A Strange Defense of Spying on Trump
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The press corps doesn't usually support government spying, but when it comes to Donald Trump they are making an exception. The journalists who gave themselves prizes for pressing the Russia collusion narrative that turned out be false are now dismissing news that their narrative was inflated with false information collected by eavesdropping on Mr. Trump.
A legal filing Friday by special counsel John Durham says a private contractor aided the Hillary Clinton campaign in concocting the false collusion tale. Tech executive Rodney Joffe worked with other researchers to mine proprietary internet data, including records from the White House. The filing says Mr. Joffe could access this data because his employer had a "sensitive arrangement" with the government to provide internet services, which Mr. Joffe "exploited" to help Team Clinton gather "derogatory information about Donald Trump."
Mr. Joffe’s response, in a Monday statement, is worth parsing. It describes Mr. Joffe as an “apolitical internet security expert” who “legally provided access” to the internet data from the White House.
“Under the terms of the contract, the data could be accessed to identify and analyze any security breaches or threats,” says the statement. And since there were “legitimate national security concerns about Russian attempts to infiltrate the 2016 election,” Mr. Joffe and “cyber-security researchers” prepared a “report of their findings,” which they gave to the CIA.
The Russians were a legitimate 2016 electoral threat, but Mr. Joffe’s statement doesn’t explain how or why he cooperated with Clinton representatives. If the contractor’s job was to monitor security threats to the U.S., then the responsibility was to report any suspicious activity to the government—immediately and in a classified manner.
But according to Mr. Durham’s filing, Mr. Joffe took his information to others—namely, lawyers for the Clinton campaign, who also brought in the oppo-research hit squad Fusion GPS. This partisan team spent months writing anti-Trump white papers full of unproven claims that they spread to the media. We doubt government contracts include: “In case of threats, first call Democrats.”
Mr. Joffe’s statement raises more questions than it answers. Who in government provided the contract that gave him such access to White House records? Why did he cooperate with Clinton campaign operatives? How did he come to hire the same lawyer who worked for the Clinton campaign?
We don’t apologize for thinking that all of this is news that readers might like to know about. The mystery is why the rest of the press corps wants everyone to ignore it.
Tags
Who is online
422 visitors
The Durham memo is clear and it is being directed to Michael Sussman. The message is that Sussman's lawyers are not serving him. They are trying to protect others. Sussman should be cooperating.
Durham is building a larger conspiracy case. Sussman is a vital link in that case.
Why is taking him so long to 'build this case?' I mean it's been years now - over five years.
I mean we've been waiting for years now on those indictments against the Obama administration - that were coming 'any day now'!!!!!!!!!!!!
Look at it this way Tess, it still may cost less than the bogus Mueller investigation and this one is uncovering what may be the nation's greatest scandal.
May be... might... could be... Until it is - it could also be nothing.
It's not nothing. The least that could happen is that Durham would need to bring a heavy hand against Sussman.
I'm still looking for those indictments from Hillary's emails.
And Sussman's lawyers are saying Durham knows full well he's of shit - and only fishing for information he doesn't have. We'll find out if, or when, it goes to trial.
Bogus Mueller investigation? Let's look at the numbers, shall we?
Mueller's group is composed of six former Trump advisers, 26 Russian nationals, three Russian companies, one California man, and one London-based lawyer. Seven of these people (including five of the six former Trump advisers) have pleaded guilty.
Durham's single indictment is consists of:
They aren't ready yet.
And Sussman's lawyers are saying Durham knows full well he's of shit - and only fishing for information he doesn't have.
Sussman's lawyers don't care about him, they are worrying about other people who may get caught in this. They want Sussman to be the second coming of Susan McDougal. Let's see what he does under pressure.
It is nothing. It's a great big nothingberder.
Bogus Mueller investigation
They were supposed to be investigating Trump's collusion with Russia.
Seriously, do NONE of y'all have an understanding of the existence of a federal statute of limitations?
Sussman's lawyers are kicking Durham's ass. Wait till the voir dire the jury pool...
All one needs do is read Sussman's response to Durham's motion to see what he's doing under pressure Vic.
Oh and BTW Vic, why limit the conspiracy by assuming that Sussman is under any pressure? Maybe it's already a given that Sussman will be pardoned before sentencing, like Trump pardoned Flynn. In for a penny, in for a pound right Vic?
What's taking so long?
You wish.
It's a whole lotta nothing!
Lol... Not one of any American for conspiring with Russia to influence the 2016 election. Which was his purpose....
Special counsel Durham has made 1 indictment
Wrong again!
Durham's single indictment is consists of:
Doubling down on the wrong now.
Do you do stand up too? Because that's fucking funny shit. I'm certain it's past any statute of limitations on any new charges. Also if you still think she's guilty of incorrectly holding classified info, then should be incensed at what was allegedly recently found in Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence. Neither will be indicted on any related charge.
Sure... okay. Have you read the Durham filing and the resulting counter argument? I'm talking the actual legal documents? Durham as facts to prove the Sussman lawyers are telling the judge would be impossible. The most obvious being Sussman billing the Clinton Campaign - Durham says he did and Sussman is saying he didn't AND couldn't since there was no Clinton Campaign at that time. That should be extremally simple to for Durham to prove if he had that evidence.
Just keep telling yourself that....
Prove it...
Then prove me and Mueller wrong. For once, provide an actual fact based argument. Apparently, you think Mueller was lying when he concluded " The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” So all you have to do is show the indictment brought by Mueller's office proving Mueller wrong.
Lol! bold tactic from the person who refuses to provide any proof of his claims and argues by emoji.
But because I don't live in fantasy land and make fact based arguments, you can start by looking up Durham's indictment and conviction of FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith and the indictment of Steele source Igor Danchenko.
I think you're confused.
We'll see how funny it is for Sussman and a few others.
That should be extremally simple to for Durham to prove if he had that evidence.
There is no "if." Durham doesn't bluff. I kept this avatar for a reason.
That's what they said about Jill Biden
Three's a crowd!
Nope, but as usual you are.
Nothing new there ......
Yup, you got it, a total of 3 indictments, but they were only for lying to the FBI. As we've seen with Michael Flynn, lying to the FBI is a meaningless crime that should not have been charged in the first place... Trump said it was okay to lie to the FBI after all.
Right?
Sussman's charge will be dismissed. There is no evidence for his alleged crime since for some reason, they decided not to record him during that part of the questioning. It is a he said...he said accusation with no corroborating evidence. The others appear to be plea bargaining down to hand slaps.
After 5 years, he doesn't do much else either.
What do we have, besides Sussman?
Kevin Clinesmith - FBI lawyer how was indicted (and pled guilty) for falsifying routine paperwork and got 3 years probation.
Igor Danchenko - the Russian analyst in the Steele dossier who has been indicted on 5 counts of lying to the FBI. He's pled not guilty.
Deflect, Deflect Deflect. I proved my statement, yet you've still yet to prove any of yours.
Trump said it was okay to lie to the FBI after all
Ah yes, get caught spreading information so pivot to Trump. Play number one from the liberal troll handbook.
Anytime you want to make a wager on that I'm right here.
Is it 2024 already?
nypost
And 1 year inability to practice law. Like I said, a hand slap.
Danchenko is accused of lying to FBI agents when he told them he never communicated with a public relations executive active in Democratic politics about allegations in Steele’s reports.
All of Durham's indictments have to do with side issues and have nothing to do with the facts in the dossier. He is failing utterly in disproving the dossier.
Exactly what statement do I need to prove???
He pardoned Flynn for lying to the FBI. Doesn't that mean to you that he felt it was okay, since there are no consequences thanks to Trump? What else could pardoning Flynn mean?
You don't read many of my comments do you? As I have told other right wing apologists, I use Trump to show their hypocritical comments when they attack someone for doing the same thing that they approved of under Trump.
As a fictional example:
Let's say that someone, under 1 presidential administration was caught and charged with, then plead guilty to, lying to the FBI. But there is nary a word of contempt by a certain group of people.
THEN under a different presidential administration, someone else was caught and charged with lying to the FBI. But this same group is now up in arms about the charge of lying to the FBI.
That would make members of this unnamed group hypocrites. Understand?????
He doesn't have dick.
He's been bluffing for a long time now - over five years.
"Sussman's charge will be dismissed. There is no evidence for his alleged crime since for some reason, they decided not to record him during that part of the questioning. It is a he said...he said accusation with no corroborating evidence. The others appear to be plea bargaining down to hand slaps."
"After 5 years, he doesn't do much else either."
Ya! I wonder how much they're paying him for producing absolutely NOTHING.
Unfortunately, we're the ones paying him.
He's so far failing to prove much at all.
For starters, prove any American was indicted by Mueller for conspiring with the Russians to influence the 2016 election.
w their hypocritical comments when they attack someone for doing the same thing that they approved of under Trump.
Great. Prove that I ever said it's okay to lie to the FBI.
That's your statement, not mine. I have no need to prove it. [deleted]
Once again, why would I want to prove something I never said? Trump showed, with his pardon, that it is okay to lie to the FBI.
[deleted]
Lol... your response show a lot of dishonesty. It's sad you can't even own up to your own words.
Anyone can read your posts and now see you try and weasel out of your own arguments.
When you write this, " I use Trump to show their hypocritical comments when they attack someone for doing the same thing that they approved of under Trump," in a response to me you are claiming I approve of lying to the FBI. Unless you are now claiming you don't understand simple English and can't construct a coherent argument. Which would also explain a lot of things.
"Unfortunately, we're the ones paying him."
I realized that after I made the comment, so the joke is really on me/us. We're always paying for the other sides' fuck ups. We're paying for the investigations into the investigations of the fuckups (AKA the trumpturd criminal enterprise of an administration).
And what has that gotten you?
Diddly squat and a lot of wasted taxpayer cash.
Thanks fuck up liberals.
Care to provide links to my quotes where I said what you are claiming?
First, it's NOT a memo, it's a 'provocative and misleading' MOTION TO INQUIRE INTO POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.
Uttter bullshit.
Of special note is that not even Durham made that claim in his bullshit motion.
The message is that Durham fails to charge ANYONE for the conspiracy allegations he has made throughout his filings.
They WHO Vic?
Why would Sussman cooperate with a prosecutor that has done nothing but LIE?
Durham has alleged that he had evidence of a conspiracy since September of 2020 yet hasn't charged ANYONE.
BTFW, the statute of limitations has lapsed.
Well then Durham fucked himself by lying about Sussman since September.
Sussman's lawyers. Pay attention.
Oh, I am Vic. I read all of the machinations you post. They're a daily source of comic relief.
Trump's lawyer interrupted a hearing about the Trump Organization's finances to ask New York's AG to investigate Hillary Clinton for 'spying' on Trump
It's a reference to a right-wing conspiracy theory claiming Clinton illegally spied on Trump's White House.
The comment came in the middle of a court hearing over whether Trump should sit for a deposition about Trump Organization finances.
Former President Donald Trump's attorney Alina Habba asked a lawyer from New York attorney general Tish James' office if they would "go after Hillary Clinton" in a hearing about whether the former president should be forced to sit for a deposition about his company's finances.
"I want to know, Mr. Wallace, Ms. James, are you gonna go after Hillary Clinton for what she's doing to my client?" Habba said, referring to New York Attorney General Letitia James and Kevin Wallace, an attorney representing her in the hearing. "That she spied at Trump Tower in your state? Are you gonna look into her business dealings?"
Judge Arthur Engoron stopped Habba's discussion of Clinton, saying they were irrelevant.
"The Clintons are not before me," he said.
The conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton spied on Trump in the White House has proliferated through right-wing media outlets in recent days.
C'mon, folks, all of this involves the Clintons. The motivation for the Clintons doing anything ain't rocket science. Follow the money.
Yep, spot on. The closer it gets to the evil one, the harder all the Clinton sycophants fight it.
Its how worker drones roll ......
The fact that there was no report of any suspicious activity should tell everybody with half a brain that the Democrats wasted millions of taxpayer money and 4 years "investigating" something that wasn't there.
Even when the pure partisan investigation was expanded to look for ANY wrong doing, it come up empty. And yet here we are, almost 6 years later and we STILL have the left chirping that there was something criminal.
This is all to distract from Trump's financial crimes
That you think Durham gives a flying fuck about Trump's finances is comical as hell.
Didn't Meuller look into those during his "investigation" and come up with nothing?
No, it wasn't a part of his mandate.
Half of what he was looking into wasn't in the mandate.
Pfft.
Gee, that's what Hillary just said.
John, that time has come. A lot of people are going to be squirming.
Rodney is in deep doodoo. Two employees have already testified against him, and there will be more to come.
It may take some time but the truth will be forthcoming.
"It may take some time but the truth will be forthcoming."
Five years and counting?
Is it 2024 already?
Doh!
Their stupid comments never end.
Again, is it 2024 already?
"Barr tapped Durham in May 2019 to review the actions of law enforcement in the FBI investigation known as “Crossfire Hurricane” which looked into potential links between President Trump’s 2016 campaign and Kremlin operatives."
Who really cares about spying? We getting free crack pipes!
No, there will be new masks with holes to smoke your crack. LMAO
All the white trash trumpturd supporters will be lining up for those!
Could be but I doubt there will be any left after all the big fat white trash, can’t keep the Twinkies out of my pie hole, Biden supporters waddle down to get theirs.
You're confused, those are the trumpturd supporters.
Never.
Crack pipe?
I’m still waiting for my free Obama phone
That program was started under Reagan and was expanded to include cell phones under George W. Bush.
Lol ..... but, but, but Reagan ..... but, but Bush ..... what about but, but, but Clinton?
Hilarious!
Wow, not a fan of facts I guess. You can look it up for yourself. Sorry to upset you.
Lol .... I’m not the one who is upset Frosty so stay frosty bro ..... you’ll live longer.
For comprehension purposes, I clearly wasn’t countering what you said but rather was only pointing out that you included Reagan and Bush but not Clinton. Clearly the act of an angry, triggered person but hey, that’s just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Democrats butt hurt about 2016 tried to cheat, they got caught spying. Save your dignity democrat fan club pumpers, it's not a good look.
Talk about the typical projection, deflection, and denial.
Reminds me of a former poster who we haven't seen around in a while - some kind of killer fish.
Hillary Clinton lashes out at Donald Trump, Fox News over Durham probe: ‘Spinning up a fake scandal’
#JustTheNews
She's upset!
That's all y'all got - fake scandals and faux outrage - plus the typical deflection, projection, and denial.
Special counsel John Durham has accused Michael Sussman, a lawyer for the Democratic party, of sharing with the CIA internet data purporting to show Russian-made phones being used in the vicinity of the White House complex. Durham coached the accusation in vague technical language in a court filing on Friday, saying that his office had found nothing to support Sussman’s alleged claim that the information shared with the CIA “demonstrated that Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare, Russian-made wireless phones in the vicinity of the White House and other locations.”
Just the typical distraction, away from whatshisnames' difficulties, or should I say, projection, deflection, denial of the former criminal enterprise of an 'administration'.
So you're distracted? I thought it was more a clarification of what Durham actually filed. My apologies for distracting your belief with facts.
What an agnorant comment.
I wasn't calling your comment a distraction, I was referring to this 'article' as being a distraction from trump's criminal actions.
What does agnorant mean?
[deleted]
That would leave the lack of knowledge crowd out. I guess this just isn't my day.
You replied to me, so it was difficult to know that. I'll try to be more discerning next time
It wouldn't have been that hard to discern if you had looked at the comment immediately before it, but, whatever.
[deleted]
BREAKING: Durham already responded to Sussmann's motion to strike. Filing here : https:// courtlistener.com/docket/6039058
That reads like a comedy skit.