| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14874
Location: on earth
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 08, 2019 12:22 am Post subject: 1200 requests by right wingers on Clinton vs 80 on trump |
 |
|
geee over 1200 requests by right wingers on clinton whitewater vs 80 on trump by dems when the repukes let trump off.
https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/a-west-wing-under-siege-as-dems-launch-investigation-1452230211934
A West Wing 'under siege' as Dems launch investigation
| Quote: | | The House Judiciary Committee on Monday launched an investigation into potential Constitutional abuses and public corruption by the president, sending a sweeping request for documents from the president's family, businesses and administration. |
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14874
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Wed May 15, 2019 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the congressional intelligence committe has not received a briefing on counterintelligence for nearly 2 years now.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/absence-of-counterintel-in-mueller-report-puts-spotlight-on-wray-59639365521
| Quote: | Absence of counterintel in Mueller report puts spotlight on Wray
Rachel Maddow reports on the House Intelligence Committee's fight to get access to the counterintelligence aspects of the Trump Russia investigation to which it has a legal right, and notes that the counterintel probe appears to have remained under the purview of FBI Director Christopher Wray, new target of angry Trump tweets. |
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14874
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Tue May 31, 2022 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
and here we find the ultra partisan right winger special prosecutor appointed by trump has lost his first big and really only case that he has spent what 4 years on. His only big case he claimed to have found. Did he even get a grand jury to approve of these charges?
Jury was clear and fast, and the trial portion ended friday.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/us/politics/michael-sussmann-durham-fbi.html?campaign_id=60&emc=edit_na_20220531&instance_id=0&nl=breaking-news&ref=cta®i_id=115919677&segment_id=93815&user_id=f730a3b9531f5b2c781c5ff7996dd05c
Michael Sussmann Is Acquitted in Case Brought by Trump-Era Prosecutor
| Quote: | WASHINGTON — Michael Sussmann, a prominent cybersecurity lawyer with ties to Democrats, was acquitted on Tuesday of a felony charge that he lied to the F.B.I. about having no client in 2016 when he shared a tip about possible connections between Donald J. Trump and Russia.
The verdict was a blow to the special counsel, John H. Durham, who was appointed by the Trump administration three years ago to scour the Trump-Russia investigation for any wrongdoing.
The case centered on odd internet data that cybersecurity researchers discovered in 2016 after it became public that Russia had hacked Democrats and Mr. Trump had encouraged the country to target Hillary Clinton’s emails.
The researchers said the data might reflect a covert communications channel using servers for the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, a Kremlin-linked bank. The F.B.I. briefly looked at the suspicions and dismissed them.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
On Sept. 19, 2016, Mr. Sussmann brought those suspicions to a senior F.B.I. official. Prosecutors accused him of falsely telling the official that he was not there on behalf of any client, concealing that he was in fact working for both Mrs. Clinton’s campaign and a technology executive who had brought him the tip.
Mr. Durham and his trial team used court filings and trial testimony to detail how Mr. Sussmann, while working for a Democratic-linked law firm and logging his time to the Clinton campaign, had been trying to get reporters to write about the Alfa Bank suspicions.
But trying to persuade reporters to write about such suspicions is not a crime. Mr. Sussmann’s guilt or innocence turned on a narrow issue: whether he made a false statement to a senior F.B.I. official at the 2016 meeting, by saying he was sharing those suspicions on behalf of no one but himself.
Mr. Durham used the case to put forward a larger conspiracy: that there was a joint enterprise to essentially frame Mr. Trump for collusion with Russia by getting the F.B.I. to investigate the suspicions so reporters would write about it — a scheme involving the Clinton campaign; its opposition research firm, Fusion GPS; Mr. Sussmann; and a cybersecurity expert who brought the odd data and analysis to him.
That insinuation thrilled supporters of Mr. Trump who share his view that the Russia investigation was a “hoax,” and have sought to conflate the actual inquiry with sometimes thin or dubious allegations developed by private citizens. In reality, the Alfa Bank matter was a sideshow and tangent: The F.B.I. had already opened its inquiry on other grounds before Mr. Sussmann passed on the tip, and the final report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III made no mention of the Alfa Bank suspicions.
ADVERTISEMENT
Continue reading the main story
But the case Mr. Durham and his team used to float their broad insinuations was thin — one count of making a false statement in a meeting with no other witnesses or contemporaneous notes. The evidence and arguments the lead prosecutor, Andrew DeFilippis, and his colleagues marshaled fell flat with the 12 jurors, who voted unanimously to find Mr. Sussmann not guilty.
Some supporters of Mr. Trump had been bracing for that outcome, pointing to the District of Columbia’s reputation as a heavily Democratic area and putting forward the prospect that a jury might be politically biased against a Trump-era prosecutor trying to convict a defendant who was working for the Clinton campaign.
The judge told the jury that they were not to take any of their own political views into account when deciding the facts.
The defense, which portrayed prosecutors’ insinuations as “political conspiracy theories,” had argued that Mr. Sussmann only brought the matter to the F.B.I. when he thought The New York Times was already on the cusp of writing an article about the matter, to give the bureau a heads-up so it would not be caught flat-footed.
Clinton campaign officials testified during the trial they had not told or authorized him to go to the F.B.I. — and that doing so was against their interests because they did not trust the bureau and it could slow down the publication of any article. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17747
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue May 31, 2022 12:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hysterical. The foolish righties predicted Durham would sent lots of people to jail. One trial, one acquittal. Malibu--do you feel foolish now? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
