John Durham's Investigation & Hannity's Delusional Operation Boomerang

[Reality Check]

Is it just me or does it seem like Dunham's case just vaporized?

[Kendra]

Is it just me or does it seem like Dunham's case just vaporized?

No, it's not just you. I'm not a lawyer, but it sounds like there's a lot of things that don't add up.

[raison de arizona]

Baker was the only one who witnessed Sussman lie about representing Clinton/DNC... Which is the whole case. So um, ?

[Kendra]

Baker says Clinton email was still open, which would make him cautious. Also says knowing political connection would have made him judge reliability of info differently. Says he would have been aware of and wary that the FBI was being played. This is central to Durham’s case.

[Reality Check]

It is funny that now that Baker is under oath he magically seems to recall that Sussman had been representing Clinton at the time they met.

[Suranis]

From my understanding it would not matter if S had been representing the Clinton Campaign as long as he wasn't doing it when he was talking with the FBI. Its not illegal to have clients not involved with a case.

Or is the case that S was representing clinton at the meeting and said he wasn't?

Theres also this from farther up the thread.
https://twitter.com/AGoudsward/status/1 ... 7451729920

Andrew Goudsward@AGoudsward
·6h
Baker emphasizes a couple of times that FBI was already investigating possible Trump-Russia connections at time of meeting and was concerned about press reporting things that could affect that probe.

Which means the FBI was already looking at what S was talking to them about, so the whole conspiracy that S started the Probe is false anyway.

[bob]

From my understanding it would not matter if S had been representing the Clinton Campaign as long as he wasn't doing it when he was talking with the FBI. Its not illegal to have clients not involved with a case.

Or is the case that S was representing clinton at the meeting and said he wasn't?

The crux of the case is that Sussmann (allegedly) told the FBI that he wasn't representing the campaign when he brought the data to the FBI.

The case is literally about the lie about the representation, and whether it was material because (the prosecution theorizes) the FBI wouldn't have agreed to the meeting if it knew about the representation.

Baker's saying he knew about the representation suggests the lie (if it happened) wasn't material, but that's not really the legal standard. But it may smell like "reasonable doubt" to a juror.

[Suranis]

https://twitter.com/AGoudsward/status/1 ... 8069611529

"Michael Sussmann trial resumes this morning with more testimony from ex-FBI top lawyer James Baker. First though the defense is objecting to part of Marc Elias' testimony yesterday where he said "you'd have to ask Mr. Sussmann" if FBI meeting was on behalf of Clinton camp

Judge Cooper, as expected, is not going to grant a mistrial based on Elias testimony, but will strike portions of transcript where he gave non-responsive answers to questions.

Baker now back on the stand. Says he agreed to met with Sussmann the day after he reached out because "it seemed urgent and important"

Key moment as Baker testifies that he's "100% confident" that Sussmann told him in Sept. 2016 meeting he wasn't there on behalf of any client.

"Michael's a friend of mine and a colleague. I believed and trusted that the statement was truthful," Baker testifies.

Baker said Sussmann told him major news outlets had info about Alfa Bank allegations. Baker said he was under impression that Sussmann hadn't given info to press. Sussmann had been communicating with reporters during this time.

Baker testifies that knowing allegations were about to be reported in press added "urgency" to situation because if there was secret communications channel, it would likely disappear if press reported it.

Baker said he "vouched" for Sussmann in meeting with top FBI counterintelligence official that day. Says he relayed that Sussmann was serious lawyer "who could understand importance and validity of information that had been brought"

Baker says he knew Sussmann had clients in Democratic Party, but believed the meeting was in a "different capacity." Likens him to confidential human source.

Baker emphasizes a couple of times that FBI was already investigating possible Trump-Russia connections at time of meeting and was concerned about press reporting things that could affect that probe.

Baker testifies that he sought to protect Sussmann's identity after the meeting, but if he perceived he was working with a client he would not have. He says in that case, the client would have been the person needing protecting, not lawyer.

Baker says he discussed press issue with FBI leadership and they decided to ask Sussmann if he knew reporters so they could ask them to hold off on the story

Juror comes forward to say that she learned that her daughter is on the same crew team as Sussmann's daughter. Juror hasn't meet Sussmann and says she can be fair. Judge is going to let her stay on, over prosecution's objections.

Baker is back on stand and prosecutor is walking him through detailed account of FBI's conversations with NYT to try to get them to hold off on Alfa Bank story while bureau investigated.

Baker testifies that FBI leadership had another meeting with NYT where they said they could not confirm that data they investigated showed secret communications between Trump Org and Alfa Bank
Andrew Goudsward

Baker says FBI's ultimate conclusion on Alfa Bank matter was there was "nothing there."

Prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis shows Baker texts from Sussmann to Baker alerting him that he was hearing rumors about outlets that were about to publish Trump-Russia stories in late-September 2016.

Jury now getting shown a photo Sussmann sent Baker of protesters outside Perkins Coie office after it became public that the two had met about Trump-Russia allegations in 2016.

Baker now sounding a bit upset as he recounts experience of testifying about Trump-Russia investigation before Congress. "It sucked," he said calling the behavior of members of Congress "appalling."

Baker also says he felt he had "dragged Michael into a maelstrom" by mentioning meeting with Sussmann in House interview."

I think thats the case demolished, honestly.

[Kendra]

Baker's back on the stand for cross-exam.

[Reality Check]

If Durham's team has no billing records or no communication or witness that can show that the HRC campaign directed Sussmann to meet with the FBI doesn't it really come down to Sussmann's word? He can just say that he was concerned as a citizen about what was going on between Alfa Bank and the Trump as a matter of national security, It seems that the prosecution is trying to do mind reading here.

The case on Sussnann's so called lie being material seems equally weak because in the end the FBI said there was nothing to the claims. Baker has made vague comments that he may have treated the claims differently had he known they had come from the Clinton campaign. But he has yet to give any details on what that means. Maybe that will come up in cross examination today.

Edit: This is from cross today:


As I said this is f--ing weak.

[Kendra]

[Reality Check]

I ventured over to Twitter and checked out #Sussmanntrial. The Trumpers are going crazy that Hillary signed off on going to the press with the tips on Alfa Bank connections with Trump. They are certain Hillary will be in jail any day now.

[Slim Cognito]

Of course they do. It will happen right after SCOTUS announces trump won the 2020 election.

[raison de arizona]

[Kendra]

Everyone rush to the teevee. Maria Bartiromo has Kash Patel up in this hour to talk about the explosive testimony in last week's trial

[Reality Check]

Jonathan Turley chimes in on the Sussmann case at The Hill. It is as bad as you would imagine.

Tale of two trials: How Sussmann is receiving every consideration denied to Flynn

Our very own GeorgetownJD pointed out to Turley on Twitter that Flynn had pleaded guilty before being pardoned by the Asshole.

[Kendra]

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/2 ... s-00034434

An FBI agent involved in the investigation of links between Donald Trump and Russia told a colleague weeks before the 2016 election that top FBI brass were “fired up” about since-discredited allegations of a secret communications channel between Trump and a Russian bank with close ties to Vladimir Putin.

“People on 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server,” FBI agent Joseph Pientka wrote in an internal instant message to another agent working on the issue, Curtis Heide, on Sept. 21, 2016. “Reachout and put tools on… its [sic] not an option — we must do it.”


But Pientka’s comment, revealed in courtroom testimony Monday, was part of a conflicting narrative presented to jurors about the secrecy and urgency with which the FBI treated allegations related to the Putin-linked Alfa Bank. Those claims arrived at the bureau via Michael Sussmann, a cybersecurity attorney who represented the Democratic National Committee and the Hillary Clinton campaign, in the final weeks of the 2016 contest.

[Reality Check]

I created a Twitter list to follow the reporters who are live tweeting the Sussmann trial. The link is on my Twitter profile:

https://twitter.com/R_C_Radio

This should link directly to the list:

https://twitter.com/i/lists/1529453805615579137?s=20

[Kendra]

I created a Twitter list to follow the reporters who are live tweeting the Sussmann trial. The link is on my Twitter profile:

https://twitter.com/R_C_Radio

This should link directly to the list:

https://twitter.com/i/lists/1529453805615579137?s=20

Thank you for that. I've been trying to follow EmptyWheel, but she's so fast and furious I can't understand half of what she says.

[Reality Check]

Thank you for that. I've been trying to follow EmptyWheel, but she's so fast and furious I can't understand half of what she says.

Thanks, Kendra. I forgot she was also live tweeting. I added her to the list.

[Kendra]

Cool. Now if someone can get me a short Dummies version

[Slim Cognito]

Thanks!! Every time I try to check it out on twitter, I get bombarded with KILLARY'S GOING TO PRISON!!!

[Reality Check]

The prosecution has rested. I was a bit surprised that when they put on their summary witness the testimony was entirely about whether Sussmann was acting for a client at the FBI meeting and nothing was mentioned about whether the so called omission was material. That seems to me to be the weakest part of their case. I assume they will address this in closing.

[Foggy]

If the prosecution has rested, no need for any defense, I think the jury now goes straight to determining the number of years Killary's going to spend in prison, yesno?

[Reality Check]

If the prosecution has rested, no need for any defense, I think the jury now goes straight to determining the number of years Killary's going to spend in prison, yesno?

That's pretty much the Right's version of things on Twitter.