Billy_Bob
Diamond Member
I put my investigators hat on today while I was reading the information from the Sussman trial. You can argue that the judicial bias, which blocked crucial evidence from being admitted, was the reason he was acquitted but what I found in testimony connects the dots on Jan 6. At a minimum, it exposes some incestuous playmates and raises ethical questions.
One of the revelations in the trial was the fact that Sussman worked for Perkins-Coie law firm. This law firm is the Democratic National Committees lead law firm. Within this law firm the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) was given a secure office and was working with the law firm. I want to know what their roll was. Sussman was feeding the FBI lies at the request of Hillary Clinton according to her Campaign Manager's testimony.
Why is this important? The FBI and Hilary's campaign were working jointly. The DNC was therefore working jointly as well. The office is still in operation today and was throughout the Trump Presidency. IF you think for one minuet that Pelosi and Schumer were not in the loop, you would be wrong, as the party leaders they were always kept informed of what was taking place.
So, let's look at Jan 6. The FBI and their surrogates incited the riot on Capitol Hill. We know this from testimony and from admissions by the FBI. There is even video of them doing so. The CHP waved these people in, who gave that order? Video is still being withheld of the incident. Why?
Pelosi refused re-enforcements at least three times. Why? Pelosi had information that there was going to be a large crowd. She knew it could be whipped up into a frenzy if the right buttons were pushed. Why would she allow the police to let people in? That order had to come from her given what was going on (verification of the electoral college vote).
Given her knowledge, that she had from classified briefings, the conversations she most certainly had with Perkins-Coie and the DNC, this makes the FBI working in conjunction with the DNC very important. Was this all staged? It looks like it to me. To many "coincidences" to be luck. When you get this many 'coincidences" happening all at once, the chances of it not being orchestrated become very small. Was it a coincidence that 30+ FBI people inciting the crowd was an accident? Or the fact that they were never charged with the crime of inciting even when there is ample video evidence to charge them (Ray Epps)??
The Sussman trial opened pandoras box, showing the connection between the FBI and the DNC. I have a whole lot of questions and the answers I am finding are severely lacking.
One of the revelations in the trial was the fact that Sussman worked for Perkins-Coie law firm. This law firm is the Democratic National Committees lead law firm. Within this law firm the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation) was given a secure office and was working with the law firm. I want to know what their roll was. Sussman was feeding the FBI lies at the request of Hillary Clinton according to her Campaign Manager's testimony.
Why is this important? The FBI and Hilary's campaign were working jointly. The DNC was therefore working jointly as well. The office is still in operation today and was throughout the Trump Presidency. IF you think for one minuet that Pelosi and Schumer were not in the loop, you would be wrong, as the party leaders they were always kept informed of what was taking place.
So, let's look at Jan 6. The FBI and their surrogates incited the riot on Capitol Hill. We know this from testimony and from admissions by the FBI. There is even video of them doing so. The CHP waved these people in, who gave that order? Video is still being withheld of the incident. Why?
Pelosi refused re-enforcements at least three times. Why? Pelosi had information that there was going to be a large crowd. She knew it could be whipped up into a frenzy if the right buttons were pushed. Why would she allow the police to let people in? That order had to come from her given what was going on (verification of the electoral college vote).
Given her knowledge, that she had from classified briefings, the conversations she most certainly had with Perkins-Coie and the DNC, this makes the FBI working in conjunction with the DNC very important. Was this all staged? It looks like it to me. To many "coincidences" to be luck. When you get this many 'coincidences" happening all at once, the chances of it not being orchestrated become very small. Was it a coincidence that 30+ FBI people inciting the crowd was an accident? Or the fact that they were never charged with the crime of inciting even when there is ample video evidence to charge them (Ray Epps)??
The Sussman trial opened pandoras box, showing the connection between the FBI and the DNC. I have a whole lot of questions and the answers I am finding are severely lacking.
Last edited:
