In other words, only seven days passed from 1) the day when Steele published Report #97 and 2) the day when GPS informed The Wall Street Journal about that report.
====
According to the Horowitz report, the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigative team did not receive Dossier report #94 until September 19, 2016.
There I point out that it was no later than April 2016 that the CIA began to suspect that Kremlin money was passing through Alfa Bank to Donald Trump's election-campaign staff.
For comparison, Christopher Steele did not deliver his first Dossier reports to his FBI case officer Michael Gaeta until July 2016.
Fascinating revelations! I think Sussman lying to Baker ( no client!) and then dutifully filling in his timesheet, just confirms the utter moral decrepitude and weasely cunning of this merry band - but as some have mentioned, they may have gone too far with their recent attorney/client moans and groans! Walked into a trap, instead of cooperating with the wily Durham…I think Sussman’s goose is cooked.
Durham's recent document, Page 11, includes the following passage:
[quote]
“Fusion’s in-house cyber ninja, [name of the Government’s expected Fusion GPS trial witness], was asked to analyze the DC Leaks site. Her assessment came back quickly. ‘The poor English and amateurish site architecture — no SSL encryption, open downloads folder — screams ‘Russian hackers’ to me,’ she said.”
[end quote]
Notice the expression: "the Government's expected Fusion GPS trial".
Notice also that some woman employee of Fusion GPS apparently has agreed to be a witness for Durham in that trial.
Now I am reading Durham's recent document, filed on April 25 and titled "Government's Reply to the Defendant's and Non-Party Intervenors' Filings Concerning the Government's Filings Concerning the Government's Motion to Compel the Production of Purported Privileged Communications for In-Camera Inspection".
In regard to Fusion GPS, I understand that Fusion GPS indeed argues that it is providing legal advice in a peculiar sense. In my own words, Fusion GPS argues that it provides facts that would contradict potential accusations of defamation and libel.
For example, if Hillary Clinton were to accuse Donald Trump of colluding with Russian Intelligence and if Trump subsequently would sue Clinton for defamation or libel, then the information provided by Fusion GPS would contradict Trump's lawsuit. According to such reasoning, Fusion GPS was providing "legal advice" to Clinton's campaign organization.
This reasoning is rather diffuse in Durham's document, so I cannot point out a short passage that states the reasoning concisely.
However, I now perceive that Fusion GPS itself has made this argument to avoid showing some of its own documents and correspondence to Durham.
Perhaps I should have written the last sentence of my above comment as follows:
However, I now perceive that Fusion GPS itself has made this argument to prevent Durham from using some of its own documents and correspondence in the legal proceedings.
In Durham's document, Page 7 discusses a situation where a Fusion GPS employee sent an e-mail to a Slate reporter on May 14, 2016. (This e-mail was sent about seven weeks before Christopher Steele supposedly gave the first few of his Dossier reports to his FBI case officer Michael Gaeta.)
This e-mail on May 14, 2016, seems to be, in this history, the first in a series of communications from Fusion GPS to this Slate reporter. In this first e-mail, Fusion GPS indicated to the Slate reporter that Fusion GPS (i.e. Christopher Steele) was studying a Trump advisor ("Trump Advisor -1"; I presume Carter Page) and that Fusion GPS soon would provide incriminating information about that "Trump Advisor-1".
Furthermore, that passage of Durham's document (on Page 7) indicates that Fusion GPS subsequently did provide information linking "Trump Advisor-1" (Carter Page) and Russian Bank-1 (Alfa Bank) and a "purported board member of Russian Bank-1" (Alfa Bank).
However, as far as I know, no publicly available Dossier report contains any information about such a linking. In other words, Durham has some Dossier reports that are not available to the public.
In other words, Durham has a Dossier report (or several reports) -- or perhaps has just e-mails mentioning such report(s) -- that link Carter Page, Alfa Bank and some "purported board member" of Alfa Bank.
Any such Dossier report(s) linking Page, Alfa Bank, and a "board member" remain unknown to the public. For sure, though, Steele provided all such reports promptly to his FBI case officer, Michael Gaeta.
Durham's document, Page 9, includes the following passage:
[quote]
On the same date [September 27, 2016], the Fusion GPS co-founder [Glenn Simpson?] replied to the [New York Times] reporter, stating in part, “see below from ip-tracker.org from three weeks ago.” The email then stated that Chamber President-1 [Pavel Milyukov] “was using an IP address registered in Moscow,” and noted that a telecom company under the same parent company as Russian Bank-1 “ [Alfa Bank] was its internet service provider.” The [Fusion GPS] email then included additional screenshots, links, and other internet-related information pertaining to Chamber President-1 that Fusion GPS had apparently gathered.
[end quote]
So, Fusion GPS managed to obtain some very obscure Internet information -- e.g. about Milyukov's IP address in Moscow and about an Alfa Bank affiliate's e-mails.
I am guessing that Fusion GPS obtained such obscure Internet information ultimately from Rodney Joffe and his fellows.
SOL question for federal civil lawsuits. A number of these emails establish that a number of corporate press outlets that published articles corroborating the Steele Dossier—Hamburger of the WSJ in particular—had Moscow sources telling them the Carter Page meeting with Sechin story was “bullshit… never happened.”
Which means that Page, and others named in the Steele Dossier, such as Millian, can arguably now meet the actual malice standard of Sullivan v. NYT for public figures. But it’s also been 6 years. Is it too late for them to sue?
MW: please take a look at the Brennan referral memo to Comey/Strzok 07 Sept 2016 in which he reveals CIA has seen intel indicating Russian Intel is aware of Hillary "green-lighting: a plan to smear trump with Collusion with Russia claims.
FWIW, this is the first I've heard that Guccifer 2.0 was involved in the "exchange" (email or text message, or private messaging?) from which CIA supposedly gleaned Russian intel knowledge of Hillary's smear campaign on Trump, which was the basis of the referral.
It all seems too cute by half. "Topicality is always suspect," as Smiley says.
My sense is G2.0 is someone playing for Team Hillary, if not one of the main co-conspirators.
I'm nothing like a G2.0 expert. Like you, I'm a skeptic and I can readily agree with your view. The two parts of 3a, to my mind, fit together like hand and glove. Hillary's gonna claim Trump and Russians are tied together re the "hack", then open source--with nothing to back them up--claim G2.0 did it. Looks like something that F-GPS would put out.
Is Fusion GPS saying that it was giving legal advice?
Perhaps only Perkins Coie is saying that Perkins Coie was giving legal advice -- but that that legal activity included obtaining information from Fusion GPS.
I have not read the legal documents that were released recently. Therefore, I might be mistakenly attributing to Fusion GPS a legal argument that Fusion GPS itself has not made.
TF: Special Counsel John Durham just filed this motion in response to the efforts of Hillary for America, Fusion GPS, et al. to keep secret (by use of the attorney-client and work product privileges) communications involving Fusion GPS.
The argument that Fusion GPS essentially was providing legal advice is preposterous.
The sensible legal strategy would be cooperate generally with Durham's requests for information. I assume that, in this history, Fusion GPS acted legally. Fusion GPS sold opposition research to Hillary Clinton's campaign organization. Furthermore, I suppose that Fusion GPS thought that the sold information was generally true.
Of course, Fusion GPS does not want to reveal its "sources and methods" to the public, but such revelations could be minimized, with Durham's cooperation.
So, why is Fusion GPS making this preposterous argument about providing legal advice?
I wonder if Fusion GPS is being represented by some law firm that is representing also another party in this legal dispute. Durham has been warning the judge about conflict-of-interest problems involving law firms in this situation.
Fusion GPS does have a legal problem with Alfa Bank, but that problem is separate from the USA's 2016 Presidential election.
As I understand Alfa Bank's lawsuit against Fusion GPS, the essential complaint was an allegation in a Dossier report that Alfa Bank generally had a corrupt relationship with Vladimir Putin. That particular allegation was among the Dossier information that Fusion GPS distributed to reporters.
As far as the public knows, however, no Dossier report says anything along the lines that there was some secret, nefarious communications between Alfa Bank and Trump Tower or between Alfa Bank and the Trump political-campaign staff.
As far as the public knows, Fusion GPS was not involved significantly in the Alfa Bank part of this history. Rather, Fusion GPS was involved essentially just in Steele's Dossier.
So, the Perkins Coie law firm hired Fusion GSP, which then hired Christopher Steele to write a series of Dossier reports. GPS Fusion forwarded Steele's reports to Perkins Coie, from where Michael Sussman game them to the FBI, CIA, etc. (Meanwhile, Steele himself gave at least some of his Dossier reports to the FBI's Michael Gaeta.)
In this situation, I do not see that GPS has done anything illegal.
I suppose it's possible that Fusion GPS explicitly told Steele to write reports that were false. However, I doubt that Fusion GPS did so.
Eventually Fusion GPS went further and distributed some of the Dossier information to reporters (but not to the FBI, CIA, etc.). Surely that is not illegal.
It seems to me that the legal problem in this situation might be that Fusion GPS distributed such information to reporters at the behest of Perkins Coie (i.e. the Clinton campaign). In other words, this is a legal problem not for Fusion GPS, but rather for Perkins Coie, etc.
So, I wonder again: what law firm is representing Fusion GPS and is that law firm representing also another party in this situation? Is this a conflict-of-interest problem that Durham has been warning the judge about?
It is beginning to look like Durham used Sussman as bait; and the bigger fish couldn't resist biting. But the real lunkers are still swimming around the deep state pond. And those 'reporters' are starting to look like chum.
No one in the govt is going to be investigated or charged with any wrongdoing the stink of this runs through the DOJ the FBI the CIA sitting senators of both parties and the obama White House. If anyone in the govt gets the slightest hint of getting in trouble then it all gets shut down. This is being allowed to move forward as a hit on the Clinton crime family by the rest of the uniparty crime families. Cleaning the out the corruption in dc would take some sort of meteor strike razing dc to the ground followed by a salting of the earth
Of course that's the orthodox CTH doctrine on Durham--you should have at least been gracious enough to preface your comment with something like, "Our teacher Sundance tells us that ..." However ...
This view is possibly shortsighted and may indeed get everything exactly reversed. It relies on the naive notion that the US government is controlled by government officials. While government officials do exercise some degree of control, that view misses the big picture of the Deep State. If Durham can unmask the people who control the parties and the policies the parties are allowed to advance, that is a service. It won't be Durham's fault if the American people don't pay attention. Who really believes that our elected officials or even our career bureaucrats sat down and reasoned their way to the disastrous policies that have brought America to its current pass? There is far too much evidence to the contrary.
What do you expect a prosecutor to do? You start with the little people and work your way "up the ladder." "Unmasking underlings?" Do you really consider the Clinton organization--Hillary for America--to be "underlings"? By forcing Clinton to come out of hiding and make bogus claims of privilege, while also exposing the MSM complicity, Durham has done all that a prosecutor can do to unmask the entire Russia Hoax. If he is able to continue up the ladder and indict the Clinton inner circle that would be the most incredible feat of political prosecution in US history. As matters stand, Durham is currently one rung of the ladder below that inner circle and is forcing that inner circle out into the light of day.
On July 26, 2016, Peter Fritsch of Fusion GPS sent an e-mail to reporter Jay Solomon of The Wall Street Journal.
https://sleuthscorner.docdroid.com/GYBo5Xm/2022-04-25-durham-huge-reporter-email-list-pdf#page=7
In that e-mail, Fritsch summarized key details that Christopher Steele had written in his Dossier Report #94, which was dated July 19, 2016.
https://themoscowproject.org/dossier/index.html
In other words, only seven days passed from 1) the day when Steele published Report #97 and 2) the day when GPS informed The Wall Street Journal about that report.
====
According to the Horowitz report, the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane investigative team did not receive Dossier report #94 until September 19, 2016.
My new blog article:
"The Tape-Recorded Conversation in April 2016"
https://people-who-did-not-see.blogspot.com/2022/04/the-tape-recorded-conversation-in-april.html
There I point out that it was no later than April 2016 that the CIA began to suspect that Kremlin money was passing through Alfa Bank to Donald Trump's election-campaign staff.
For comparison, Christopher Steele did not deliver his first Dossier reports to his FBI case officer Michael Gaeta until July 2016.
Fascinating revelations! I think Sussman lying to Baker ( no client!) and then dutifully filling in his timesheet, just confirms the utter moral decrepitude and weasely cunning of this merry band - but as some have mentioned, they may have gone too far with their recent attorney/client moans and groans! Walked into a trap, instead of cooperating with the wily Durham…I think Sussman’s goose is cooked.
Durham's recent document, Page 11, includes the following passage:
[quote]
“Fusion’s in-house cyber ninja, [name of the Government’s expected Fusion GPS trial witness], was asked to analyze the DC Leaks site. Her assessment came back quickly. ‘The poor English and amateurish site architecture — no SSL encryption, open downloads folder — screams ‘Russian hackers’ to me,’ she said.”
[end quote]
Notice the expression: "the Government's expected Fusion GPS trial".
Notice also that some woman employee of Fusion GPS apparently has agreed to be a witness for Durham in that trial.
Now I am reading Durham's recent document, filed on April 25 and titled "Government's Reply to the Defendant's and Non-Party Intervenors' Filings Concerning the Government's Filings Concerning the Government's Motion to Compel the Production of Purported Privileged Communications for In-Camera Inspection".
https://www.scribd.com/document/571632094/97-Gov-Resp-to-AC-Priv-Motions
In regard to Fusion GPS, I understand that Fusion GPS indeed argues that it is providing legal advice in a peculiar sense. In my own words, Fusion GPS argues that it provides facts that would contradict potential accusations of defamation and libel.
For example, if Hillary Clinton were to accuse Donald Trump of colluding with Russian Intelligence and if Trump subsequently would sue Clinton for defamation or libel, then the information provided by Fusion GPS would contradict Trump's lawsuit. According to such reasoning, Fusion GPS was providing "legal advice" to Clinton's campaign organization.
This reasoning is rather diffuse in Durham's document, so I cannot point out a short passage that states the reasoning concisely.
However, I now perceive that Fusion GPS itself has made this argument to avoid showing some of its own documents and correspondence to Durham.
Perhaps I should have written the last sentence of my above comment as follows:
However, I now perceive that Fusion GPS itself has made this argument to prevent Durham from using some of its own documents and correspondence in the legal proceedings.
In Durham's document, Page 7 discusses a situation where a Fusion GPS employee sent an e-mail to a Slate reporter on May 14, 2016. (This e-mail was sent about seven weeks before Christopher Steele supposedly gave the first few of his Dossier reports to his FBI case officer Michael Gaeta.)
This e-mail on May 14, 2016, seems to be, in this history, the first in a series of communications from Fusion GPS to this Slate reporter. In this first e-mail, Fusion GPS indicated to the Slate reporter that Fusion GPS (i.e. Christopher Steele) was studying a Trump advisor ("Trump Advisor -1"; I presume Carter Page) and that Fusion GPS soon would provide incriminating information about that "Trump Advisor-1".
Furthermore, that passage of Durham's document (on Page 7) indicates that Fusion GPS subsequently did provide information linking "Trump Advisor-1" (Carter Page) and Russian Bank-1 (Alfa Bank) and a "purported board member of Russian Bank-1" (Alfa Bank).
However, as far as I know, no publicly available Dossier report contains any information about such a linking. In other words, Durham has some Dossier reports that are not available to the public.
In other words, Durham has a Dossier report (or several reports) -- or perhaps has just e-mails mentioning such report(s) -- that link Carter Page, Alfa Bank and some "purported board member" of Alfa Bank.
Any such Dossier report(s) linking Page, Alfa Bank, and a "board member" remain unknown to the public. For sure, though, Steele provided all such reports promptly to his FBI case officer, Michael Gaeta.
Durham's document, Page 9, includes the following passage:
[quote]
On the same date [September 27, 2016], the Fusion GPS co-founder [Glenn Simpson?] replied to the [New York Times] reporter, stating in part, “see below from ip-tracker.org from three weeks ago.” The email then stated that Chamber President-1 [Pavel Milyukov] “was using an IP address registered in Moscow,” and noted that a telecom company under the same parent company as Russian Bank-1 “ [Alfa Bank] was its internet service provider.” The [Fusion GPS] email then included additional screenshots, links, and other internet-related information pertaining to Chamber President-1 that Fusion GPS had apparently gathered.
[end quote]
So, Fusion GPS managed to obtain some very obscure Internet information -- e.g. about Milyukov's IP address in Moscow and about an Alfa Bank affiliate's e-mails.
I am guessing that Fusion GPS obtained such obscure Internet information ultimately from Rodney Joffe and his fellows.
SOL question for federal civil lawsuits. A number of these emails establish that a number of corporate press outlets that published articles corroborating the Steele Dossier—Hamburger of the WSJ in particular—had Moscow sources telling them the Carter Page meeting with Sechin story was “bullshit… never happened.”
Which means that Page, and others named in the Steele Dossier, such as Millian, can arguably now meet the actual malice standard of Sullivan v. NYT for public figures. But it’s also been 6 years. Is it too late for them to sue?
Probably. I meant to include that specific example, so nice catch. That's pretty stunning.
MW: please take a look at the Brennan referral memo to Comey/Strzok 07 Sept 2016 in which he reveals CIA has seen intel indicating Russian Intel is aware of Hillary "green-lighting: a plan to smear trump with Collusion with Russia claims.
See especially paragraph 3a:
>> https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FRR-F-RX0AA0ydO?format=jpg&name=large <<
Anything jump out at you?
FWIW, this is the first I've heard that Guccifer 2.0 was involved in the "exchange" (email or text message, or private messaging?) from which CIA supposedly gleaned Russian intel knowledge of Hillary's smear campaign on Trump, which was the basis of the referral.
It all seems too cute by half. "Topicality is always suspect," as Smiley says.
My sense is G2.0 is someone playing for Team Hillary, if not one of the main co-conspirators.
I'm nothing like a G2.0 expert. Like you, I'm a skeptic and I can readily agree with your view. The two parts of 3a, to my mind, fit together like hand and glove. Hillary's gonna claim Trump and Russians are tied together re the "hack", then open source--with nothing to back them up--claim G2.0 did it. Looks like something that F-GPS would put out.
Is Fusion GPS saying that it was giving legal advice?
Perhaps only Perkins Coie is saying that Perkins Coie was giving legal advice -- but that that legal activity included obtaining information from Fusion GPS.
I have not read the legal documents that were released recently. Therefore, I might be mistakenly attributing to Fusion GPS a legal argument that Fusion GPS itself has not made.
seems like all the orgs involved cited ACP.
Fusion GPS, Hillary for America, Perkins Coie.
There are some good articles dissecting the pros and cons.
But it smacks of desperation.
TF: Special Counsel John Durham just filed this motion in response to the efforts of Hillary for America, Fusion GPS, et al. to keep secret (by use of the attorney-client and work product privileges) communications involving Fusion GPS.
Andrew McCarthy published a superb article today:
"Durham Would Use a Big Scheme to Prove a Modest Crime"
https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/04/durham-would-use-a-big-scheme-to-prove-a-modest-crime/
Yes, it's an interesting article. You may recall that way back when, on the old blog, I was a big fan of a 371 conspiracy.
The argument that Fusion GPS essentially was providing legal advice is preposterous.
The sensible legal strategy would be cooperate generally with Durham's requests for information. I assume that, in this history, Fusion GPS acted legally. Fusion GPS sold opposition research to Hillary Clinton's campaign organization. Furthermore, I suppose that Fusion GPS thought that the sold information was generally true.
Of course, Fusion GPS does not want to reveal its "sources and methods" to the public, but such revelations could be minimized, with Durham's cooperation.
So, why is Fusion GPS making this preposterous argument about providing legal advice?
I wonder if Fusion GPS is being represented by some law firm that is representing also another party in this legal dispute. Durham has been warning the judge about conflict-of-interest problems involving law firms in this situation.
Fusion GPS does have a legal problem with Alfa Bank, but that problem is separate from the USA's 2016 Presidential election.
As I understand Alfa Bank's lawsuit against Fusion GPS, the essential complaint was an allegation in a Dossier report that Alfa Bank generally had a corrupt relationship with Vladimir Putin. That particular allegation was among the Dossier information that Fusion GPS distributed to reporters.
As far as the public knows, however, no Dossier report says anything along the lines that there was some secret, nefarious communications between Alfa Bank and Trump Tower or between Alfa Bank and the Trump political-campaign staff.
Correct--warning about conflicts. This privilege claim looks pretty desperate, and out of desperation they seem to have walked into a trap.
As far as the public knows, Fusion GPS was not involved significantly in the Alfa Bank part of this history. Rather, Fusion GPS was involved essentially just in Steele's Dossier.
So, the Perkins Coie law firm hired Fusion GSP, which then hired Christopher Steele to write a series of Dossier reports. GPS Fusion forwarded Steele's reports to Perkins Coie, from where Michael Sussman game them to the FBI, CIA, etc. (Meanwhile, Steele himself gave at least some of his Dossier reports to the FBI's Michael Gaeta.)
In this situation, I do not see that GPS has done anything illegal.
I suppose it's possible that Fusion GPS explicitly told Steele to write reports that were false. However, I doubt that Fusion GPS did so.
Eventually Fusion GPS went further and distributed some of the Dossier information to reporters (but not to the FBI, CIA, etc.). Surely that is not illegal.
It seems to me that the legal problem in this situation might be that Fusion GPS distributed such information to reporters at the behest of Perkins Coie (i.e. the Clinton campaign). In other words, this is a legal problem not for Fusion GPS, but rather for Perkins Coie, etc.
So, I wonder again: what law firm is representing Fusion GPS and is that law firm representing also another party in this situation? Is this a conflict-of-interest problem that Durham has been warning the judge about?
they are part of Durham's 'joint venture'.
I guess the question is did they know their work product was being used in a conspiracy to defraud the US government?
Perkins Coie is IMO in deep trouble.
They have claimed that Marc Elias took all the files and
they know nothing,
nothing!
CTH: Durham Staffer Accidentally Makes Private Emails Public, Fusion GPS Coordination Discussions with Media, and Much More
It is beginning to look like Durham used Sussman as bait; and the bigger fish couldn't resist biting. But the real lunkers are still swimming around the deep state pond. And those 'reporters' are starting to look like chum.
Certainly looks like some legal judo.
I would pay a years salary to see a televised 4am raid ending with footage of Hillary doing the perp walk.
Ok, 6 months salary...
That's a Mueller play - only difference being that Mueller wouldn't actually have any emails in his possession.
No one in the govt is going to be investigated or charged with any wrongdoing the stink of this runs through the DOJ the FBI the CIA sitting senators of both parties and the obama White House. If anyone in the govt gets the slightest hint of getting in trouble then it all gets shut down. This is being allowed to move forward as a hit on the Clinton crime family by the rest of the uniparty crime families. Cleaning the out the corruption in dc would take some sort of meteor strike razing dc to the ground followed by a salting of the earth
Of course that's the orthodox CTH doctrine on Durham--you should have at least been gracious enough to preface your comment with something like, "Our teacher Sundance tells us that ..." However ...
This view is possibly shortsighted and may indeed get everything exactly reversed. It relies on the naive notion that the US government is controlled by government officials. While government officials do exercise some degree of control, that view misses the big picture of the Deep State. If Durham can unmask the people who control the parties and the policies the parties are allowed to advance, that is a service. It won't be Durham's fault if the American people don't pay attention. Who really believes that our elected officials or even our career bureaucrats sat down and reasoned their way to the disastrous policies that have brought America to its current pass? There is far too much evidence to the contrary.
What do you expect a prosecutor to do? You start with the little people and work your way "up the ladder." "Unmasking underlings?" Do you really consider the Clinton organization--Hillary for America--to be "underlings"? By forcing Clinton to come out of hiding and make bogus claims of privilege, while also exposing the MSM complicity, Durham has done all that a prosecutor can do to unmask the entire Russia Hoax. If he is able to continue up the ladder and indict the Clinton inner circle that would be the most incredible feat of political prosecution in US history. As matters stand, Durham is currently one rung of the ladder below that inner circle and is forcing that inner circle out into the light of day.
I dream of this everyday