I surely hope I am wrong but the jury is tainted, DC is 95% democrat and are Hillary supporters, This makes Durham’s job extremely difficult convincing biased jurors to deliver a guilty verdict even though the facts prove otherwise. My question now, does all this new info initiate having Hillary testify before a Grand Jury?
"Q: In the Summer of 2016, was Mr. Trump’s relationship with Russia something that the campaign focused on?
A: Yes. I mean, it was frankly something we were focused on before that time. But absolutely."
Keywords: "focused on BEFORE that time"
Connecting the dots, the larger conspiracy apparently dates back to April, 2016, when ALLEGEDLY-hacked DNC documents found their way onto the Internet, and eventually to Wikileaks. Instead of the FBI exercising its legal responsibility to conduct a forensic examination of the ALLEGEDLY-hacked server in relation to this ALLEGED criminal hacking and supposed national-security threat, the FBI mysteriously outsourced its investigative authority and allowed the DNC to hire a private entity --- CrowdStrike --- to conduct this criminal/national security investigation.
That is the FIRST criminal case I've ever heard of where law enforcement authorities allowed the ALLEGED victim to use their own hireling in place of government law enforcement in determining who the ALLEGED perpetrator of the crime was. What a convenience it was for the DNC to be allowed to claim it had been hack, hire the "experts" to confirm the hack, and pin the blame on the ALLEGED hacker --- Russia --- all without assistance or intervention by law enforcement authorities.
In other words, the DNC claimed to have been hacked (as opposed to one of its own rogue employees gaining access to the documents and releasing them). and then had its own hired firm pin the alleged hack on Russia --- and everyone --- democrat and republican alike --- just fell in line and accepted that new PRIVATIZATION of law enforcement and national security investigation as if it were standard procedure.
And this "coincidentally" happened concurrently with Hillary's people formulating the Russia-Collusion HOAX in all of its varied aspects. When you consider the fact that tying Trump to Russia wouldn't be especially damaging UNLESS Russia was first painted as the bad guy, it makes sense that framing Russia for an ALLEGED hack that has never been substantiated to have even occurred would be the logical first step for the Russia-Collusion Hoax.
It was a fairly long time ago now, and it also helps to remember that at the time, Hillary and the DNC were synonymous, because Hillary had obtained full financial control of the DNC heading into the campaign. So the ALLEGED hacking of the DNC was viewed as an attack on Hillary. Therefore the timeline was that first democrats accused Russia of attacking the DNC/Hillary, and then Russia began colluding with Trump. The second part of the scheme has now been fully debunked, but nobody seems to be willing to correlate that fraud with the still-unproven hack of the DNC.
And ever since April, 2016, Democrats have methodically pushed the US farther and farther into an adversarial relationship with Russia --- and ultimately the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine against a country that had previously been a partner in space with the International Space Station, and a partner in the war on terror, as demonstrated by Russia having warned the US about the Boston Marathon bombers, even though the Obama FBI chose to ignore the warning.
So in summary: Never forget about the ALLEGED hacking of the DNC that was never investigated by the FBI and that everyone just accepted as having happened because the DNC said it happened, and that that occurred simultaneously with the hatching of Hillary's Russia-Collusion Hoax that included the crime(s) currently being prosecuted.
Thanks Techno, but it’s a shame Judge Cooper & The Brides couldn’t coordinate more convenient scheduling. Standing by to assist any overserved bridesmaid.
I'm honestly shocked that Mook was that forthcoming instead of pulling a Comey and just repeating "I don't recall" ad nauseum. When Hillary runs again in 2024 here's one person who won't be on the campaign staff.
I still believe Durham is slow walking this entire investigation. He should be going for the broader conspiracy and tying all this and everyone together. Also this case says nothing to the coup attempt that continues throughout the Trump Presidency.
If the FBI, in all their might, glory, and storied tradition, couldn’t see through the massively orchestrated, cunningly planned, October surprise ... Exactly how are they gonna catch terrorists?
This might be an unpopular opinion but I don’t really care about the bias jury here and I also don’t care if Sussman gets convicted. He’s a scumbag like the rest but he’s a small part in the bigger problem. If Durham can keep pulling at threads and get more information out there about the people that really matter than I see it as a win because it could and should lead to more indictments.
Just stepping back it is really shocking what an absolute cancer HRC has been on the body politic for more than 30 years. What is also amazing is how many have aided and abetted this awful human being. I wonder psychologically if this is the bitter fruit of having been humiliated by Bill for so many years. She also is emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party.
Robert Mook, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign manager, also testified before the jury Friday. In his testimony, he stated that Hillary Clinton personally approved a plan to spread the lie that Trump was colluding with Russia via secret servers to the media. He also admitted to being briefed on the conspiracy. "
Nice, sharing on my show. JFK JR. CONFIRMED HE'S THE REAL DEAL FROM DAVID STRAIGHT
ClosIng Act Dismantled Impossible to clean No Such Agency EnouGh is EnOugh It's Time Mr President Trump and Mr Vice President John Fitzgerald Kennedy Jr. 🇮🇹⚓️🇺🇸
Just shared this on social (anti-social?) media. Along with my preface, that HER is a liar, and they conspired w/ media to get people to hate Trump. "So if you hate Trump, ok, but is your hatred based on lies?"
Meanwhile, in the background there's a ferocious argument going on, where former New York Times reporter Eric Lichtblau, who was subpoenaed by Sussman to give testimony for the defense, is trying to get the court to limit the scope of cross-examination to which Durham can subject him, per his Motion for Protective Order filed May 12:
On May 19, Durham filed a Response, citing various legal authorities to show that there's no basis to limit the cross-examination of a witness in a criminal trial, and arguing that Lichtblau (and Sussman's lawyer) can't cherry-pick information to provide in Sussman's defense and disallow Durham's probing into relevant and/or related topics:
And this afternoon, May 22, Lichtblau filed a Reply to Durham's Response, again asserting some privilege to testify to what Sussman wants Lichtblau to testify while limiting what Durham can question him about:
In his Reply, Lichtblau requests oral argument and, if the court rules in Durham's favor, an opportunity to file an appeal.
The unspoken issue is that the FBI regularly leaks to the New York Times, and the two entities often share information in order to frame narratives to feed to the public, and Sussman and Lichtblau really don't want Durham to be able to cross-examine Lichtblau about those issues OR whether Lichtblau spoke with Hillary or any of her associates after being fed information by Sussman, Joffe, or someone at the FBI.
"Clinton's team made it all up, Durham found out easily, and Clinton's team admit it now. Yet, no one seems curious as to how Mueller/Weissmann could spend two years, $40 million, 2,800 subpoenas, use 40 agents, 19 DOJ lawyers, 500 witnesses and not figure that out."
I surely hope I am wrong but the jury is tainted, DC is 95% democrat and are Hillary supporters, This makes Durham’s job extremely difficult convincing biased jurors to deliver a guilty verdict even though the facts prove otherwise. My question now, does all this new info initiate having Hillary testify before a Grand Jury?
The significance of this investigation, it's outcome, and the reporting of it can not be overstated. Thank you! Enjoy the wedding.
"Q: In the Summer of 2016, was Mr. Trump’s relationship with Russia something that the campaign focused on?
A: Yes. I mean, it was frankly something we were focused on before that time. But absolutely."
Keywords: "focused on BEFORE that time"
Connecting the dots, the larger conspiracy apparently dates back to April, 2016, when ALLEGEDLY-hacked DNC documents found their way onto the Internet, and eventually to Wikileaks. Instead of the FBI exercising its legal responsibility to conduct a forensic examination of the ALLEGEDLY-hacked server in relation to this ALLEGED criminal hacking and supposed national-security threat, the FBI mysteriously outsourced its investigative authority and allowed the DNC to hire a private entity --- CrowdStrike --- to conduct this criminal/national security investigation.
That is the FIRST criminal case I've ever heard of where law enforcement authorities allowed the ALLEGED victim to use their own hireling in place of government law enforcement in determining who the ALLEGED perpetrator of the crime was. What a convenience it was for the DNC to be allowed to claim it had been hack, hire the "experts" to confirm the hack, and pin the blame on the ALLEGED hacker --- Russia --- all without assistance or intervention by law enforcement authorities.
In other words, the DNC claimed to have been hacked (as opposed to one of its own rogue employees gaining access to the documents and releasing them). and then had its own hired firm pin the alleged hack on Russia --- and everyone --- democrat and republican alike --- just fell in line and accepted that new PRIVATIZATION of law enforcement and national security investigation as if it were standard procedure.
And this "coincidentally" happened concurrently with Hillary's people formulating the Russia-Collusion HOAX in all of its varied aspects. When you consider the fact that tying Trump to Russia wouldn't be especially damaging UNLESS Russia was first painted as the bad guy, it makes sense that framing Russia for an ALLEGED hack that has never been substantiated to have even occurred would be the logical first step for the Russia-Collusion Hoax.
It was a fairly long time ago now, and it also helps to remember that at the time, Hillary and the DNC were synonymous, because Hillary had obtained full financial control of the DNC heading into the campaign. So the ALLEGED hacking of the DNC was viewed as an attack on Hillary. Therefore the timeline was that first democrats accused Russia of attacking the DNC/Hillary, and then Russia began colluding with Trump. The second part of the scheme has now been fully debunked, but nobody seems to be willing to correlate that fraud with the still-unproven hack of the DNC.
And ever since April, 2016, Democrats have methodically pushed the US farther and farther into an adversarial relationship with Russia --- and ultimately the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine against a country that had previously been a partner in space with the International Space Station, and a partner in the war on terror, as demonstrated by Russia having warned the US about the Boston Marathon bombers, even though the Obama FBI chose to ignore the warning.
So in summary: Never forget about the ALLEGED hacking of the DNC that was never investigated by the FBI and that everyone just accepted as having happened because the DNC said it happened, and that that occurred simultaneously with the hatching of Hillary's Russia-Collusion Hoax that included the crime(s) currently being prosecuted.
Thanks Techno, but it’s a shame Judge Cooper & The Brides couldn’t coordinate more convenient scheduling. Standing by to assist any overserved bridesmaid.
I'm honestly shocked that Mook was that forthcoming instead of pulling a Comey and just repeating "I don't recall" ad nauseum. When Hillary runs again in 2024 here's one person who won't be on the campaign staff.
I still believe Durham is slow walking this entire investigation. He should be going for the broader conspiracy and tying all this and everyone together. Also this case says nothing to the coup attempt that continues throughout the Trump Presidency.
If the FBI, in all their might, glory, and storied tradition, couldn’t see through the massively orchestrated, cunningly planned, October surprise ... Exactly how are they gonna catch terrorists?
Let’s hope that Durham is unraveling that thread. - You'll forgive me if i don't hold my breath
This might be an unpopular opinion but I don’t really care about the bias jury here and I also don’t care if Sussman gets convicted. He’s a scumbag like the rest but he’s a small part in the bigger problem. If Durham can keep pulling at threads and get more information out there about the people that really matter than I see it as a win because it could and should lead to more indictments.
Just stepping back it is really shocking what an absolute cancer HRC has been on the body politic for more than 30 years. What is also amazing is how many have aided and abetted this awful human being. I wonder psychologically if this is the bitter fruit of having been humiliated by Bill for so many years. She also is emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party.
[nuclear] BOOM!
"The Robby Mook testimony.
Robert Mook, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign manager, also testified before the jury Friday. In his testimony, he stated that Hillary Clinton personally approved a plan to spread the lie that Trump was colluding with Russia via secret servers to the media. He also admitted to being briefed on the conspiracy. "
Nice, sharing on my show. JFK JR. CONFIRMED HE'S THE REAL DEAL FROM DAVID STRAIGHT
ClosIng Act Dismantled Impossible to clean No Such Agency EnouGh is EnOugh It's Time Mr President Trump and Mr Vice President John Fitzgerald Kennedy Jr. 🇮🇹⚓️🇺🇸
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Jtip5XrACpZM/
#4952 Durham.
Just shared this on social (anti-social?) media. Along with my preface, that HER is a liar, and they conspired w/ media to get people to hate Trump. "So if you hate Trump, ok, but is your hatred based on lies?"
Meanwhile, in the background there's a ferocious argument going on, where former New York Times reporter Eric Lichtblau, who was subpoenaed by Sussman to give testimony for the defense, is trying to get the court to limit the scope of cross-examination to which Durham can subject him, per his Motion for Protective Order filed May 12:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60390583/133/united-states-v-sussmann/
On May 19, Durham filed a Response, citing various legal authorities to show that there's no basis to limit the cross-examination of a witness in a criminal trial, and arguing that Lichtblau (and Sussman's lawyer) can't cherry-pick information to provide in Sussman's defense and disallow Durham's probing into relevant and/or related topics:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60390583/140/united-states-v-sussmann/
And this afternoon, May 22, Lichtblau filed a Reply to Durham's Response, again asserting some privilege to testify to what Sussman wants Lichtblau to testify while limiting what Durham can question him about:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/60390583/141/united-states-v-sussmann/
In his Reply, Lichtblau requests oral argument and, if the court rules in Durham's favor, an opportunity to file an appeal.
The unspoken issue is that the FBI regularly leaks to the New York Times, and the two entities often share information in order to frame narratives to feed to the public, and Sussman and Lichtblau really don't want Durham to be able to cross-examine Lichtblau about those issues OR whether Lichtblau spoke with Hillary or any of her associates after being fed information by Sussman, Joffe, or someone at the FBI.
TheLastRefuge@TheLastRefuge2
·
17h
"Clinton's team made it all up, Durham found out easily, and Clinton's team admit it now. Yet, no one seems curious as to how Mueller/Weissmann could spend two years, $40 million, 2,800 subpoenas, use 40 agents, 19 DOJ lawyers, 500 witnesses and not figure that out."