual, you're wrong.