I believe he’s only charged Sussman with lying to the FBI, there might be an issue with the billing which could indeed be construed as lying, but even some of that “lying” indictment seems like a reach (the idea Sussman brought the data knowing it was innocuous, is pretty much blown up if the 3 researchers are all sticking to their original suspicions about the data packets they were seeing). That’s where his indictment oversteps, and tries to present it as a conspiracy, even though the facts don’t seem to be there. I warned a poster that the unusual server communications were NOT sufficiently explained, the company behind them has presented different competing stories, and that raises more suspicion. But of course those posters blew right past that in their fervor to believe any investigation into Trump must be false.
Just an update on the Sussman indictment, with additional information now provided to the defense, it would be very surprising if this isn't just thrown out. The investigation was political to begin with, and to date only indicting an FBI lawyer for editing an email, for which he served probation and community service as a sentence (and likely irreparably damage to his career). Defendant in Case Brought by Durham Says New Evidence Undercuts Charge
Yeah, sure, something that 17 angry Dem lawyer spent $40 + million trying to prove, but they could NOT, just suddenly appears..
Not sure I understand what you are talking about. This was the indictment Durham brought against Sussman. If you read the indictment, it comes down to whether or not Baker actually asked Sussman if he represented a client, which Baker gave different answers to. I don't see how Durham can pursue charges if Baker can't even remember their conversation.
This was Durham's big accomplishment, and now it looks like he won't even get this. How much did he spend to tell us nothing?
Mueller turned a profit, so it would be hard to beat Mueller on spending. Durham won't catch Mueller on convictions either. Mueller got convictions on over a dozen Americans, and indictments against a couple dozen Russians. Those will never go to trial, but informative as to who Trump's campaign was working with.
Well, it does tell us the FBI did their job well in the Russia investigation to protect our elections against foreign intervention, and wasn't some conspiracy to taint Trump's presidency.
It tells you exactly the opposite if you have been paying attention. The IG's Report on Crossfire Hurricane was a national embarrassment for the FBI.
What do you see as a national embarrassment? While there were acknowledged mistakes related to the FISA warrants for Carter Page and to reliance on the Steele dossier, the IG report concluded, from Wiki: Wray adopted the recommendations to correct mistakes, which is taking accountability and commented that .
The IG in the CH investigation concluded that the FBI did not follow the law when it came to following the required procedures necessary, "Wood Procedures," to lawfully apply for a FISA warrant at the FISC in the case of Carter Page. The IG order the DOJ to conduct an audit of other FISA applications and that audit found that there were over 200 instances where the FBI did not follow the Woods Procedures in 29 FISA application the audit reviewed. The FISC even got into the act and slapped the FBI around for lying to them. FISA Warrants are the most sensitive and high visibility responsibility that the FBI is tasked with and they completely punted it into the stands. The level of incompetence the IG uncovered was a national embarrassment for the FBI. Justice Department IG Finds Widespread Problems With FBI's FISA Applications FISA court issues rare order to DOJ, FBI following scathing watchdog review DOJ OIG Releases Audit Report on the FBI’s Execution of its Woods Procedures for Applications Filed with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Relating to U.S. Persons | U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General The FBI is still embarrassed about it to this day. Ask any FBI agent you know if it is still soon for FISA jokes and you will be quickly and emphatically informed that "YES! It is still too soon!" The fact you aren't aware of this and that Igor Danchenko was indicted as part of Durham's investigation, makes me think you are trolling the board on this topic.
Well, fortunately I don't know any FBI agents to ask personally! You are citing an investigation that was undertaken to understand the extent of the problem with the FISA applications in general over a five year period of time, which uncovered widespread lack of compliance to the Woods procedure (I did not know what the WP was, so thanks, learned something). Wray embraced the issue and has stated he is working to ensure the FBI and all agents fall into compliance with the process. Sounds like a good and bad thing - problems were uncovered, acknowledged and steps are being taken to correct them. However, Horowitz also noted opening the Russia investigation was not improper. And you are right, I left out the indictment of Igor Danchenko, simply because I don't know all the details of the case - my bad - thanks for pointing that out. My interest in the Durham investigation started with what I read of the researchers and that it seemed like a foolish Hail Mary by Durham to consider indicting them and indicting Sussman, as it resurfaces the researchers concerns of a cybersecurity threat, linked to the Trump org. His investigation and indictment of Sussman also appears to be heading nowhere. I can look at your attempt to change the focus from Sussman to general issues with the FBI, as kind of acknowledging that. So, you can call me troll because you disagree with my take on the issue, but that's kind of BS.
Most of the articles are completely worthless. You must completely separate errors vs misleading statements. Not giving exculpatory evidence is a big deal, so lets talk cases there and if it would have changed outcome. Same as prosecutors not releasing exculp and/or Brady. All this comes down to lazy supervisors not maintaining standard’s at FBI, DOJ and the court themselves. Possibly a grand conspiracy, but most likely cockiness and laziness. A claim of 2 million errors can be made, but if only two are material……. Mountains and molehills. A lot more detail is needed to determine the extent of malfeasance. It is also good to talk about what the FBI actually investigates (day to day bulk of cases) where their expertise lies, versus public perceptions.
The Durham Investigation has more than proved that it was necessary. The indictment of Danchenko showed that the Steele Dossier was complete BS and came from a Clinton ally. So you had the Clinton campaign hire a foreign national, who hired a Russian national, who relied on a Clinton FP person to generate the Steele Dossier, that was used in a FISA warrant against a POTUS campaign. That should have never happened and the fact it did shows the FBI leadership was either incompetent or corrupt. The Durham Investigation has also shown that the Alfa Bank story was another bit of Clinton Campaign Oppo Research that Sussman ran to the FBI with. Durham might have a hard time making the charges stick but it doesn't change the fact that his investigation identified that the origins of that story came from the Clinton Campaign. So you now have two of the three instances the FBI relied on to start the Crossfire Hurricane investigation originating out of the Clinton Campaign. I called you a suspected troll because you were trying to claim that the Durham Investigation had not done anything while specifically leaving out the most important indictment they made. That is in addition to the fact the researchers have not been indicted for their research nor are they likely going to be but you keep acting like it has already happened.
Cool, my status has been upgraded to only a suspected troll. By the hopes of Republicans to attack the integrity of the FBI and indict high profile Democrats or FBI leadership over the Russia investigation, the Durham investigation has not produced what Republicans were hoping for. That's my observation and opinion of how this investigation will end. You obviously have a different opinion - that's called a difference of opinion - and I'm gladly not going to call you a troll over it. I read your articles, and learned something - thanks, I hope we can revisit when Durham finally closes the books.
I'm not sure what you think Republicans were hoping for but in my opinion the Durham Investigation has done exactly what I hoped it would. I have said for the last five years on this board that the US IC's capabilities should not be used against the opponents of the party controlling the Executive Branch in a Presidential election. It was wrong when it happened under the Obama Admin to the Trump Campaign and it would have been wrong if the Trump Admin tried to do it to the Biden Campaign. We needed to know exactly how that happened and it needed to be available public to make sure it never happens again. What Durham has shown with his indictments is that so far 2 out of the three things the FBI used to justify opening the Crossfire Hurricane Investigation against Trump and his campaign have been shown to have originated as oppo research paid for by the Clinton Campaign. And incorrect oppo research at that. The fact that FBI Leadership team under Comey fell hook, line, and sinker for it shows that they were either incompetent or stupid. The first thing they should done was taken that info to the rest of the US IC and checked to see if it was legitimate and corroborated by other members of the IC. They did not and failing to do so is a great big flashing neon sign that something was very wrong. I have heard several legal commentators say they think Durham is going to provide a written report to the DOJ that layouts what his team thinks happened. That report will likely say that the FBI Leadership was duped by the multiple vectors of reporting they were getting on Trump from Clinton allies and it will not recommend criminal charges for any of them. I think that is matching up with what we are seeing. You cannot charge someone for being incompetent or stupid but that is what the report will likely point to when it tries to explain how the FBI Leadership allowed this to happen. I do feel I owe you an apology as I should not have suggested you were a troll. This is an extremely involved case and you need to understand how the IC and government contracts work. For people in the IC, it is pretty personal and it is not a good thing when the IC is dragged into an election controversy, as the IC should be seen as non-partisan.
