Courtroom Showdown

  

Category:  Op/Ed

By:  vic-eldred  •  one month ago  •  49 comments

Courtroom Showdown
“As the Special Counsel argues, it is at least possible that statements made to law enforcement prior to an investigation could materially influence the later trajectory of the investigation. Sussmann offers no legal authority to the contrary.”...US District Judge Christopher Cooper

The long awaited trial of former Clinton lawyer & operative Michael Sussman begins today. It will be a major test for the investigation conducted by Special Counsel John Durham. The case involves a Sept. 19, 2016, meeting in which Sussman gave then-FBI General Counsel James Baker supposedly damning information between a “secret” server operated by the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank. It sparked an FBI investigation that later determined that the only thing the Trump organization and Alfa Bank exchanged was marketing emails. Sussmann allegedly told Baker that he wasn’t sharing internet data about Trump on behalf of a client, when in fact he was working for the Clinton campaign. After trying to get the case tossed out, a Federal Judge (A Barack Obama appointed Judge) ruled that Sussman must make his case to a jury.

JudgeChristopherCooper.jpg
Judge of the  United States District Court for the District of Columbia


Sussman remains defiant. A true Trump hating ideologue, who believed that the end justifies the means, he will make his case in court (a DC Court). If convicted he faces a possible sentence of 5 years in prison. The case must be very narrowly micromanaged by Durham. Certain Fusion GPS e-mails, now in John Durham's possession cannot be used, nor can Hillary Clinton be somehow dragged in. Those are very unique ground rules. Ah, the Deep State is alive and well!


The Washington Post describes it thus:

"The trial of Michael Sussmann centers on the narrow legal question of whether he lied when he claimed — less than two months before the 2016 election — that no client had spurred him to bring the tip to authorities, and whether that information was relevant to how FBI agents investigated the matter."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2022/05/12/sussmann-trial-fbi-trump-clinton/


Thus far, a former FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith has pleaded guilty to falsifying records submitted to the federal surveillance court. In November, Durham indicted Igor Danchenko with lying to the FBI about his contributions to the Steele dossier. His case is pending.

Jury selection begins today.

 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  author  Vic Eldred    one month ago

"A slew of current and former  FBI  officials are slated to take the stand in a trial set to begin Monday of former  Clinton  campaign attorney  Michael Sussmann , offering testimony that could lay bare the  FBI ’s eagerness to seize on unverified anti- Trump  political dirt."

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
1.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    one month ago
"A slew of current and former  FBI  officials are slated to take the stand

And how many will roll over on other "officials" so that their hoax would be believed.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1    one month ago

We can only hope.

The big question is can we expect a fair judgement from a DC jury?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
1.1.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.1    one month ago
can we expect a fair judgement from a DC jury?

I doubt it.  This is going to be a political circus.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.2    one month ago

I believe that is why Barr decided not to prosecute McCabe.  It can't be close in TDS country.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
1.1.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.3    one month ago

With the political circus it's almost a given that information would be leaked and witness tampering at some level will take place.  I don't think it will be due to TDS (can't completely rule that out) but because of how close it is to the Democrats and Clinton.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.4    one month ago
but because of how close it is to the Democrats and Clinton.  

Maybe we'll finally get some justice.

FS4ip8SVUAEr1mU?format=jpg&name=small

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
1.1.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.1.5    one month ago

I am kind of surprised that hasn't happened yet.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.7  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @1.1.6    one month ago

The federal government is loaded with them.

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
1.2  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    one month ago
A slew of current and former ...

... and by the time one gets to the 4th paragraph, "slew" which means many is morphed into a "handful".

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Hallux @1.2    one month ago

I see. Nothing to see there.

BTW: The FBI has 10 agents testifying in the Durham Vs Sussman case. 5 each for the prosecution and defense.

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
1.2.2  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    one month ago

In this case, using 'slew' is clickbait writing and as someone who professes to be well read, you should be well aware of this.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  Hallux @1.2.2    one month ago
In this case, using 'slew' is clickbait writing and as someone who professes to be well read, you should be well aware of this.

Some might consider 10 agents a slew.

Is the use of the word the topic?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
1.2.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Hallux @1.2.2    one month ago
using 'slew' is clickbait

To the gullible maybe.  That could send them off the deep end and into another bout of fake outrage meanwhile it could be 10. 

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
1.2.5  Hallux  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.3    one month ago
Is the use of the word the topic?

How language is either used or misused in this day of inflammatory writing? Yes indeed!

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.6  Texan1211  replied to  Hallux @1.2.5    one month ago

I guess if one chooses to miss the bigger picture..........

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
1.2.7  Hallux  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.6    one month ago

Do I need to quote Lincoln?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.8  Texan1211  replied to  Hallux @1.2.7    one month ago
Do I need to quote Lincoln?

I have no earthly idea what you feel the need to do, nor is it very important to me.

Knock yourself out.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.2.9  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Hallux @1.2.7    one month ago
Do I need to quote Lincoln?

Did you follow Brad when he pitched in Toronto?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.10  Texan1211  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.9    one month ago
Did you follow Brad when he pitched in Toronto?

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
1.2.11  Hallux  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @1.2.9    one month ago

Montrealers don't follow anything that happens in Toronto.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.12  Texan1211  replied to  Hallux @1.2.11    one month ago
Montrealers don't follow anything that happens in Toronto.

Ah, isolationists!

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
1.2.13  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    one month ago

“…Durham…”

… just another synonym for partisanship, hence failure, and when all else is lost, desperation.. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
1.2.14  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Hallux @1.2.11    one month ago

LoL.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
1.2.15  afrayedknot  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.3    one month ago

“Is the use of the word the topic?”

If you could not defer to the use of a word in any discussion, the slight being real or imagined, you would have absolutely nothing to contribute…which is the case with every. single. post. 

Please do continue and prove the point. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.16  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @1.2.15    one month ago
“Is the use of the word the topic?”

Are you sure you understood my question?

He was just distracting from the article's content because he took offense over a word which is arguably being used correctly.

I wasn't aware that grammar had much to do with any of it--perhaps you can relate how grammar has a thing to do with it.

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
1.2.17  Hallux  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.12    one month ago
Ah, isolationists!

Nah, Toronto is nothing more than a vast sprawling suburb full of uninteresting bars and even less interesting Presbyterians.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
1.2.18  afrayedknot  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.16    one month ago

“I wasn't aware…”

…duh. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.19  Texan1211  replied to  Hallux @1.2.17    one month ago
Nah, Toronto is nothing more than a vast sprawling suburb full of uninteresting bars and even less interesting Presbyterians.

Interesting,

I found Roman Catholics to be the largest denomination of Christians there.

Maybe that is hard to find when you are an isolationist..

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.20  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @1.2.18    one month ago
“I wasn't aware…” …duh. 

Well, THAT certainly is one silly explanation for what grammar has to do with it.

Congrats, I guess?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.21  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @1.2.15    one month ago
If you could not defer to the use of a word in any discussion, the slight being real or imagined,

And yet, it wasn't me that started any conversation about the use of the word "slew".

And I wasn't the one distracting from the content of the story by focusing on the word that brings nothing to the discussion.

Seems your comment should have been directed at the person deferring.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
1.2.22  afrayedknot  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.20    one month ago

“…what grammar has to do with it.”

Point proven, tex.

Pick a word, any word, and any point you think you have made is lost in the innuendo…

…please continue to prove the fact. 

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
1.2.23  afrayedknot  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.21    one month ago

“…slew…”

Point proven, tex.

Pick a word, any word, and any point you think you have made is lost in the innuendo…

…please continue to prove the fact. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.24  Texan1211  replied to  afrayedknot @1.2.23    one month ago
…please continue to prove the fact. 

No need to prove anything. The proof is in his own post. Sorry you can't see that.

I asked you to relate the word in the article and his detracting by bitching about the word.

You have failed miserably,

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
1.2.25  Hallux  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.19    one month ago

Presbyterians who are looking to get laid call themselves Catholics.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.2.26  Texan1211  replied to  Hallux @1.2.25    one month ago
Presbyterians who are looking to get laid call themselves Catholics

Must be a uniquely Canadian thingy.

Is being Catholic such a turn on for Canadians?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.2.27  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @1.2.13    one month ago
just another synonym for partisanship,

Ah, more projection

 
 
 
bugsy
Professor Participates
1.2.28  bugsy  replied to  Texan1211 @1.2.3    one month ago
Is the use of the word the topic?

It is when that word does not meet their given agenda.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2  author  Vic Eldred    one month ago

This just in:

"U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper of the District of Columbia, who is presiding over the Sussmann case which begins tomorrow, is married to lawyer Amy Jeffress, who represented FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

 

Cooper, an Obama-appointee, and Jeffress, a former top aide to Attorney General Eric Holder, are well connected in the Democrat party. Merrick Garland even presided over their 1999 wedding.

 

John Durham did not ask  Judge Cooper to recuse himself."




 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
2.1  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago
Durham did not ask  Judge Cooper to recuse himself."

Why not, Judge Cooper said he would if asked?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Hallux @2.1    one month ago

And take away the "he should have recused himself" defense after it's over..................IF needed 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
2.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago
"U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper of the District of Columbia, who is presiding over the Sussmann case which begins tomorrow, is married to lawyer Amy Jeffress, who represented FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

Maybe people should set their hair on fire like they did with Justice Thomas and his wife.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
2.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2    one month ago

Far more of a power couple than Justice Thomas and his wife.

I can't find anywhere that Thomas' wife has a law degree- nor has she represented any high powered Republicans in court. Nor is she well connected in the court- outside of her husband.

Judge Cooper reeks of Democrat insider. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
2.2.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ronin2 @2.2.1    one month ago

And that's why I'm expecting a lot of leaks and witness tampering.  

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
2.2.3  Ender  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.2    one month ago

A lot of leaks? Is this going to be a closed case where the public cannot see?

Even if it was court reporters tell what happened that day.

Leaks...Hahaha

 
 
 
Hallux
Sophomore Principal
2.3  Hallux  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago

B.T.W. I did have to laugh at the site's commentators accusing Durham of being a 'sellout'.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.4  Dulay  replied to  Vic Eldred @2    one month ago

This just in:

A revelation from Sept 2021. 

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
2.4.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Dulay @2.4    one month ago
This just in:

This just in:

Newstalkers lefties are among the very few who still cling to the Russia Hoax!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3  author  Vic Eldred    one month ago

"According to the indictment, Mr. Sussmann went to Mr. Baker’s office and spun the tale that he was acting as a “good citizen,” not as a lawyer for  Donald Trump ’s election opponents, delivering information potentially damaging to Mr. Trump. FBI special agents are trained to interview witnesses and suspects and spend most of their working careers doing so. An agent would have keyed in on Mr. Sussmann’s motivation and memorialized the interview on an FD-302 interview-report form, the proper way to record what would likely become evidence.

What makes Mr. Baker’s lack of action even more egregious is that he was told by Mr. Sussmann a day in advance, by text, that he wanted the visit so he could bring sensitive information to the FBI’s attention. According to an April 4, 2022, court filing by Mr. Durham, Mr. Sussmann also specifically said, in a Sept. 18, 2016, text to Mr. Baker, that he was “coming on my own—not on behalf of a client.” This is the essence of his alleged lie.

Mr. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty. What will be his defense? If it were simply his word against Mr. Baker’s, with only the two of them in the room, Mr. Sussmann could simply deny the alleged lie. Once Mr. Durham’s investigation recovered Mr. Sussmann’s text, sent the day before the meeting, that avenue of defense was closed off."


 
 

Who is online



43 visitors