The Company Town

On Saturday, American Greatness posted an article about how Washington, D.C., currently functions (or does not function). The article is titled, “Dismantle the D.C. Company Town.” What a great idea.

The article reports:

Gertrude Stein famously warned that it was important to know how far to go when going too far. 

It pains me to admit that Democrats seem to have a far better sense of all that than do Republicans. Perhaps it’s because Democrats have a visceral appreciation of William Hazlitt’s observation that “those who lack delicacy hold us in their power.” The Democrats, that is to say, long ago became expert at the game of holding their opponents to standards that they themselves violate not just with impunity but with ostentatious glee. 

The news last week that Michael Sussmann was found not guilty by a D.C. jury of his ideological peers was another thumb in the eye of the American so-called system of justice. Scary-looking super-cop John Durham had indicted Sussmann for the same thing that brought down Trump’s flash-in-the-pan National Security Advisor Mike Flynn—lying to the FBI—but no one who has been paying attention thought the two men would be treated the same way. Flynn was close to Donald Trump, therefore he must be considered a sacrificial beast, someone to be made an example of, a pariah. And so he was. 

Sussmann, by contrast, was a covert employee of the Hillary Clinton campaign. He helped get the Russian Collusion Delusion going and lied to the FBI in the process. But he was on the side of the regime party, so, as Jonathan Turley observed as the Sussmann case unfolded, he was afforded every consideration while Flynn found himself ruined. In this tale of two trials, we got a textbook illustration of how you can deploy a two-tier system of justice in which, as George Orwell put it in Animal Farm: All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others. 

The article also notes the recent arrest of Peter Navarro:

Sussmann joins a long list of Hillary cronies and Department of Justice lackeys (but I repeat myself). In any just world Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, James Comey, Kevin Clinesmith, Loretta Lynch, and indeed Hillary herself would be behind bars. But this is our world, not any just world. 

And here’s some salt to rub in the wound. Peter Navarro, a former Trump economic advisor, was held in contempt of Congress because he refused to hand over documents to the Kangaroo Court, er . . . the Democrat-controlled January 6 inquisition. Eric Holder, Barack Obama’s self-declared “wingman” and Attorney General was also held in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over documents. But not to worry. As CNN reported soon after the affront, “The White House and the Justice Department made clear Friday what had been expected all along: Attorney General Eric Holder will not face criminal prosecution under the contempt of Congress citation passed by the U.S. House.”

The article concludes:

In his Philosophical Investigations, Ludwig Wittgenstein says “all philosophical problems have the form ‘I have lost my way.’” The first response to being lost should be to retrace one’s steps in order to escape the maze. It’s time that Americans faced up to the reality that their governing apparat is a corrupt, self-engorging Leviathan. This is not, or not only, a partisan issue. Sure, Washington, D.C. is a fully paid-up concession of the Democratic Party, regularly voting some 93 to 95 percent Democratic. Sussmann was never going to be convicted there.

So a preliminary antiseptic, as I have argued elsewhere, would be to downgrade Washington in the political metabolism of the country. Indeed, I think the capital, if not the Capitol, ought to be dispersed. Washington, D.C., could continue to function as what it has already in part become: a sort of stage set where functionaries preen and simper before the cameras of a preposterous media and press corps. 

Donald Trump made a few half-hearted stabs at dismantling the lumbering machine that is the Washington establishment, but that seems like a long time ago and, besides, the swamp closed almost instantly to reassert its prerogatives. In his next term, however, he should make the destruction of the Washington machine one of his highest priorities. It won’t be easy. To be frank, I am not sure, absent some world-shaking calamity, it is even possible. But it is nevertheless necessary if anything resembling the republic as envisioned by the founders is to be salvaged.

We have wandered far from the republic the Founding Fathers created. I pray it is not too late to get it back.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article.

Is Anyone Surprised?

On Tuesday, NewsMax reported that a federal jury in Washington, D.C. has found Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann not guilty of lying to the FBI.

As I noted on May 22nd:

JONATHAN TURLEY: Durham faces a lot of challenges in this trial. The judge in the trial has hit the prosecution with limiting orders. This jury pool is a nightmare for the prosecutors. There are three Clinton donors on the jury. In the last 24 hours, the judge turned down a motion to dismiss a juror whose daughter is actually playing on the same team with the daughter of Sussmann. So I think for the prosecutors, it seems like the only thing that is missing on the jury is Chelsea Clinton. A jury of your peers is not supposed to mean other Clinton people. And so, I think that the prosecutors have quite a challenge with this pool.

Unfortunately we have reached the place as a country where equal justice under the law is a myth. Considering the people involved in his wrongdoing, there was no way Michael Sussman was going to be found guilty.

The article at NewsMax reports:

The trial focused on whether Sussmann, a cybersecurity attorney and former federal prosecutor, concealed from the FBI that he was representing Clinton’s campaign when he presented computer data that he said showed a possible secret backchannel between Russia-based Alfa Bank and Trump’s business company, the Trump Organization. The FBI investigated but quickly determined that there was no suspicious contact.

The bureau’s then-general counsel and the government’s star witness, James Baker, testified that he was “100% confident” that Sussmann had told him that he was not representing any client during the meeting. Prosecutors say he was actually acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and another client, and that he hid that information so as to make it seem more credible and to boost the chances of getting the FBI to investigate.

Lawyers for Sussmann deny that he lied, saying that it was impossible to know with certainty what he told Baker since they were the only participants in the meeting and neither of them took notes.

They argued that if Sussmann said he wasn’t acting on the Clinton campaign’s behalf that that was technically accurate since he didn’t ask the FBI to take any particular action. And they said that even if he did make a false statement, it was ultimately irrelevant since the FBI was already investigating Russia and the Trump campaign and would have looked into the Alfa Bank data no matter the source.

Read that last paragraph again. Then consider what would happen to an ordinary citizen if he lied to the FBI. The defense is saying that even if he lied to the FBI, it really isn’t important.

Has America become a banana republic where justice is determined by political affiliation?

If You Believe This…

On Tuesday, The Washington Times posted an article ‘explaining’ how a “typo” in an email led investigators in 2016 to believe that false allegations linking former President Trump to Russia’s Alfa Bank came from the Department of Justice rather than from Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann.

The article quotes testimony from the trial of Michael Sussmann.

FBI Agent Curtis Heide, who along with agent Allison Sands authored the internal communication, said the inaccuracy, sent out just weeks before the 2016 election, was simply a mistake.

“We may have conflated the Office of the General Counsel and the Justice Department,” Mr. Heide said on the witness stand. “I don’t know how that information got in there.”

On Monday, jurors in the criminal trial of Mr. Sussmann were shown the electronic communication sent in September 2016 by top bureau officials to field agents marking the opening of the case. The communication said the investigation was based on a “referral” from the Justice Department, rather than a tip from Mr. Sussmann.

On Tuesday, John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog reported the following:

I was skeptical that the Sussman prosecution would tell us much that is new, but some significant nuggets have come out. Like this one: “FBI brass were ‘fired up’ about now-debunked Trump-Russia ties.”

FBI leaders, including then-Director James Comey, were “fired up” about a potential connection between the Trump campaign and Russia — which ultimately was proven false, text messages and court testimony revealed Tuesday.

On Sept. 21, 2016, two days after Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann gave then-FBI General Counsel James Baker info about a supposed digital back channel between the Trump Organization and Moscow-based Alfa Bank, agent Joe Pientka texted colleague Curtis Heide: “People on 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server.”

So there was zero evidence of any connection between presidential candidate Donald Trump and the Alfa Bank, or any other Russians of note, and all one of Hillary Clinton’s lawyers had to do was waltz into the Bureau with some fabricated “data” and FBI Director James Comey and others were “fired up.” The lust to defeat the interloper Trump and elect Hillary Clinton is palpable.

It’s a shame that they were not nearly so ‘fired up’ over the security problems involved in Hillary Clinton’s secret server.

The Fix Is In

Many Americans are hopefully watching the trial of Michael Sussmann for indications that our justice system’s principle of all men are equal under the law still applies. Well, don’t get your hopes up too high. If you are following the case, you realize that the prosecution is very carefully laying out the case that the bad people in the Clinton campaign fooled the Justice Department into going along with the Russia hoax. There is no suggestion that the Justice Department was part of the plan. That is the first indication that this trial is a show put on to appease those in America who actually want to see people held responsible for ignoring the civil liberties of their political opponents and lying to the media and the American public. There are also some other indications that the truth is not actually welcome in this trial.

On Friday, Fox News posted the following quote from Jonathan Turley:

JONATHAN TURLEY: Durham faces a lot of challenges in this trial. The judge in the trial has hit the prosecution with limiting orders. This jury pool is a nightmare for the prosecutors. There are three Clinton donors on the jury. In the last 24 hours, the judge turned down a motion to dismiss a juror whose daughter is actually playing on the same team with the daughter of Sussmann. So I think for the prosecutors, it seems like the only thing that is missing on the jury is Chelsea Clinton. A jury of your peers is not supposed to mean other Clinton people. And so, I think that the prosecutors have quite a challenge with this pool.

If I am ever charged with a crime, can I get a jury of my friends? How likely is that?

Something To Keep In Mind

It is becoming obvious that someone will be thrown to the lions in the John Durham investigation. It will probably be someone (or someones) associated with the Clinton campaign. It may even include a Clinton (but I doubt it). The mob (many Americans) are demanding accountability, and some accountability will be provided. However, the root of the problem will never be dealt with.

The following is an excerpt from an article posted in The Conservative Treehouse on May 17:

As noted by Charlie Savage, prosecutor Deborah Shaw, a member of the Durham team, delivered the opening remarks to frame the government position in the case.

The telling remarks came early: “Shaw addresses “the elephant in the room” – tells jury their feelings about Russia, Trump, Clinton can’t play a role in the case. This is about “our FBI” which should not be used as a tool by anyone, Republicans or Democrats.”  In essence, prosecutor Shaw is telling the jury the FBI were duped into the Trump-Russia conspiracy investigation by outsiders connected to the Clinton campaign.

That’s a critical baseline from the government we must understand and accept.  That baseline now indicates that none of the DOJ and FBI operatives involved in the fraudulent scheme will be held accountable by the Durham team.  “Our FBI should not be used as a tool by anyone,” yet they were, so sayeth the United States Government.

There you have it folks.  For those who tried to avoid the uncomfortable reality of the situation. The Durham prosecution has set down the cornerstone establishing the DOJ/FBI was used and tricked.

The prosecution cannot later turn toward DOJ and FBI officials who were victimized by the Clinton outside group, reverse the predicate motive of the prior trial, and then hold the DOJ and FBI legally accountable.

That’s that.

The Durham accountability focus is now narrowed to the Clinton team, starting with Michael Sussmann.

This outcome was always visible when we accept the totality of the Robert Mueller probe as an overlay into this entire scenario.  Put into a question I have asked for two years:

How could John Durham hold DOJ and FBI officials accountable for participating in the Trump-Russia fraud, when those same DOJ and FBI officials were part of the Robert Mueller cover-up operation? 

Answer, they can’t.   If Durham were to connect the conspiracy of the outside government and inside government collusion, he would be penetrating an impregnable firewall that would take down multiple DC government institutions simultaneously.

Durham is being permitted to give the illusion of accountability, but he was not authorized or permitted to expose the Dept of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, or any other institution.

The vehicles of our justice institutions are rusted and broken.

Bill Barr was the Bondo application.  John Durham is the spray paint.

The article includes the following Tweet:

That’s where we are, folks. Until we pay closer attention to primary elections and un-elect the Washington swamp creatures, things will not change.

 

The Trial Begins

Just the News posted an article today about the trial of 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann. It is a long, detailed article, so please follow the link and read the entire article. I will try to hit some of the high points.

The article reports:

An FBI agent testifying Tuesday in the trial for 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann discredited evidence Sussmann gave the agency that attempted to connect the Trump Organization with Russia’s Alfa Bank, a purportedly hotline to the Kremlin.

FBI special agent Scott Hellman said the conclusion of the authors of the white paper analysis of the internet data between the email server of the Trump Organization and the Russian Alfa Bank was “not objective” and “far-reaching,” and their conclusion of a secret communications channel “didn’t ring true at all.”

Special counsel John Durham last year charged Sussmann with lying to the FBI when he allegedly told then-FBI general counsel James Baker that he was not working on behalf of any client while providing him with since-debunked collusion allegations.

Sussmann is pleading not guilty to the charge. If convicted, he faces up to five years in prison.  

Hellman, in the second day of the trial, was the prosecution’s second witness and had examined the data on the thumb drives that Sussmann had given to Baker in their meeting – weeks before the presidential election.

Hellman also said that he was frustrated that he didn’t know the source of the data. 

Hellman said he disagreed with the white paper from the thumb drive that explained the Domain Name System data as being a secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank. He also said that he felt that whoever wrote the white paper jumped to conclusions not supported by the technical data and that the methodology of their analysis was questionable. 

The agent noted the lack of logic in the charges:

The FBI agent also said the overall conclusion of the connection between Trump and Russia from the data didn’t make any sense because a presidential candidate would not likely put their own name in a domain name that was easily connected to their organization and Russia if it’s supposedly for secret communication.

“Didn’t ring true at all,” Hellman said. He said the analysis of the data was done “inside of a day,” then given for further analysis to theFBI Chicago division, which later agreed with his assessment. 

Hellman added that he found it conveniently coincidental that someone was looking for suspicious activity between the Trump and Russian servers and found it just three weeks after it began. 

It has become very obvious that this was an effort to neuter the candidacy and presidency of President Trump by the Clinton cartel and their friends in the government bureaucracy. Unfortunately, there are still some in the media who are still parroting the original charges as if they were legitimate. Hopefully there will be enough reporting on this trial to show Americans how they were misled by the media and how badly President Trump was treated. I can’t imagine how much President Trump would have accomplished had not the Clinton cartel, their bureaucratic allies, and their media allies attempted to cripple his presidency from the beginning.

Unraveling The Lies Of The Past Five Years

On Saturday, Hot Air posted an article reminding us that the trial of Michael Sussmann begins Monday. I suspect the exhibits are going to be far more interesting than the trial itself.

The article reports:

When we last checked in with the John Durham case against Michael Sussmann, Durham’s team had asked the judge to decide whether a small group of Fusion GPS emails were covered by attorney-client privilege. According to lawyers for Clinton’s 2016 campaign, Fusion GPS was hired solely to provide legal advice about defamation and libel laws which meant everything they did was legal consulting work. Judge Christopher Cooper didn’t seem to buy that claim and yesterday announced that Fusion GPS would have to turn over 22 emails to the prosecutors.

The Washington Post reported on May 12th:

The charge against Sussmann is the first Durham case to go to trial. A Washington-based researcher faces trial later this year for allegedly lying to the FBI about how he collected allegations against Trump. In 2020, a former FBI lawyer pleaded guilty to illegally changing a government record.

Robert Mintz, another former federal prosecutor, said the trial next week “will be the first real test” of Durham’s work. By going to trial, he said, Sussmann has “thrown down the gauntlet and challenged the significance of the prosecution and the wisdom of bringing the case.”

…“The strategy,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Andrew DeFilippis said in court Monday, “was to create news stories … to get the government to investigate it … and to get the press to report the government was investigating.”

…Prosecutors signaled this week that they plan to call a host of current and former law enforcement officials to describe how the FBI pursued the Alfa Bank accusations, and to paint Sussmann as part of a “joint venture” that included Joffe, Clinton’s campaign, research firm Fusion GPS and cybersecurity experts.

The article at Hot Air quotes a Wall Street Journal article by Kimberly Strassel:

Over at the Wall Street Journal, Kimberley Strassel argued yesterday that Durham’s team has already gone a long way to revealing the machinations behind the scenes of the Clinton campaign, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS and the rest: (Please follow the above link to the Hot Air article to read the quote)

…Strassel concludes that Sussmann’s trial “on its face is about one lawyer, but in reality is the continuing tale of one of the dirtiest tricks in modern U.S. history.” I guess we’ll see how the trial goes next week. It looks to me like Durham’s team has the goods on Sussmann. Whether that will allow him to make a larger case about the Clinton campaigns dirty tricks remains to be seen.

This might be a really good time to sit back and get some popcorn ready.

The Investigation (With Coverup) Continues

On Saturday, The Washington Examiner reported that Special counsel John Durham has issued trial subpoenas for members of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee. Before you get too excited about this, consider the following:

The Conservative Treehouse reported on April 16th:

Thanks to a more detailed filing by John Durham last night {pdf here, h/t Techno}, we can now see the guardrails, rules and general direction the prosecution is taking.

In essence, the underlying Trump-Russia conspiracy theory material from the Clinton campaign, via Rodney Joffe to Michael Sussmann, was fabricated – likely for a dual purpose:

(A) to coverup and make excuses for the stunningly embarrassing, potentially unlawful and politically terrible April 2016 DNC email leaks, which showed the DNC Club internally working to secure the nomination for Hillary Clinton, while trying to destroy her primary opponent, Bernie Sanders.

and

(B) to create the political Russia narrative against Trump, to be deployed later in the general election.

Within the general direction Durham is following, the FBI was duped by a purposeful and manipulative intent from the Clinton campaign.  Meanwhile, the CIA [Agency-2] did not buy into the technological evidence saying it was not “technically plausible” and was “user created and not machine/tool generated.”  

…The prosecutorial approach by John Durham positions all of the corruption outside the institutions of government, thereby protecting them.

The swamp is deep and in control. The government agencies that were totally out of control will not be held accountable by the Durham investigation.

The Washington Examiner reports:

Hillary for America also tried to intervene Tuesday, saying it was “asserting attorney-client privilege and work protection” related to Perkins and Fusion. The filing included declarations from Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta, Clinton campaign manager Robbie Mook, and Elias.

“The Special Counsel continues to overreach: he seeks to admit evidence that the law squarely forbids, he seeks to prove unduly prejudicial allegations he has not charged, and he seeks to prove conduct that is utterly irrelevant to the one discrete crime he has charged,” Sussmann’s lawyers argued Friday night.

Durham also “seeks to prevent Mr. Sussmann from introducing relevant — indeed essential — exculpatory evidence in the form of testimony from his former client, Rodney Joffe,” Sussmann’s lawyers said Friday.

Durham pushed back Saturday.

“The goal of the joint venture could not have been more clear: it was to gather and disseminate derogatory non-public information regarding the internet activities of a political candidate and his associates,” he wrote.

“And that venture was far from collateral to the charged crime. Indeed, the above-described joint venture was the very project that led Tech Executive-1 to rely upon the defendant’s services; the very project that gave rise to the Russian Bank-1 allegations; the very project that prompted agents of the Clinton Campaign to meet with Tech Executive-1; and the very project that caused the defendant to meet with the FBI General Counsel and lie to him about the clients who were behind all of this work,” Durham said.

Durham has declined to promise that Joffe won’t be indicted at some point in the future, but if Joffe is not granted immunity to testify at trial on Sussmann’s behalf, then the charges should be dismissed, the defense team argued.

On Saturday, The Conservative Treehouse reported:

The current court battle is circling around various lawyers and groups saying they have attorney-client privileges in order to attempt to avoid document production and/or testimony that will put them in legal jeopardy.   The Clinton Campaign is claiming communication with Fusion is privileged. Fusion is claiming communication with Perkins Coie is privileged.  Perkins Coie is claiming they hired Fusion GPS for legal services, etc. etc. etc.

It takes much more time, but John Durham is working through each of the privilege claims in court, and so far, he has been successful in compelling compliance.

♦ A frequent question:  Why didn’t Durham charge Rodney Joffe yet?   It’s a good question, and the answer is likely because he’s building that case around something else.  Here’s my suspicion.

You will remember, back in 2016, 2017 and 2018, when I said the Clinton team seem to have some kind of “direct portal” into government databases.  There was some process clearly evident where the Clinton campaign itself had access to government databases.

We speculated about all kinds of contractors helping her, etc.  This is entirely separate from what Fusion GPS and other participants were doing to data-mine information.  This is not the people inside government connected to spygate (NSA, Fusion, etc), this is a portal specific to the Clinton campaign itself.

I always called this network the “Clinton Portal“, and the fingerprints from it just kept surfacing as the media described Trump-Russia connections, and then campaign officials would amplify.  I’ve said that since mid 2016, and I retained that view throughout.  Clinton’s campaign operation was data mining some government database, somehow.  The question was who and how?

Rodney Joffe is the explanation that answers that question.  Joffe exploiting contractor access to government databases (GA Tech via DARPA), in combination with his access to data from Neustar, gave him a unique position.  Joffe was Clinton’s Portal.

My hunch is that Durham is holding back on Joffe because accessing government databases, via a government contract (DARPA) that was not given for that intent, is a bigger set of charges.

Please follow the links above to see exactly what is  happening here. It is brilliant sleight of hand.

The Smoke Screen Continues

On Tuesday, The Epoch Times reported that John Durham has uncovered evidence that the CIA knew the accusations of President Trump’s ties to Russia were fake as early as February 2017.

It should be noted at this point that The Conservative Treehouse begins every article about the Durham investigation with the following disclaimer:

CTH begins every outline of the ongoing Durham investigation with the following disclaimer:  How is John Durham going to reveal everything that is possible about the deep state Trump targeting operation, and simultaneously handle the involvement of Robert Mueller, Andrew Weissmann and the Special Counsel team who were specifically appointed to cover it up?

The Conservative Treehouse reported on April 16th:

Thanks to a more detailed filing by John Durham last night {pdf here, h/t Techno}, we can now see the guardrails, rules and general direction the prosecution is taking.

In essence, the underlying Trump-Russia conspiracy theory material from the Clinton campaign, via Rodney Joffe to Michael Sussmann, was fabricated – likely for a dual purpose:

(A) to coverup and make excuses for the stunningly embarrassing, potentially unlawful and politically terrible April 2016 DNC email leaks, which showed the DNC Club internally working to secure the nomination for Hillary Clinton, while trying to destroy her primary opponent, Bernie Sanders.

and

(B) to create the political Russia narrative against Trump, to be deployed later in the general election.

Within the general direction Durham is following, the FBI was duped by a purposeful and manipulative intent from the Clinton campaign.  Meanwhile, the CIA [Agency-2] did not buy into the technological evidence saying it was not “technically plausible” and was “user created and not machine/tool generated.”  

…The prosecutorial approach by John Durham positions all of the corruption outside the institutions of government, thereby protecting them.

The bad guys, the corrupt lawbreakers, are the people directly connected to the Clinton Campaign and all of the political and legal agents in/around the Clinton political machine.

As the prosecutorial narrative is unfolding, the institutions of government were victims to the horrible, terrible activity by the Clinton outsiders.

Pay no attention to the aligned politics and weaponization of the White House, DOJ, DOJ-NSD, FBI main, FBI-CoIntel, CIA, Senate Intelligence Committee, or memberships therein.  The entire apparatus of the most robust, capable, excellent and diligent intelligence apparatus in the history of all mankind, along with all the oversight mechanisms that exist to support that apparatus, was duped by Hillary Clinton’s team.

That’s John Durham’s investigative thesis, and the court filings show he’s sticking to it.

The Epoch Times article concludes:

The bigger question that looms is whether Durham will charge anyone with conspiracy. He clearly has plenty of evidence, but for reasons not fully understood, he has not used that evidence to date. It may be that he faces significant internal pressure from DOJ officials. It may also be that he’s trying to extend the legal clock until after the midterms, knowing that prosecuting the Clinton campaign will require political cover.

Or it may simply be that Durham is waiting for more evidence that would allow him to charge top campaign officials. This argument is backed by the fact that the two people who received immunity are too far down the food chain to have known anything about the extent of involvement from top Clinton campaign officials.

Don’t hold your breath waiting to see the real culprits in this trial held accountable.

Quietly Paying The Fine After You Have Broken The Law

When charged with a crime that has a penalty of a cash payment, the quickest way to get that charge and the crime off of the front pages of the media is to quietly pay the fine. If you’re a Republican, that might not work, but if you are Democrat, it will definitely kill the story.

On Saturday, The Epoch Times reported the following statement by Kash Patel, regarding the violations by the Hillary Clinton campaign in 2016:

“So the Hillary Clinton campaign is not contesting it, they’re paying the fine. It’s basically admitting that they did this and they’re out is: ‘we just don’t want a protracted legal deal, as if the Hillary Clinton campaign and DNC ever shied away from taking something or someone to court,” Patel added.

(Hillary) Clinton’s campaign and the DNC agreed to pay a combined $113,000 to the FEC, according to documents made public on March 30, after the commission found probable cause that the entities violated federal law by describing payments that ultimately went to the Fusion GPS research group as going toward legal services and consulting.

“It shows them how wrong they were to violate the law and spend political campaign dollars on hit job, opposition research pieces for then-candidate Trump, all of which, [to] remind the audience, was then used intentionally by the FBI—even though they knew it was false—to go to a federal secret court and surveil a presidential candidate and later a president of the United States.”

The article concludes:

In October 2020, Durham (Special counsel John Durham) was appointed by the Dept. of Justice as special counsel to investigate the FBI’s handling of Russiagate. His recent filings revealed that internet traffic at Trump Tower and the White House was accessed to fabricate ties between Trump and Russia.

The filing, which was submitted late on Feb. 11 in connection with the indictment of Michael Sussmann, a former attorney to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, reveals that Rodney Joffe, a tech executive who was working with Sussmann, had exploited access to domain name system (DNS) internet traffic pertaining to the Executive Office of the President of the United States (EOP) as well as Trump Tower and Donald Trump’s Central Park West apartment building.

“This FEC fine is another step towards accountability. But [for] me as a former federal prosecutor, maybe I’m biased, but the ultimate step of accountability which the American public is waiting for,comes in the form of indictments, especially to those people who violated their oath of office,” Patel said.

Indictments would be nice, but unfortunately it is becoming very obvious to most Americans that only Republicans get indicted when they break the law.

 

Why Are The Names Always The Same?

On February 15th, The Washington Free Beacon reported that the Biden campaign paid nearly $20,000 to Neustar Information Services, the cybersecurity firm at the center of Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, in 2020 for accounting and compliance work,

The article reports:

The campaign paid Neustar Information Services in 2020 for accounting and compliance work, according to Federal Election Commission records. According to Durham, Neustar’s chief technology officer, Rodney Joffe, accessed sensitive web traffic data that the company maintained on behalf of the White House executive office in order to collect “derogatory” information about Donald Trump. Joffe allegedly provided the information to Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who in turn gave it to the CIA during a meeting in February 2017. Durham charged Sussmann in September with lying to the FBI about his investigation of Trump.

The Biden campaign’s payments raise questions about whether Joffe continued snooping on Trump in the most recent election. The Biden and Clinton campaigns are the only two presidential committees to have ever paid Neustar, according to Federal Election Commission records. Biden’s campaign paid Neustar $18,819 on Sept. 29, 2020, the records show. The Clinton campaign paid the firm $3,000 in May 2015 for mobile phone services. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee paid $3,000 to Neustar in 2017. Neustar executives and staffers contributed $17,906 to Biden’s campaign, FEC records show.

The article concludes:

Joffe began helping the Clinton campaign in mid-2016 after he found what he claimed was suspicious Internet chatter between the servers of Russia’s Alfa Bank and Trump’s real estate company, the Trump Organization. Sussmann shared Joffe’s findings with journalists and then-FBI general counsel James Baker. Sussmann is accused of lying to Baker during a Sept. 19, 2016, meeting by denying that he was investigating Trump on behalf of the Clinton campaign.

According to Durham, Clinton campaign lawyers told campaign officials, including Jake Sullivan, about the Alfa Bank claims. Sullivan later joined the Biden campaign and currently serves as national security adviser. His wife is counselor to Attorney General Merrick Garland, who oversees the Durham probe and has final say over a release of a report of the investigation.

Federal investigators have debunked Joffe’s allegations of secret channels of communication between Trump and Russia. The Justice Department inspector general said the FBI determined by February 2017 that there was no basis to the Alfa-Trump allegation. Durham said in his court filing on Friday that his investigators found “no support” for the information Sussmann gave the CIA.

The swamp that is the deep state runs deep and wide.