If Tucker etc. duck this story tonite, that'll be a major Tell, that this Durham stuff will be trivial. If we hear much on this tonite, I'll wonder what extreme moves the DS is weighing.
I'm still in the dark re: "Tech exec #1" and the various internet companies he is associated with; it doesn't seem to fit anything I seen before, and thus may be some heretofore unknown players. I have to suspect that "Tech Exec #1" is potentially facing a conspiracy charge for his role in this, as he seems to be the "Puppet Master" orchestrating underlings, and Sussmann, to fabricate an ad hoc collusion communication hypothesis where the data does not support one, <b>as his underlings pointed out to him in writing. </b>
I just finished it and, from my perspective it's impressive. Here's one factoid that corrected a misapprehension that I had. Durham establishes that Sussmann did in fact bill his meeting with Baker to the Clinton campaign--and yet at the meeting he denied specifically that he was there for a client. Priestap's notes confirm that, based on his discussion with Baker. Priestap and Baker--also based on Priestap's notes--were fully aware of Sussmann's connections and were specifically concerned to avoid being used by Sussmann--that's why Baker asked that question and why Sussmann went to the meeting obviously prepared to lie, because he knew if he told the truth the FBI would shut him down, show him the door.
Durham also shows in detail that the "narrative" was known to be false--it was designed to be "plausible" to a non-expert.
It would appear that Marc Elias should be concerned at this point, based on all his consulting with Sussmann and Fusion. Fusion and Simpson should be very concerned.
Still not clear what Durham means when he references Perkins Coie's involvement as an entity, as a law firm--not just individual lawyers.
Sussmann's Congressional testimony was striking. He is clearly trying to shield his "client"--and I'm guessing from the context that he's referencing conversations with HRC personally. He won't say 'she told me to do it', but it seems she knew about the 'special project'.
Those 4 writers at the NYT on this article were Sussman's media contacts (main stooges) for all that transpired over the past 5 years. Those writers must have been pimping Sussman for weeks if not months to get this scoop. I read somewhere today where Sussman asked the NYT to "slow down" on the Alfa story only to see it blossom years ago. My guess is that Sussman himself shared this with them to get this out in the open.
Further, would love to see Elias brought down. Perhaps why he left PC recently?
Great work!
If Tucker etc. duck this story tonite, that'll be a major Tell, that this Durham stuff will be trivial. If we hear much on this tonite, I'll wonder what extreme moves the DS is weighing.
Here it is!
https://context-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/3203e975-c59b-42f1-b3c8-8a07e33b01d8/note/9901e223-403a-47ce-93e0-1d78a5ff6627.#page=1
I'm still in the dark re: "Tech exec #1" and the various internet companies he is associated with; it doesn't seem to fit anything I seen before, and thus may be some heretofore unknown players. I have to suspect that "Tech Exec #1" is potentially facing a conspiracy charge for his role in this, as he seems to be the "Puppet Master" orchestrating underlings, and Sussmann, to fabricate an ad hoc collusion communication hypothesis where the data does not support one, <b>as his underlings pointed out to him in writing. </b>
https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1438615848776765446
Tech Exec #1 is claimed to be Rodney Joffe of "Neustar."
Thanks. I'll have to try to expand and systematize my comments after dinner.
para 42. Sussmann meets with two employees of "Agency-2" "outside of DC" ...
Langley VA?
Best guess. Note that this extends the SoL into Feb 2017 at least.
Hmmm. I can readily plug in Marc Elias, Perkins Coie, and Fusion GPS. Do we know who Tech Exec 1 is?
FusionGPS wrote one of the whitepapers given to FBI!
"US Investigative firm"
Fusion
Exactly!
I do not at this juncture.
It sounds much worse that I imagined.
Tech exec-1 appears to be the coordinator (puppet-master) of the Hoax.
And I'm only half way through it.
I just finished it and, from my perspective it's impressive. Here's one factoid that corrected a misapprehension that I had. Durham establishes that Sussmann did in fact bill his meeting with Baker to the Clinton campaign--and yet at the meeting he denied specifically that he was there for a client. Priestap's notes confirm that, based on his discussion with Baker. Priestap and Baker--also based on Priestap's notes--were fully aware of Sussmann's connections and were specifically concerned to avoid being used by Sussmann--that's why Baker asked that question and why Sussmann went to the meeting obviously prepared to lie, because he knew if he told the truth the FBI would shut him down, show him the door.
Durham also shows in detail that the "narrative" was known to be false--it was designed to be "plausible" to a non-expert.
It would appear that Marc Elias should be concerned at this point, based on all his consulting with Sussmann and Fusion. Fusion and Simpson should be very concerned.
Still not clear what Durham means when he references Perkins Coie's involvement as an entity, as a law firm--not just individual lawyers.
Sussmann's Congressional testimony was striking. He is clearly trying to shield his "client"--and I'm guessing from the context that he's referencing conversations with HRC personally. He won't say 'she told me to do it', but it seems she knew about the 'special project'.
Those 4 writers at the NYT on this article were Sussman's media contacts (main stooges) for all that transpired over the past 5 years. Those writers must have been pimping Sussman for weeks if not months to get this scoop. I read somewhere today where Sussman asked the NYT to "slow down" on the Alfa story only to see it blossom years ago. My guess is that Sussman himself shared this with them to get this out in the open.
Further, would love to see Elias brought down. Perhaps why he left PC recently?
Wasn't it Baker who asked the NYT to slow down, because FBI was only at an early stage?
Maybe... I'll check. Thought it was Sussman but you may be correct.