The Sussman trial

[eagle7-31]

CNN's Eye is on the Sparrow

Jack Sparrow, that is, the movie pirate played by Johnny Depp, whose defamation suit against his ex-wife Amber Heard is full of the kind of meaningless salacious nonsense CNN’s declining viewership is capable of focusing on. For grownups, ...

www.americanthinker.com

In spite of Durham's evidence which in plentiful the deep state cover up will continue.

 

[eagle7-31]

CNN's Eye is on the Sparrow

Jack Sparrow, that is, the movie pirate played by Johnny Depp, whose defamation suit against his ex-wife Amber Heard is full of the kind of meaningless salacious nonsense CNN’s declining viewership is capable of focusing on. For grownups, ...

www.americanthinker.com

In spite of Durham's evidence which in plentiful the deep state cover up will continue.

The Hill has the most detailed description of how the Clinton team lied about the false allegations and their role in generating and promoting it. Here’s a sample of the “bag of tricks”:

The Clinton team denied involvement in the creation of the Steele dossier throughout the 2016 campaign despite direct media inquiries. It was only after the election that mysterious expenses for its legal counsel led reporters to discover the truth. The payments for the dossier were masked as “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to the law firm. According to New York Times reporter Ken Vogel, Elias categorically denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier; when Vogel tried to report the story, he said Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman later wrote that “folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”
According to the indictment, Sussman told the truth -- and contradicted what he’d originally told the FBI general counsel -- when interviewed under oath in December 2017 before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, telling them he did not hold the meeting of his own volition but at the request of a client.
Notably, another Clinton figure pushing the Alpha Bank conspiracy was Jake Sullivan, who now weighs intelligence reports for President Biden as his national security adviser. Sullivan, a senior policy adviser to Clinton, declared in an official campaign press statement that the Alfa Bank allegation “could be the most direct link yet between Donald Trump and Moscow” and portrayed it as the work of independent experts: “Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump Organization to a Russian-based bank. This secret hotline may be the key to unlocking the mystery of Trump’s ties to Russia. … This line of communication may help explain Trump’s bizarre adoration of Vladimir Putin.”
So the “very useful narrative” was delivered to the media and the FBI and, along with the dossier, was used to launch the Russia investigation, which led to the appointment of former special counsel Robert Mueller. The “bag of tricks” was supposed to be buried with the involvement of the Clinton campaign -- until Trump Attorney General William Barr appointed Durham as a second special counsel.

This Clinton game was not without national consequences:

Most of the press will ignore this news, but the Russia-Trump narrative that Mrs. Clinton sanctioned did enormous harm to the country. It disgraced the FBI, humiliated the press, and sent the country on a three-year investigation to nowhere. Vladimir Putin never came close to doing as much disinformation damage.

Where do we go from here? Once again, Democrat wrongdoing is being tried before partisan judges and juries in the capital. Professor Jonathan Turley, in a series of tweets, points out that Sussman’s trial is “in stark contrast” to the trial of General Flynn in D.C. Among other things, the Flynn judge refused to immediately close the case even after the prosecution moved to drop it.
In contrast, Sussman’s judge, Obama appointee Christopher Cooper, refused to strike from the jury pool a woman whose daughter is a teammate of Sussman’s daughter; and three other jurors who donated to Clinton, “including one who could only promise to ‘strive for impartiality as best I can.” On the Hill site Turley elaborated on this, detailing the judge’s restrictive rulings and concluding:

The treatment given to Sussmann is in stark contrast to how Trump associates were treated in this same court. In the Flynn trial, Judge Cooper’s colleague, Judge Emmet Sullivan, conducted a series of bizarre hearings, including one in which he used the courtroom flag as a prop to accuse Flynn of being an “unregistered agent of a foreign country while serving as the national security adviser” and to suggest that Flynn could be charged with treason -- crimes not brought against him. Sullivan then declared: “I cannot assure you that if you proceed today, you will not receive a sentence of incarceration. I am not hiding my disgust and my disdain.”
Likewise, another judicial colleague, Judge Amy Berman Jackson, refused to grant Trump associate Roger Stone a new trial despite disturbing reports of juror bias.
While the judge in Flynn’s case was eager to remove obstacles from the prosecution’s path, the judge in Sussmann’s case seems to have created a virtual obstacle course for Durham. Durham may be able to jump the legal hurdles, but he will do so without much of his evidence. To paraphrase Charles Dickens in “A Tale of Two Cities,” for a prosecutor D.C. can be the best of venues or it can be the worst of venues.

Judge Cooper, incidentally, is married to Amy Jeffress, a former Justice Department official and national security counselor to former United States Attorney General Eric Holder.
There’s much discussion online of the likely next path for Durham -- will miscreant FBI agents be next in the dock, for example?
Clearly, despite many handicaps, the Special Prosecution team has done a thorough job of it and has amassed considerable probative evidence to warrant convictions.
But while these FBI agents (and others who colluded with Clinton) in this nefarious scheme would appear to be reasonable targets of the Special Prosecutor, as long as partisan judges in the District of Columbia continue to condone sociopathic behavior by their party through biased rulings that make successful prosecution iffy, that next step -- or any other by the prosecutor -- is problematic.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/05/cnns_eye_is_on_the_sparrow.html#commentsSection

 

[night_son]

What's sadder still is how in the wake of 2020's stolen election so many Americans are placing all their bets on 2024, as if their candidate will somehow get a fair shake this time around. Who says voters aren't herd animals. Show them green enough grass and they'll eat it every time.

 

[schmidlap]

In spite of Durham's evidence which in plentiful the deep state cover up will continue.

Durham's "evidence" against his targeted FBI was non-existent, and his one charge against someone he accused of lying to the FBI was so feeble it was readily dismissed by the jury.

John Durham Tried to Prove Trump’s Russiagate Theory. Instead He Debunked It
Donald Trump's 2016 election conspiracy theory just took a big hit
Trump’s Crusade to Prove the Russia Investigation Was Fraudulent Is Collapsing
A brief history of failed efforts to make Trump the Russia probe’s victim​

More crackpot stuff ensues:

Donald Trump is pushing an insane conspiracy about the Georgia governor's race​

 

[Silent Warrior]

Durham's "evidence" against his targeted FBI was non-existent, and his one charge against someone he accused of lying to the FBI was so feeble it was readily dismissed by the jury.

John Durham Tried to Prove Trump’s Russiagate Theory. Instead He Debunked It
Donald Trump's 2016 election conspiracy theory just took a big hit
Trump’s Crusade to Prove the Russia Investigation Was Fraudulent Is Collapsing
A brief history of failed efforts to make Trump the Russia probe’s victim​

More crackpot stuff ensues:

Donald Trump is pushing an insane conspiracy about the Georgia governor's race​

True. It would be hard to convince the 3 Clinton donors on the jury, allowed by the bias judge, that any amount of evidence is enough to convict one of their own minions. They probably were afraid they would earn the wrath of the suicide queen herself.

 

[schmidlap]

True. It would be hard to convince the 3 Clinton donors on the jury, allowed by the bias judge, that any amount of evidence is enough to convict one of their own minions. They probably were afraid they would earn the wrath of the suicide queen herself.

The weird worshipers will just parrot the Cry Baby Loser's paranoid fantasy regardless of Durham's inability to contrive any evidence against the FBI, but as long as they don't violently attack Congress again, we should consider ourselves lucky.

John Durham Investigation Cost $3.8M in Its First Year​

h

 

[Silent Warrior]

Gosh, were you this concerned about cost when Mueller spend $32M in his investigation of the Clinton provided fantasy? I suppose cost only counts when your side does it. The wierd worshipers just parroted the Cry Baby Loser's paranoid fantasy of Russian collusion. LOL