Just to clear up a point of confusion, "In Camera" is Latin for "In a Chamber" and has nothing to do with the electronic device ... I had to look it up. People keep misinterpreting this to mean there will be some kind of public viewing or hearing of the documents.
I don't believe it's being intentionally deceptive. It's more just a common term in the the legal profession ... they have a Latin term for everything. "writ of mandamus", "habeas corpus", "stare decisis", etc. Lawyers just don't realize the general public isn't familiar with the term because they're so use to hearing it.
TF descending on the Russia Collusion Hoax like a fog. We've been waiting for these ridiculous privilege claims to implode. It must be really bad for the Hillary Campaign, DNC and co. to all make such a desperate claim.
Thanks for the update technofog. The msm hasn’t said a peep for obvious reasons. Tragic. I hope this judge is just and rules with wisdom and not bias. Since the Mueller report some of us have been waiting for the whole enchilada story behind the “Russia, Russia, Russia” false narrative. I pray Durham is honest and forthright with all Americans and those who are guilty of planning this coup of an elected president justly have a ride to jail.
Thank you, TechnoFog! This "Hillary for America" lawyer, Mr. Trout, doesn't seem very smart... I've seen Marc Elias mentioned: is it possible that those 30 emails are incriminating also for Marc Elias, besides Sussmann and the HRC campaign?
2) I find interesting the mention “not for this trial” - “important for other investigations”. So we know there are other investigations ongoing... Who could be the targets of those "other investigations"?
1. Obstruction of Justice has been mentioned twice.
2. More people identified lying to the FIB.
3. Conspiracy (a step easier than RICO).
4. Tangentially relayed - 27 crooked Weismann (Mueller figurehead) DOJ attorneys wiping their Federal smartphones. But it seems like crooks inside the government get a pass.
5. Danchenko. (Will he flip?)
6. Mark Elias <--- Sussman.
7. - 8. Feb 14, 2022, Adam Housley: "High level non political sources telling me that the Durham investigation has a lot of names being looked at…”two names to keep an eye on…Jake Sullivan and…… Colin Kahl….. both being looked at very closely…both of em nose deep.” "
9. - 10. Georgia Tech Fabricators? Would love to see more 'Flippers' inside scheme.
Devin Nunes identified multiple crimes committed several years ago.
6. & 7. - Marc Elias and Jake Sullivan: this is exactly what I think.
3. Conspiracy charges: absolutely! Durham mentioned explicitly the term "joint venture" = elegant term to define "Conspiracy". Plus: he mentioned "charges not being subject to Statute of Limitations"
I wonder: what about James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper? and Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce & Nellie Ohr?
Remember how Brennan was already interviewed by Durham? Either Brennan was the clueless moron he was always or he was a plotter who was brought into the fold after he wrote his memo about Hillary approving plan to smear Trump with Russia allegations.
oh yes, I remember perfectly the Brennan interview: on August 21, 2020 - it lasted 8 hours! - I reported about the Brennan interview in my book "Durham Indictments" (Link: https://gregrubini.squarespace.com/bookstore/p/durham )
Brennan is a moron, no doubt, but he's not stupid. Brennan was the mastermind behind ALL the spy operations on Trump - including the GCHQ SpyOp on Trump that nobody dares to talk about (except yours truly in this book: https://gregrubini.squarespace.com/bookstore/p/spyops )
Interestingly that book was suppressed by Amazon in September 2020, when it was a bestseller, 50 days before the 2020 Elections.
Probably they keep the GCHQ SpyOp under wraps not to upset our British so-called "ally"... (better to have straight enemies, than "allies" like that)
I wonder if Durham is investigating the GCHQ SpyOp, or he has been gagged by the CIA. I sent my book to Durham back in June 2020, with all the evidence, the data and the GCHQ Top Secret documents
Danchenko is the only other "trial" on the docket. The other investigations would be the criminal conspiracy between DNC and HFA and FGPS and Sussmann and Joffe, and Joffe's major fraud for misusing government contract access at DARPA.
"Danchenko is the only other trial on the docket" >> true (for now...) but it seems Durham is building the case to nail other targets (higher in the ladder)
Plus, since the Sussmann/Joffe/HFA plot about the Alpha Bank continued after Jan 20, 2017, and into February, means the crime becomes "Seditious Conspiracy to overthrow the Government" (Trump was the President since Jan 20, 2017, thus he was "the Government" (the head of the Executive branch)
The thing is, the Clinton-Obama camp so very obviously felt entitled to destroy another democratically elected President "by any means necessary." The country can't survive that level of treachery. It has to be addressed and if it is not adequately addressed there just is no America anymore. Sure, we have been on that path for a long time, but what they did to Trump was the final destination. Now it only goes one way...or the other.
no, it means that Durham doesn't need more evidence (emails, comms) for nailing Danchenko. Plus, it seams clear from the last filings that in the Sussmann case Durham is targeting members of the HRC campaign and the DNC
So it doesn't end here..."The court asked whether Durham’s team would come back for the other 1,500 e-mails. They responded in the negative - with a curious “not for this trial” - and stated the court’s decision would be “important for other investigations.”" More to come and thanks again to Techno Fog.
This is rather intriguing; because they fought so hard to keep these emails secret the Judge himself now has to personally review them. If the information is damaging, now the Judge has seen that damning information up close and personal before he makes further rulings prior to and at trial. This could epically backfire on the HRC team.
What is Tyrrell, Joffe's lawyer saying about the 8 Joffe emails?
All sides and the judge seem to agree that Elias executed a valid Kovel engagement with PR expert Fusion with respect to his HFA and DNC clients, which at least in form creates privilege on those Perkins Coie communications (to the extent they are genuinely with respect to legal advice). While Sussmann, Elias's partner, had Joffe as a client, the fact that neither Sussmann nor Elias executed a Kovel engagement with Fusion for PR advice with respect to their rendering legal advice to Joffe (Algor asserts this), this is not fatal to Fusion/Joffe communications lacking privilege because Joffe expected they were privileged because of how Sussmann brought Fusion and Joffe together, implying that because Perkins Coie had hired Fusion for its PR expertise, that created Kovel privilege with respect to the Sussmann/Joffe client relationship as well. Tyrrell says that every communication between Joffe and Fusion (Seago) that did not involve Sussmann was nevertheless contemporaneously marked privileged by Joffe and Sussmann was copied. That would appear to be pretty strong evidence that client Joffe thought his communications with Fusion were privileged, although again if the communications are not in relation to legal advice that Joffe was seeking from Sussmann, privilege would not apply.
As to Joffe’s argument, I’m curious if the judge will change his mind once he sees the emails. Or if Durham will end up getting them another way (crime fraud exception, for example).
My impression is the parties are trying to avoid disclosure of the contents at all costs because they are so damaging to the parties that a charge of conspiracy is entirely unavoidable. They might be willing to lie to the Court because the consequence of disclosure would be complete incrimination.
Just hypothetical, assuming there was something incredibly illegal being done, the parties knew this, and thought doing all the work with attorneys would protect their crimes under privilege.
This was Hillary's setup with Cheryl Mills. Everything that would have been illegal was covered with attorney client privilege in deposition, and the FBI didn't investigate further than that.
Yes, a conspiracy to defraud the U.S. under 18 USC 371 may be the crime that invokes the crime fraud exception to privilege which TF raises in his reply below. That would have a statute that while 5 years is still running as it doesn't begin until the conspiracy ceased (which may be down to this day). The mafia dons always having the in house consigliere party to their meetings, who was a member of the bar, being the classic example of its application.
One guy gets to make the call on the hypothetical you propose.
But could Judge Cooper not allow them in because they are not relevant to the 1001 crime charged here, even though they might be evidence of conspiracy (which he only has a small window on as compared to the evidence Durham may be compiling)?
The language is irrelevant. The point is that Judge Cooper, appointed by Obama, is granting further access to the Clinton-related emails. I will accept this apparent victory with a forever watchful eye out for traitors to this great experiment.
Having read the full hearing transcript, I noticed that at least two of the opposition lawyers again leaned heavily on their complaints that Durham waited too long to raise the issue of documents withheld under a dubious claim of attorney-client privilege (or work-product immunity).
I was surprised that the government didn't provide a clear response --- or ANY response --- explaining why Durham waited until April 6 to file his Motion to Compel which raised this issue that the defense claims he should have raised months ago, if not during the grand jury investigation.
The recent Supplementation regarding the results of the FEC investigation would be the key to answering those arguments, I think, but that wasn't made clear during the hearing --- so I guess the government feels that it made its point with the Supplementation. Still, they might have at least mentioned it during the oral arguments.
Or, it might be that the explanation for the delay is intertwined with the testimony the government expects to get from Fusion GPS employ Seago, so maybe a response is somehow buried in that argument. But it's tough to tell, not knowing what she is expected to say in court.
I wouldn't predict how the judge will rule on actual disclosure of the withheld documents, other than that he'll probably rule that SOME of them will be disclosed --- giving a little to both sides in his ruling.
Or the judge will be shocked by what he reads in camera because the withheld documents in no way are protected and incriminate all the parties involved.
Judge Cooper might also be worried that if he doesn't accurately review the records and give them to Durham now, the records will come out later in a different trial and show that he made a mistake.
It really could have all been legal work and legit, we just don't know right now.
Well, since we don't know what's in the documents, it's Schrödinger's cat and anything is possible. It could even be a map to where Hillary buried Jimmy Hoffa's body.
I do tend to agree that the documents might very-well include highly-incriminating information --- based upon the same theory I have about why Hillary went to the trouble of deleting emails that were under subpoena, where she claimed that they were only about "wedding planning" and "yoga." One wouldn't expect someone to stir up a controversy and risk criminal prosecution just to hide that sort of innocuous information. So there's a tendency to suspect that there was information in those emails that was SO damaging that the controversy would have only been worse if she hadn't destroyed them.
So that could easily be the case here, and you're certainly correct that if there's information in the documents that puts any of them clearly beyond the scope of attorney-client privilege (or work-product immunity), the judge would be foolish to not turn them over to Durham. It's even possible that Durham's already obtained the documents via other means (such as from the FEC investigation), already knows what's in them, and just wants this judge to approve them, to take this opportunity to clear up any controversy about attorney-client privilege now.
There are lots of possibilities. But I still think the odds are that the judge may find some documents that could CONCEIVABLY be categorized as privileged, and so the judge will try to find a reason to spit his ruling as a Granted In Part and Denied in Part ruling, if possible --- as a demonstration that he is trying to be fair.
If he's formed some opinion about where the trial is heading (he's not supposed to, but he's only human), or even if he hasn't, he could want to bend over backwards to show that Sussman has been given a fair hearing and the benefit of any doubt wherever possible --- so as to make an appeal more difficult. No judge likes to have his rulings reversed.
I remember when Barr was asked whether he believed that the Trump campaign was spied on and he answered "Yes" I yelled out...here was an AG who had followed the evidence from yourself, from Dan Bongino, Mark Levin, Tom Fitton...here was a man who was going to save America from the Marxist onslaught!!!
If you had such success in uncovering relevant information and Dan and the others could write books off the known collaboration with foreign spies...how come Barr followed the path of the gutless Washington swamp and what's to say Durham won't do the same?
Barr caved in to the elites in two ways: 1.) not bringing the laptop story forward before the election and the impeachment trial, since the fbi had it given to them in December of 2019 and 2.) not acknowledging the hundreds of Americans who gave testimony under oath of the irregularities in the election. There were also videos that showed barred windows and votes being shuffled in after closing. He never acknowledged any of this. He could have said there were irregularities that were worth looking into even though he thought it wouldn’t have changed the vote. But to say nothing when we all saw and heard evidence to the irregularities, made me think he had been bought by the elite establishment. I was sorely disappointed. Makes me doubt Durham, but I hope he’s a true man of justice.
Barr has been on a book tour for the past six months. Gutless because he was only in for the payout after. The only decent thing he did was force Mueller to end the charade of that special counsel investigation. Even then the democrat lawyers did everything they could to go down swinging. Because of that, the left is still convinced about Russian collusion.
Just to clear up a point of confusion, "In Camera" is Latin for "In a Chamber" and has nothing to do with the electronic device ... I had to look it up. People keep misinterpreting this to mean there will be some kind of public viewing or hearing of the documents.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_camera
It’s amazing how the DS manipulate language, they say Camera, believing nobody will investigate. Like you did.
We can not believe anything they say.
Thank you
I don't believe it's being intentionally deceptive. It's more just a common term in the the legal profession ... they have a Latin term for everything. "writ of mandamus", "habeas corpus", "stare decisis", etc. Lawyers just don't realize the general public isn't familiar with the term because they're so use to hearing it.
I am a lawyer and you are correct. Every lawyer does understand "in camera review" to mean a private review by the Judge in his or her chambers.
In Italian , camera is a room. Same thing eh?
Since Latin was the official language of the Roman Empire ... I'd venture to guess that's a safe assumption
Ok I understand. Here’s a thought. Perhaps those reporting could put in parentheses the actual meaning?
How many of us know who are not lawyers, there is a Latin term in front of us?
TF descending on the Russia Collusion Hoax like a fog. We've been waiting for these ridiculous privilege claims to implode. It must be really bad for the Hillary Campaign, DNC and co. to all make such a desperate claim.
Thank you Techno Fog from Mendocino CA
Not tired of winning
Not sick of popcorn
Still on the edge of my seat.
Still Thanking God everyday for Our Beloved Anons.
Great Update Techno Fog
🥂❤🇺🇸 Thank You!
Thanks for the update technofog. The msm hasn’t said a peep for obvious reasons. Tragic. I hope this judge is just and rules with wisdom and not bias. Since the Mueller report some of us have been waiting for the whole enchilada story behind the “Russia, Russia, Russia” false narrative. I pray Durham is honest and forthright with all Americans and those who are guilty of planning this coup of an elected president justly have a ride to jail.
TechNo_Fog of War! Brilliant! My main man Vern!
Seago’s professional and educational history are GIANT FLASHING SIGNALS!
TFTP (multiple meanings) CIA, SWIFT, SWIFTNET, ALFA and a bulk surveillance program.
It’s clearer and clearer with every drop of information.
This might give your readers some insight into Seago and what her role might be.
https://datasociety.net/library/data-civil-rights-technology-primer/
Thank You for the update🌎✌️❤️🇺🇸🌞🌻🍭🍫🍿🙏
Thank you, TechnoFog! This "Hillary for America" lawyer, Mr. Trout, doesn't seem very smart... I've seen Marc Elias mentioned: is it possible that those 30 emails are incriminating also for Marc Elias, besides Sussmann and the HRC campaign?
2) I find interesting the mention “not for this trial” - “important for other investigations”. So we know there are other investigations ongoing... Who could be the targets of those "other investigations"?
1. Obstruction of Justice has been mentioned twice.
2. More people identified lying to the FIB.
3. Conspiracy (a step easier than RICO).
4. Tangentially relayed - 27 crooked Weismann (Mueller figurehead) DOJ attorneys wiping their Federal smartphones. But it seems like crooks inside the government get a pass.
5. Danchenko. (Will he flip?)
6. Mark Elias <--- Sussman.
7. - 8. Feb 14, 2022, Adam Housley: "High level non political sources telling me that the Durham investigation has a lot of names being looked at…”two names to keep an eye on…Jake Sullivan and…… Colin Kahl….. both being looked at very closely…both of em nose deep.” "
9. - 10. Georgia Tech Fabricators? Would love to see more 'Flippers' inside scheme.
Devin Nunes identified multiple crimes committed several years ago.
Excellent list!
6. & 7. - Marc Elias and Jake Sullivan: this is exactly what I think.
3. Conspiracy charges: absolutely! Durham mentioned explicitly the term "joint venture" = elegant term to define "Conspiracy". Plus: he mentioned "charges not being subject to Statute of Limitations"
I wonder: what about James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper? and Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Bruce & Nellie Ohr?
Remember how Brennan was already interviewed by Durham? Either Brennan was the clueless moron he was always or he was a plotter who was brought into the fold after he wrote his memo about Hillary approving plan to smear Trump with Russia allegations.
oh yes, I remember perfectly the Brennan interview: on August 21, 2020 - it lasted 8 hours! - I reported about the Brennan interview in my book "Durham Indictments" (Link: https://gregrubini.squarespace.com/bookstore/p/durham )
Brennan is a moron, no doubt, but he's not stupid. Brennan was the mastermind behind ALL the spy operations on Trump - including the GCHQ SpyOp on Trump that nobody dares to talk about (except yours truly in this book: https://gregrubini.squarespace.com/bookstore/p/spyops )
Interestingly that book was suppressed by Amazon in September 2020, when it was a bestseller, 50 days before the 2020 Elections.
Probably they keep the GCHQ SpyOp under wraps not to upset our British so-called "ally"... (better to have straight enemies, than "allies" like that)
I wonder if Durham is investigating the GCHQ SpyOp, or he has been gagged by the CIA. I sent my book to Durham back in June 2020, with all the evidence, the data and the GCHQ Top Secret documents
No, he said Joffe was being looked at a crime greater than 5 years statute of limitations. Durham later said it is for Major Fraud, which has 7 years.
1) Danchenko.
2) Conspiracy to commit federal crime
3) Major fraud against the federal government.
No, I think Danchenko is done. I think most likely the targets of those "other investigations" are Jake Sullivan and Marc Elias.
And perhaps Hillary Clinton?
Danchenko is the only other "trial" on the docket. The other investigations would be the criminal conspiracy between DNC and HFA and FGPS and Sussmann and Joffe, and Joffe's major fraud for misusing government contract access at DARPA.
"Danchenko is the only other trial on the docket" >> true (for now...) but it seems Durham is building the case to nail other targets (higher in the ladder)
"criminal conspiracy" involving HFA & DNC >> exactly!
Plus, since the Sussmann/Joffe/HFA plot about the Alpha Bank continued after Jan 20, 2017, and into February, means the crime becomes "Seditious Conspiracy to overthrow the Government" (Trump was the President since Jan 20, 2017, thus he was "the Government" (the head of the Executive branch)
The thing is, the Clinton-Obama camp so very obviously felt entitled to destroy another democratically elected President "by any means necessary." The country can't survive that level of treachery. It has to be addressed and if it is not adequately addressed there just is no America anymore. Sure, we have been on that path for a long time, but what they did to Trump was the final destination. Now it only goes one way...or the other.
I agree 100% Candis!
Done, what does that mean. Plea deal?
no, it means that Durham doesn't need more evidence (emails, comms) for nailing Danchenko. Plus, it seams clear from the last filings that in the Sussmann case Durham is targeting members of the HRC campaign and the DNC
So it doesn't end here..."The court asked whether Durham’s team would come back for the other 1,500 e-mails. They responded in the negative - with a curious “not for this trial” - and stated the court’s decision would be “important for other investigations.”" More to come and thanks again to Techno Fog.
The trial of Sussmann is scheduled to begin in 10 days, on May 16, correct?
asking for a friend...
On schedule, nothing continued yet.
Thank you, TechnoFog!
TF I've followed u since I jumped on Twitter and I got 2 say u are the most informed of all I read. My humble thanks.
This is rather intriguing; because they fought so hard to keep these emails secret the Judge himself now has to personally review them. If the information is damaging, now the Judge has seen that damning information up close and personal before he makes further rulings prior to and at trial. This could epically backfire on the HRC team.
Exactly. This could be the mother lode.
What is Tyrrell, Joffe's lawyer saying about the 8 Joffe emails?
All sides and the judge seem to agree that Elias executed a valid Kovel engagement with PR expert Fusion with respect to his HFA and DNC clients, which at least in form creates privilege on those Perkins Coie communications (to the extent they are genuinely with respect to legal advice). While Sussmann, Elias's partner, had Joffe as a client, the fact that neither Sussmann nor Elias executed a Kovel engagement with Fusion for PR advice with respect to their rendering legal advice to Joffe (Algor asserts this), this is not fatal to Fusion/Joffe communications lacking privilege because Joffe expected they were privileged because of how Sussmann brought Fusion and Joffe together, implying that because Perkins Coie had hired Fusion for its PR expertise, that created Kovel privilege with respect to the Sussmann/Joffe client relationship as well. Tyrrell says that every communication between Joffe and Fusion (Seago) that did not involve Sussmann was nevertheless contemporaneously marked privileged by Joffe and Sussmann was copied. That would appear to be pretty strong evidence that client Joffe thought his communications with Fusion were privileged, although again if the communications are not in relation to legal advice that Joffe was seeking from Sussmann, privilege would not apply.
What is your take on this argument?
As to Joffe’s argument, I’m curious if the judge will change his mind once he sees the emails. Or if Durham will end up getting them another way (crime fraud exception, for example).
My impression is the parties are trying to avoid disclosure of the contents at all costs because they are so damaging to the parties that a charge of conspiracy is entirely unavoidable. They might be willing to lie to the Court because the consequence of disclosure would be complete incrimination.
Just hypothetical, assuming there was something incredibly illegal being done, the parties knew this, and thought doing all the work with attorneys would protect their crimes under privilege.
This was Hillary's setup with Cheryl Mills. Everything that would have been illegal was covered with attorney client privilege in deposition, and the FBI didn't investigate further than that.
Yes, a conspiracy to defraud the U.S. under 18 USC 371 may be the crime that invokes the crime fraud exception to privilege which TF raises in his reply below. That would have a statute that while 5 years is still running as it doesn't begin until the conspiracy ceased (which may be down to this day). The mafia dons always having the in house consigliere party to their meetings, who was a member of the bar, being the classic example of its application.
One guy gets to make the call on the hypothetical you propose.
But could Judge Cooper not allow them in because they are not relevant to the 1001 crime charged here, even though they might be evidence of conspiracy (which he only has a small window on as compared to the evidence Durham may be compiling)?
The language is irrelevant. The point is that Judge Cooper, appointed by Obama, is granting further access to the Clinton-related emails. I will accept this apparent victory with a forever watchful eye out for traitors to this great experiment.
Having read the full hearing transcript, I noticed that at least two of the opposition lawyers again leaned heavily on their complaints that Durham waited too long to raise the issue of documents withheld under a dubious claim of attorney-client privilege (or work-product immunity).
I was surprised that the government didn't provide a clear response --- or ANY response --- explaining why Durham waited until April 6 to file his Motion to Compel which raised this issue that the defense claims he should have raised months ago, if not during the grand jury investigation.
The recent Supplementation regarding the results of the FEC investigation would be the key to answering those arguments, I think, but that wasn't made clear during the hearing --- so I guess the government feels that it made its point with the Supplementation. Still, they might have at least mentioned it during the oral arguments.
Or, it might be that the explanation for the delay is intertwined with the testimony the government expects to get from Fusion GPS employ Seago, so maybe a response is somehow buried in that argument. But it's tough to tell, not knowing what she is expected to say in court.
I wouldn't predict how the judge will rule on actual disclosure of the withheld documents, other than that he'll probably rule that SOME of them will be disclosed --- giving a little to both sides in his ruling.
Or the judge will be shocked by what he reads in camera because the withheld documents in no way are protected and incriminate all the parties involved.
Judge Cooper might also be worried that if he doesn't accurately review the records and give them to Durham now, the records will come out later in a different trial and show that he made a mistake.
It really could have all been legal work and legit, we just don't know right now.
Well, since we don't know what's in the documents, it's Schrödinger's cat and anything is possible. It could even be a map to where Hillary buried Jimmy Hoffa's body.
I do tend to agree that the documents might very-well include highly-incriminating information --- based upon the same theory I have about why Hillary went to the trouble of deleting emails that were under subpoena, where she claimed that they were only about "wedding planning" and "yoga." One wouldn't expect someone to stir up a controversy and risk criminal prosecution just to hide that sort of innocuous information. So there's a tendency to suspect that there was information in those emails that was SO damaging that the controversy would have only been worse if she hadn't destroyed them.
So that could easily be the case here, and you're certainly correct that if there's information in the documents that puts any of them clearly beyond the scope of attorney-client privilege (or work-product immunity), the judge would be foolish to not turn them over to Durham. It's even possible that Durham's already obtained the documents via other means (such as from the FEC investigation), already knows what's in them, and just wants this judge to approve them, to take this opportunity to clear up any controversy about attorney-client privilege now.
There are lots of possibilities. But I still think the odds are that the judge may find some documents that could CONCEIVABLY be categorized as privileged, and so the judge will try to find a reason to spit his ruling as a Granted In Part and Denied in Part ruling, if possible --- as a demonstration that he is trying to be fair.
If he's formed some opinion about where the trial is heading (he's not supposed to, but he's only human), or even if he hasn't, he could want to bend over backwards to show that Sussman has been given a fair hearing and the benefit of any doubt wherever possible --- so as to make an appeal more difficult. No judge likes to have his rulings reversed.
Very good points.
I remember when Barr was asked whether he believed that the Trump campaign was spied on and he answered "Yes" I yelled out...here was an AG who had followed the evidence from yourself, from Dan Bongino, Mark Levin, Tom Fitton...here was a man who was going to save America from the Marxist onslaught!!!
If you had such success in uncovering relevant information and Dan and the others could write books off the known collaboration with foreign spies...how come Barr followed the path of the gutless Washington swamp and what's to say Durham won't do the same?
Barr caved in to the elites in two ways: 1.) not bringing the laptop story forward before the election and the impeachment trial, since the fbi had it given to them in December of 2019 and 2.) not acknowledging the hundreds of Americans who gave testimony under oath of the irregularities in the election. There were also videos that showed barred windows and votes being shuffled in after closing. He never acknowledged any of this. He could have said there were irregularities that were worth looking into even though he thought it wouldn’t have changed the vote. But to say nothing when we all saw and heard evidence to the irregularities, made me think he had been bought by the elite establishment. I was sorely disappointed. Makes me doubt Durham, but I hope he’s a true man of justice.
Barr has been on a book tour for the past six months. Gutless because he was only in for the payout after. The only decent thing he did was force Mueller to end the charade of that special counsel investigation. Even then the democrat lawyers did everything they could to go down swinging. Because of that, the left is still convinced about Russian collusion.
Even if any of these were actually privileged, can't the privilege be pierced due to the crime-fraud exception?