Durham Probe Update

anatta

100% recycled karma
The campaign plot was outlined by Durham last month in a 27-page indictment charging former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann with making a false report to the FBI. The document cites eight individuals who allegedly conspired with Sussmann, but does not identify them by name.

The sources familiar with the probe have confirmed that the leader of the team of contractors was Rodney L. Joffe, who has regularly advised the Biden White House on cybersecurity and infrastructure policies. Until last month he was the chief cybersecurity officer at Washington tech contractor Neustar Inc., which federal civil court records show was a longtime client of Sussmann at Perkins Coie, a prominent Democratic law firm recently subpoenaed by Durham. Joffe, 66, has not been charged with a crime.

Neustar has removed Joffe’s blog posts from its website. “He no longer works for us,” a spokeswoman said.

A powerful and influential player in the tech world, Joffe tasked a group of computer contractors connected to the Georgia Institute of Technology with finding “anything” in Internet data that would link Trump to Russia and make Democratic “VIPs happy,” according to an August 2016 email Joffe sent to the researchers. The next month, the group accused Trump of maintaining secret backchannel communications to the Kremlin through the email servers of Russia-based Alfa Bank. Those accusations were later determined to be false by the FBI, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Justice Department inspector general and a Senate intelligence panel.

ne of the campaign representatives with whom Joffe coordinated was Jake Sullivan, who was acting as Clinton’s foreign policy adviser, as RealClearInvestigations first reported. Now serving in the White House as President Biden’s national security adviser, Sullivan is under scrutiny for statements he made under oath to Congress about his knowledge of the Trump-Alfa research project. In a potential conflict of interest, Attorney General Merrick Garland employed Sullivan’s wife Maggie as a law clerk when he was a federal judge. Garland controls the purse strings to Durham’s investigation and whether his final report will be released to the public.
Messaging Malware and Mobile Anti-Abuse Working Group
Joffe advised President Obama on security matters and was positioning himself for a top cybersecurity post in an anticipated Clinton administration.

Messaging Malware and Mobile Anti-Abuse Working Group

At the time, Joffe was advising President Obama on security matters and positioning himself for a top cybersecurity post in an anticipated Clinton administration.....
https://www.realclearinvestigations...tractors_in_anti-trump_conspiracy_797790.html
 
The document cites eight individuals who allegedly conspired with Sussmann, but does not identify them by name.

Interesting piece of 'journalism'. The document can be found here -
https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1433511/download

The word conspire appears nowhere in the document. How can a document list 8 people that conspired if the document never uses the word conspire.
Wishful thinking by a RW blogger does not a conspiracy make. It certainly isn't a basis for a prosecution.

Is using non public data to conduct research on a political opponent illegal?
Can someone that has legal access to non public data commit a crime when they use that access or direct employees working for them to use it?

The Sussman indictment is laughable. Sussman will likely get it thrown out of court due to lack of evidence. No reasonable prosecutor would bring such a slim case to a judge. A reasonable judge would probably question the prosecutor why they attempted to prosecute without any likelihood of winning.
 
Interesting piece of 'journalism'. The document can be found here -
https://www.justice.gov/sco/press-release/file/1433511/download

The word conspire appears nowhere in the document. How can a document list 8 people that conspired if the document never uses the word conspire.
Wishful thinking by a RW blogger does not a conspiracy make. It certainly isn't a basis for a prosecution.

Is using non public data to conduct research on a political opponent illegal?
Can someone that has legal access to non public data commit a crime when they use that access or direct employees working for them to use it?

The Sussman indictment is laughable. Sussman will likely get it thrown out of court due to lack of evidence. No reasonable prosecutor would bring such a slim case to a judge. A reasonable judge would probably question the prosecutor why they attempted to prosecute without any likelihood of winning.
the indictment is for Sussman - no conspiracy yet. This shows the players, whether there is a conspiracy dont know. 27 pages is a LOT of pages if not
I dont jump the gun like Democrats/DeepState who claimed Russian collusion

Durham is investigating whether they were involved in a scheme to misuse sensitive, nonpublic Internet data, which they had access to through their government contracts, to dredge up derogatory information on Trump on behalf of the Clinton campaign in 2016 and again in 2017, sources say — political dirt that sent FBI investigators on a wild goose chase. Prosecutors are also investigating whether some of the data presented to the FBI was faked or forged.


These sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive law enforcement matter, said Durham’s investigators have subpoenaed the contractors to turn over documents and testify before a federal grand jury hearing the case. The investigators are exploring potential criminal charges including giving false information to federal agents and defrauding the government, the sources said.
 
the indictment is for Sussman - no conspiracy yet. This shows the players, whether there is a conspiracy dont know. 27 pages is a LOT of pages if not
I dont jump the gun like Democrats/DeepState who claimed Russian collusion

Durham is investigating whether they were involved in a scheme to misuse sensitive, nonpublic Internet data, which they had access to through their government contracts, to dredge up derogatory information on Trump on behalf of the Clinton campaign in 2016 and again in 2017, sources say — political dirt that sent FBI investigators on a wild goose chase. Prosecutors are also investigating whether some of the data presented to the FBI was faked or forged.


These sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a sensitive law enforcement matter, said Durham’s investigators have subpoenaed the contractors to turn over documents and testify before a federal grand jury hearing the case. The investigators are exploring potential criminal charges including giving false information to federal agents and defrauding the government, the sources said.

The indictment for Sussman is for lying to the FBI about whether he had a client at the time he talked to them. No one was in the room at the time but Sussman and the FBI counsel. How do you think anyone conspired with Sussman to lie about if he had a client? How the information came about is irrelevant to the lie other than attempting to show materiality.

Durham is investigating whether they were involved in a scheme to misuse sensitive, nonpublic Internet data,
DNS information is sensitive data? OMG. You are too funny. The author you cite is an idiot. You are right there with him.

Durham's mandate is to look for how the FBI mishandled the case. If he is investigating what you claim then he his in violation of his mandate and is required by law to get authorization from the AG in order to pursue this line of investigation.
 
The indictment for Sussman is for lying to the FBI about whether he had a client at the time he talked to them. No one was in the room at the time but Sussman and the FBI counsel. How do you think anyone conspired with Sussman to lie about if he had a client? How the information came about is irrelevant to the lie other than attempting to show materiality.

DNS information is sensitive data? OMG. You are too funny. The author you cite is an idiot. You are right there with him.

Durham's mandate is to look for how the FBI mishandled the case. If he is investigating what you claim then he his in violation of his mandate and is required by law to get authorization from the AG in order to pursue this line of investigation.
it's an update. clearly he's looking at contractors. Clearly it's mor then the FBI -Sussman worked for Perkin Coie
He's a special prosecutor (or whatever the term) and they have wide latitude as you saw from Mueller
Im not interested in discussing the minutia - you arent worth my time to pre-litigate the case
I just watching Durham, and Sussman is just the beginning by the looks of it
 
it's an update. clearly he's looking at contractors. Clearly it's mor then the FBI -Sussman worked for Perkin Coie
He's a special prosecutor (or whatever the term) and they have wide latitude as you saw from Mueller
Im not interested in discussing the minutia - you arent worth my time to pre-litigate the case
I just watching Durham, and Sussman is just the beginning by the looks of it

Mueller was given a mandate to investigate everything involved with Russia.
Durham was restricted to looking at the FBI.

This isn't minutia. It's the f-ing law.
 
The campaign plot was outlined by Durham last month in a 27-page indictment charging former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann with making a false report to the FBI. The document cites eight individuals who allegedly conspired with Sussmann, but does not identify them by name.

The sources familiar with the probe have confirmed that the leader of the team of contractors was Rodney L. Joffe, who has regularly advised the Biden White House on cybersecurity and infrastructure policies. Until last month he was the chief cybersecurity officer at Washington tech contractor Neustar Inc., which federal civil court records show was a longtime client of Sussmann at Perkins Coie, a prominent Democratic law firm recently subpoenaed by Durham. Joffe, 66, has not been charged with a crime.

Neustar has removed Joffe’s blog posts from its website. “He no longer works for us,” a spokeswoman said.

A powerful and influential player in the tech world, Joffe tasked a group of computer contractors connected to the Georgia Institute of Technology with finding “anything” in Internet data that would link Trump to Russia and make Democratic “VIPs happy,” according to an August 2016 email Joffe sent to the researchers. The next month, the group accused Trump of maintaining secret backchannel communications to the Kremlin through the email servers of Russia-based Alfa Bank. Those accusations were later determined to be false by the FBI, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Justice Department inspector general and a Senate intelligence panel.

ne of the campaign representatives with whom Joffe coordinated was Jake Sullivan, who was acting as Clinton’s foreign policy adviser, as RealClearInvestigations first reported. Now serving in the White House as President Biden’s national security adviser, Sullivan is under scrutiny for statements he made under oath to Congress about his knowledge of the Trump-Alfa research project. In a potential conflict of interest, Attorney General Merrick Garland employed Sullivan’s wife Maggie as a law clerk when he was a federal judge. Garland controls the purse strings to Durham’s investigation and whether his final report will be released to the public.
Messaging Malware and Mobile Anti-Abuse Working Group
Joffe advised President Obama on security matters and was positioning himself for a top cybersecurity post in an anticipated Clinton administration.

Messaging Malware and Mobile Anti-Abuse Working Group

At the time, Joffe was advising President Obama on security matters and positioning himself for a top cybersecurity post in an anticipated Clinton administration.....
https://www.realclearinvestigations...tractors_in_anti-trump_conspiracy_797790.html

big fucking woo! good god. what a bunch of irrelevant, nit picking bullshit that had nothing to do with trump and his cohorts secret meetings with russians, giving them access to their voter data, coordinating with them on WikiLeaks, meeting with them when they claim they have some dirt on hillary they want trump to have because putin wants trump to win, and 32 russian agents being indicted by Mueller.

as far as collusion goes-

Mueller investigation, Russia Investigation

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s final report focuses only on whether crimes were committed. It addresses two Russian conspiracies to interfere in the 2016 election—one involving a social media influence campaign and the other involving the hacking and dissemination of stolen emails. The Report then addresses whether Trump Campaign associates knowingly entered an agreement with the Russian government to assist those conspiracies.

As many experts have noted, what’s missing from the Mueller Report is the Special Counsel’s counterintelligence findings. We don’t know what the Special Counsel’s Office or the FBI have assessed, for example, with respect to whether Trump associates engaged in reciprocal efforts with Russian agents without entering a criminal agreement to do so, whether Americans have been witting or unwitting Russian assets, and what leverage or influence Moscow may have over particular individuals.

As a shorthand, we may use the term “collusion” to refer to these kinds of activities, which would be implicated in a counterintelligence analysis—though, as Asha Rangappa and I have written, the more analytically precise issues to consider are whether Trump Campaign associates “coordinated with, cooperated with, encouraged, or gave support” to the Russia/WikiLeaks election interference activities. Those are important questions regardless of whether such activities amounted to crimes, regardless of whether individuals’ actions and intentions can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, regardless of whether Americans acted as unwitting Kremlin assets in support of Russian operations, and regardless of whether individuals and organizations can be prosecuted without endangering First Amendment interests.

Although the Mueller Report does not squarely address these questions of “collusion” that fall outside the scope of potential criminal liability, it can be mined for substantive information that provides some meaningful answers.

What follows is a detailed guide to the Mueller Report’s evidence on collusion. The analysis discusses affirmative evidence and countervailing evidence in the Report, references the Special Counsel’s court filings and reliable news reports that help shed additional light on information in the Report, and identifies significant loose ends that the investigation was unable to answer.

I. Summary of Major Findings

The redacted Mueller Report documents a series of activities that show strong evidence of collusion. Or, more precisely, it provides significant evidence that Trump Campaign associates coordinated with, cooperated with, encouraged, or gave support to the Russia/WikiLeaks election interference activities. The Report documents the following actions (each of which is analyzed in detail in Part II):

1. Trump was receptive to a Campaign national security adviser’s (George Papadopoulos) pursuit of a back channel to Putin.

2. Kremlin operatives provided the Campaign a preview of the Russian plan to distribute stolen emails.

3. The Trump Campaign chairman and deputy chairman (Paul Manafort and Rick Gates) knowingly shared internal polling data and information on battleground states with a Russian spy; and the Campaign chairman worked with the Russian spy on a pro-Russia “peace” plan for Ukraine.

4. The Trump Campaign chairman periodically shared internal polling data with the Russian spy with the expectation it would be shared with Putin-linked oligarch, Oleg Deripaska.

5. Trump Campaign chairman Manafort expected Trump’s winning the presidency would mean Deripaska would want to use Manafort to advance Deripaska’s interests in the United States and elsewhere.

6. Trump Tower meeting: (1) On receiving an email offering derogatory information on Clinton coming from a Russian government official, Donald Trump Jr. “appears to have accepted that offer;” (2) members of the Campaign discussed the Trump Tower meeting beforehand; (3) Donald Trump Jr. told the Russians during the meeting that Trump could revisit the issue of the Magnitsky Act if elected.

7. A Trump Campaign official told the Special Counsel he “felt obliged to object” to a GOP Platform change on Ukraine because it contradicted Trump’s wishes; however, the investigation did not establish that Gordon was directed by Trump.

8. Russian military hackers may have followed Trump’s July 27, 2016 public statement “Russia if you’re listening …” within hours by targeting Clinton’s personal office for the first time.

9. Trump requested campaign affiliates to get Clinton’s emails, which resulted in an individual apparently acting in coordination with the Campaign claiming to have successfully contacted Russian hackers.

10. The Trump Campaign—and Trump personally—appeared to have advanced knowledge of future WikiLeaks releases.

11. The Trump Campaign coordinated campaign-related public communications based on future WikiLeaks releases.

12. Michael Cohen, on behalf of the Trump Organization, brokered a secret deal for a Trump Tower Moscow project directly involving Putin’s inner circle, at least until June 2016.

13. During the presidential transition, Jared Kushner and Eric Prince engaged in secret back channel communications with Russian agents. (1) Kushner suggested to the Russian Ambassador that they use a secure communication line from within the Russian Embassy to speak with Russian Generals; and (2) Prince and Kushner’s friend Rick Gerson conducted secret back channel meetings with a Putin agent to develop a plan for U.S.-Russian relations.

14. During the presidential transition, in coordination with other members of the Transition Team, Michael Flynn spoke with the Russian Ambassador to prevent a tit for tat Russian response to the Obama administration’s imposition of sanctions for election interference; the Russians agreed not to retaliate saying they wanted a good relationship with the incoming administration.

During the course of 2016, Trump Campaign associates failed to report any of the Russian/WikiLeaks overtures to federal law enforcement, publicly denied any contacts with Russians/WikiLeaks, and actively encouraged the public to doubt that Russia was behind the hacking and distribution of stolen emails.

One qualification before proceeding to the analysis in Part II: a significant amount of relevant information was unavailable to Mueller due to four factors. First, as the Report states, “several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the Office,” and “those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference.” Second, President Trump’s interference in the investigation also appears to have stymied the investigation. A key example is Paul Manafort’s failure to cooperate with the Special Counsel because he was apparently led to believe that President Trump would pardon him. Third, some individuals used encrypted communications or deleted their communications. Fourth, some of the individuals who “cooperated” with the investigation (e.g., Steve Bannon) appear to have been deceptive or not fully forthcoming in their dealings with the Special Counsel. Several individuals failed to recall the content of important conversations with Trump or other Campaign associates. The Report states, “Even when individuals testified or agreed to be interviewed, they sometimes provided information that was false or incomplete.”

https://www.justsecurity.org/63838/g...-on-collusion/
 
The indictment for Sussman is for lying to the FBI about whether he had a client at the time he talked to them. No one was in the room at the time but Sussman and the FBI counsel. How do you think anyone conspired with Sussman to lie about if he had a client? How the information came about is irrelevant to the lie other than attempting to show materiality.

DNS information is sensitive data? OMG. You are too funny. The author you cite is an idiot. You are right there with him.

Durham's mandate is to look for how the FBI mishandled the case. If he is investigating what you claim then he his in violation of his mandate and is required by law to get authorization from the AG in order to pursue this line of investigation.

Exactly, nothing in Sussman’s inditement even hints at conspiracies and plots by others

Another attempt by a right wing source reframing facts to serve their purpose

And you got to chuckle at even bringing up Durham, been at it two and half years now and this is all he’s got, two obscure individuals charged with procedural crimes, and we were promised Obama, Comey, and slews of others were going to jail

Bottom line, Trump lied, and now his surrogates can’t prove otherwise. The right is trying to keep Durham alive so that if the GOP wins back the House next year the little Jimmy Jordan’s can use it to launch endless innuendo
 
Just what i THOUGHT- NOTHING RELATIVE, FACTUAL, OR PERTINENT TO ANYTHING IMPORTANT!

This is what I call much ado about nothing- Jack Diddly to Poodilly Squat!

Heavens to Betsy bugs! Annata is getting desperate!
 
Last edited:
The campaign plot was outlined by Durham last month in a 27-page indictment charging former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann with making a false report to the FBI. The document cites eight individuals who allegedly conspired with Sussmann, but does not identify them by name.

The sources familiar with the probe have confirmed that the leader of the team of contractors was Rodney L. Joffe, who has regularly advised the Biden White House on cybersecurity and infrastructure policies. Until last month he was the chief cybersecurity officer at Washington tech contractor Neustar Inc., which federal civil court records show was a longtime client of Sussmann at Perkins Coie, a prominent Democratic law firm recently subpoenaed by Durham. Joffe, 66, has not been charged with a crime.

Neustar has removed Joffe’s blog posts from its website. “He no longer works for us,” a spokeswoman said.

A powerful and influential player in the tech world, Joffe tasked a group of computer contractors connected to the Georgia Institute of Technology with finding “anything” in Internet data that would link Trump to Russia and make Democratic “VIPs happy,” according to an August 2016 email Joffe sent to the researchers. The next month, the group accused Trump of maintaining secret backchannel communications to the Kremlin through the email servers of Russia-based Alfa Bank. Those accusations were later determined to be false by the FBI, Special Counsel Robert Mueller, the Justice Department inspector general and a Senate intelligence panel.

ne of the campaign representatives with whom Joffe coordinated was Jake Sullivan, who was acting as Clinton’s foreign policy adviser, as RealClearInvestigations first reported. Now serving in the White House as President Biden’s national security adviser, Sullivan is under scrutiny for statements he made under oath to Congress about his knowledge of the Trump-Alfa research project. In a potential conflict of interest, Attorney General Merrick Garland employed Sullivan’s wife Maggie as a law clerk when he was a federal judge. Garland controls the purse strings to Durham’s investigation and whether his final report will be released to the public.
Messaging Malware and Mobile Anti-Abuse Working Group
Joffe advised President Obama on security matters and was positioning himself for a top cybersecurity post in an anticipated Clinton administration.

Messaging Malware and Mobile Anti-Abuse Working Group

At the time, Joffe was advising President Obama on security matters and positioning himself for a top cybersecurity post in an anticipated Clinton administration.....
https://www.realclearinvestigations...tractors_in_anti-trump_conspiracy_797790.html

Its nice to see a thoughtful poster.
 
Terrible Democrats.

All Trump wanted was a Presidential election thrown out while Democrats wanted an investigation!
 
it's an update. clearly he's looking at contractors. Clearly it's mor then the FBI -Sussman worked for Perkin Coie
He's a special prosecutor (or whatever the term) and they have wide latitude as you saw from Mueller
Im not interested in discussing the minutia - you arent worth my time to pre-litigate the case
I just watching Durham, and Sussman is just the beginning by the looks of it

Ignore the fucker, best advice you'll hear today!
 
Back
Top