Durham: Perkins Coie Allies Connected to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign Spied on Trump’s Internet Traffic While Trump Was President

[bripat9643]

She did not and Durham hasn’t claimed she did. The tech executive hired the lawyer. Not the other way around.

Actually, she did. He was in the employ of the Clinton campaign, and has never stopped being in the employ of the Clinton campaign.

 

[colfax_m]

Actually, she did. He was in the employ of the Clinton campaign, and has never stopped being in the employ of the Clinton campaign.

Feel free to back this up with documentation at any point in time but as usual you won't and are just very confused.

 

[struth]

She did not and Durham hasn’t claimed she did. The tech executive hired the lawyer. Not the other way around.

hahaha yeah he did, that's what he freaking lied about and why he is indicted....duh

 

[colfax_m]

hahaha yeah he did, that's what he freaking lied about and why he is indicted....duh

The tech executive never worked for Clinton.
The lawyer (Sussmann) is accused of not revealing he was working for the tech executive, an allegation that Sussmann denies and will fight in court in a few months.

Many details in this story are confused by people who want to jump to conclusions.

 

[SweetTea]

If you listen to the Trump faithful, we are just as corrupt as Russia.

He is right regarding the Democrats. I mean either they are corrupt or just really, really dumb. I think corruption is more likely because even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then. This administration never makes the decision that benefits our country, unless it also happens to help our adversaries as well. If they aren't already, they should be on the payroll of our adversaries.

 

[SweetTea]

Nothing you wrote in the first paragraph is true. And the republican party is the white entitlement party.

The Democrats don't want to keep mass mail-in voting that was implemented in 2016?

Yeah, let me guess, SS is "white" entitlement.

 

[SweetTea]

The tech executive never worked for Clinton.
The lawyer (Sussmann) is accused of not revealing he was working for the tech executive, an allegation that Sussmann denies and will fight in court in a few months.

Many details in this story are confused by people who want to jump to conclusions.

You better get started compiling your excuses now. No matter how it turns out, you will assuredly decide that the Clinton's had absolutely nothing to do with it or that it was somehow, perfectly legit.

 

[SweetTea]

And you just tried to diminish it. It's a serious felony, and all your cult crybabying isn't goingto change that.

He wasn't charged nor impeached for it.

We aren't the ones crying about it. There is no reason to. Trump was not charged with collusion nor obstruction.

 

[Nostra]

You’re prejudice against people who grew up in the south and rural communities.

Got it.

I will continue to prove that I’m smarter and better informed than y’all.

If you were actually from the South you would know "y'all" refers to more than one person, Dumbass.

 

[Nostra]

The tech executive never worked for Clinton.
The lawyer (Sussmann) is accused of not revealing he was working for the tech executive, an allegation that Sussmann denies and will fight in court in a few months.

Many details in this story are confused by people who want to jump to conclusions.

You really like sucking HItlery's member, huh?

 

[Oldestyle]

You have a rich (and very paranoid) fantasy life

The only fantasy in play here, Lesh is yours that Hillary Clinton DIDN'T run the sleaziest campaign in American political history! The more layers of this onion that get peeled away the more obvious it becomes just how bad things were both before and after that election! Hillary is the very epitome of "the end justifies the means!". She is the personification of dirty politics.

 

[colfax_m]

He is right regarding the Democrats. I mean either they are corrupt or just really, really dumb. I think corruption is more likely because even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then. This administration never makes the decision that benefits our country, unless it also happens to help our adversaries as well. If they aren't already, they should be on the payroll of our adversaries.

It's not Democrats that he's talking about. It's the DoJ, the FBI, the judiciary, the State Dept., the department of education, state legislatures, governors, secretaries of state, election commissions. The entire country is corrupt, at least the part of the country that does anything he doesn't like. Except his buddies who were actually charged and convicted of fraud. Those guys were innocent little doves who were "badly treated" and deserved pardons.

Hell, even the weather service was corrupt.

No. Trump and his allies are perfectly willing to trash the country.

 

[Oldestyle]

You have a rich (and very paranoid) fantasy life

All part of the "vast right wing conspiracy", Lesh? Hillary has been playing you for a fool for the better part of twenty years and you just keep on falling for her lies!

 

[SweetTea]

It's not Democrats that he's talking about. It's the DoJ, the FBI, the judiciary, the State Dept., the department of education. The entire country is corrupt. Except his buddies who were actually charged and convicted of fraud. Those guys were innocent little doves who were "badly treated" and deserved pardons.

Hell, even the weather service was corrupt.

There is quite a bit of evidence regarding all of those agencies, minus the Supreme Court, whose Democratic members routinely don't do the job they were hired to do, they just rubber-stamp the leftist agenda.

How are some of us believing that any different than leftists continually making false claims about Trump and believing the Russian narrative?

 

[colfax_m]

There is quite a bit of evidence regarding all of those agencies, minus the Supreme Court, whose Democratic members routinely don't do the job they were hired to do, they just rubber-stamp the leftist agenda.

How are some of us believing that any different than leftists continually making false claims about Trump and believing the Russian narrative?

Or maybe you're Brad Raffensperger who is a Republican and had the audacity to decline Trump's attempts to overturn the vote in Georgia.

He was corrupt too. Supposedly.

 

[Lesh]

All part of the "vast right wing conspiracy", Lesh? Hillary has been playing you for a fool for the better part of twenty years and you just keep on falling for her lies!

Actually she's pretty spot on. She gets heat for saying outloud what everyone else whispers.

 

[Lesh]

The only fantasy in play here, Lesh is yours that Hillary Clinton DIDN'T run the sleaziest campaign in American political history! The more layers of this onion that get peeled away the more obvious it becomes just how bad things were both before and after that election! Hillary is the very epitome of "the end justifies the means!". She is the personification of dirty politics.

Wow...nothing there but your own personal hatred.

What a surprise

 

[colfax_m]

The response from Sussmann is very interesting. Specifically this footnote:
For example, although the Special Counsel implies that in Mr. Sussmann’s February 9, 2017 meeting, he provided Agency-2 with EOP data from after Mr. Trump took office, the Special Counsel is well aware that the data provided to Agency-2 pertained only to the period of time before Mr. Trump took office, when Barack Obama was President. Further—and contrary to the Special Counsel’s alleged theory that Mr. Sussmann was acting in concert with the Clinton Campaign—the Motion conveniently overlooks the fact that Mr. Sussmann’s meeting with Agency-2 happened well after the 2016 presidential election, at a time when the Clinton Campaign had effectively ceased to exist. Unsurprisingly, the Motion also omits any mention of the fact that Mr. Sussmann never billed the Clinton Campaign for the work associated with the February 9, 2017 meeting, nor could he have (because there was no Clinton Campaign).

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638.37.0_1.pdf

It would appear that the right wing seized upon this story and lied about it, drawing inferences that were not stated in Durham's filing, otherwise known as fabricating a story.

 

[Lesh]

The response from Sussmann is very interesting. Specifically this footnote:
For example, although the Special Counsel implies that in Mr. Sussmann’s February 9, 2017 meeting, he provided Agency-2 with EOP data from after Mr. Trump took office, the Special Counsel is well aware that the data provided to Agency-2 pertained only to the period of time before Mr. Trump took office, when Barack Obama was President. Further—and contrary to the Special Counsel’s alleged theory that Mr. Sussmann was acting in concert with the Clinton Campaign—the Motion conveniently overlooks the fact that Mr. Sussmann’s meeting with Agency-2 happened well after the 2016 presidential election, at a time when the Clinton Campaign had effectively ceased to exist. Unsurprisingly, the Motion also omits any mention of the fact that Mr. Sussmann never billed the Clinton Campaign for the work associated with the February 9, 2017 meeting, nor could he have (because there was no Clinton Campaign).

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638/gov.uscourts.dcd.235638.37.0_1.pdf

It would appear that the right wing seized upon this story and lied about it, drawing inferences that were not stated in Durham's filing, otherwise known as fabricating a story.

Also sounds like Durham was all over the place trying to make things sound like things that they weren't.

I wonder why he would do such a thing. Political motivations?

 

[colfax_m]

Also sounds like Durham was all over the place trying to make things sound like things that they weren't.

I wonder why he would do such a thing. Political motivations?

I have a feeling Sussmann and his lawyers are going to take Durham to the woodshed in trial.

Durham is trying to make it seem like Sussmann was working on behalf of the Clinton campaign here. Sussmann asked Durham to tell him who from the Clinton campaign he supposedly coordinated with so that Sussmann could call those people as his defense, which Durham couldn't answer. Durham admitted that he interviewed no one from the Clinton campaign for 2 months after he indicted Sussmann and even then it was just one person.

Remember, the indictment for Sussmann came days before the statute of limitations was up and unsurprisingly Durham has been repeatedly requesting delays in trial date as it appears he's still working on getting his shit together in order to actually prosecute the case.

I'm not an expert, but it doesn't sound great.