LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL

U

Search

Many Voices, One Freedom: United in the 1st Amendment

March 28, 2024

M

Menu

!

Menu

Your Source for Free Speech, Talk Radio, Podcasts, and News.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Dispelling possible previous doubts, U.S. Special Counsel John Durham is proving to be very serious about unearthing and prosecuting a vast conspiracy of improprieties and potentially criminal actions committed by high-level Department of Justice officials in connection with spying and defamation assaults upon the 2016 Trump campaign and presidency.

We have already learned, for example, that “Russian collusion” charges accusing Donald Trump of being Vladimir Putin’s puppet were entirely fabricated by operatives tied to the Clinton campaign and DNC to distract attention away from Hillary’s 30,000 deleted emails. Included were some exchanges containing highly classified information.

There is clear evidence that the Obama-Biden White House had authorized a 2016 FBI “Crossfire Hurricane” FBI investigation premised upon a phony “dirty dossier” report to obtain FISA court filings used to conduct surveillance on Carter Page, a peripheral Trump campaign advisor.

In addition to repeatedly omitting facts in the FISA filings, Kevin Clinesmith, a low-level FBI lawyer, copped a guilty plea of knowingly altering evidence in exchange for skating on serious federal prison time.

In addition to Clinesmith, Durham has indicted an individual alleged to have cooked up the phony dossier dirt on Trump, along with Michal Sussmann, a former attorney to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign who has pleaded not guilty to allegedly making a materially false statement to the FBI’s then-general counsel James Baker.

Sussmann purportedly misrepresented nefarious relationships between the Trump organization and a Russia-based Alfa bank with an intent to bait the FBI into initiating a Trump investigation that would be leaked to the media to influence the 2016 election.

The indictment specifically states that Sussmann, an attorney at the Perkins Coie law firm, had falsely assured Baker he was not doing this work “‘for any client,” which led the FBI general counsel to understand that SUSSMANN was acting as a good citizen merely passing along information, not as a paid advocate or political operative.”

The Durham investigation team turned up documents showing that Sussmann was being handsomely paid at the time by the 2016 Clinton campaign.

Working his way up the anti-Trump Clinton-Justice Department collaboration leadership chain, a new Durham court filing on January 25 reveals that DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz has concealed material information contained on two cellphones used by former FBI General Counsel Baker that is crucial to his ongoing Sussmann prosecution.

Horowitz is a big deal figure in all this illicit intrigue who led FBI investigations into Clinton’s private email server scandal, spying on the Trump campaign, Russian collusion charges, and related abuses of the FISA court.

Other information withheld from Durham included additional details regarding a separate criminal FBI pre-election leak investigation of Baker involving contacts with a Mother Jones reporter that Durham personally conducted between 2017 and 2019.

As part of Durham’s discovery obligations, the Special Counsel’s Office had met with Horowitz and his team on Oct. 7, 2021, requesting any materials, including all “documents, records, and information” regarding Sussmann in possession of the Office of Inspector General (OIG).

On Dec. 17, 2021, Horowitz’s office provided Durham with information that Sussmann had given the OIG in early 2017 stating that an OIG “employee’s computer was ‘seen publicly’ in ‘Internet traffic’ and was connecting to a Virtual Private Network [VPN] in a foreign country.”

It isn’t clear what this information was about, or why Sussmann, a private citizen and key Clinton attorney, would know about or have been interested in the internet activities of OIG employees.

In any case, although the December disclosure stated that “the OIG represented to [Durham’s] team that it had “no other file or other documentation” relating to this cyber matter,” Sussmann’s attorneys informed Durham that there was additional unreported information.

Sussmann had personally met with Horowitz in March 2017 to pass along the information about the OIG employee’s computer VPN use in a previously undisclosed meeting. Sussman’s attorneys told Durham that the VPN information had been obtained from Rodney Joffe, a computer expert with close FBI connections.

Joffe is alleged to be the source of Sussmann’s falsified data about contacts between the Trump organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank, and therefore an important figure in Durham’s case against Sussmann and to his wider investigation into the origins of the Russia collusion hoax.

Durham had noted in a previous filing that “[Joffe’s] goal was to support an ‘inference’ and ‘narrative’ regarding Trump that would please certain ‘VIPs.’”

A subsequent filing by Durham noted that these VIPs were “individuals at the defendant’s [Sussmann’s] law firm and the Clinton campaign.” Joffe (an unidentified “Tech Executive-1”) is also alleged to have been offered a high-ranking [cybersecurity]position in a Clinton administration in exchange for pushing her campaign narrative that her opponent Trump was compromised by the Kremlin.

It remains a mystery why Sussmann would have been seeking out the OIG shortly after he was pushing information detrimental to Trump and to both the FBI and the CIA… or why Horowitz would have taken a personal meeting from Hillary Clinton’s campaign lawyer. According to Bill Shipley, a former federal prosecutor, “[y]ou don’t generally just call the IG and get a meeting with him personally.”

It also isn’t clear why Horowitz chose not to inform Durham of the meeting that directly pertained to information Horowitz’s office had specifically requested in connection with Durham’s special counsel probe.

According to Durham’s filing, “in early January 2022, the Special Counsel’s Office learned for the first time that the OIG currently possesses two FBI cellphones of the former FBI General Counsel.”

Sussmann is alleged to have lied to Baker when he tried to push false incriminating data about Trump and Alfa Bank to the FBI, a circumstance that also makes Baker and his cellphones central to Durham’s case against Sussmann.

Public questions remain regarding what connections, if any, exist between Horowitz’s early contact with Clinton campaign lawyer Sussmann and potential criminal involvement of high-level DOJ/FBI officials in launching a sham Trump-Russia collusion inquiry premised upon illegitimate FISA court spying applications purposely intended to influence a presidential election.

The good news is compelling evidence to believe that U.S. Special Counsel John Durham intends to dig into and expose answers we can finally trust, however high up in the deep state they reside, and despite predictable resistance from President Joe Biden’s hyper-partisan Attorney General Merrick Garland.

MANY VOICES, ONE FREEDOM: UNITED IN THE 1ST AMENDMENT

Join our community: Your insights matter. Contribute to the diversity of thoughts and ideas.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Sitewide Newsfeed

More Stories
.pp-sub-widget {display:none;} .walk-through-history {display:none;} .powerpress_links {display:none;} .powerpress_embed_box {display:none;}
Share via
Copy link