Article

2022-05-18 Home Front: Politix

[RedState] The trial of Michael Sussmann, a Hillary Clinton apparatchik who spread false conspiracy theories about Donald Trump to the FBI, begins on Tuesday. That follows the selection of the jury, which is presenting new challenges for John Durham’s first major prosecution in his investigation of the Russian collusion hoax.

Sussmann’s prior attempts to get the case dismissed failed miserably after Durham expertly responded to the contradictory arguments presented. Going forward, though, the final decision will be in the hands of a jury that includes a Hillary Clinton donor and a woman who claims she can’t be impartial regarding Donald Trump.
Then why is she on the Jury?
Many of the members of the broader jury pool, as well as some selected for the jury itself, expressed strong disdain for former President Donald Trump and/or support for Clinton. Most said they hadn’t heard of the Sussmann case until the judge told them about it last week.

"I remembered that the 2016 election was kind of a mess and that there were a lot of shenanigans," one of the selected jurors told the court. She said she "strongly" disliked Trump and that she didn’t think she could be impartial if the case was about someone on his team but noted that "if it’s not directly about Trump," then she could be impartial.

The obvious problem here is that the case is about Donald Trump. No, it’s not a Trump associate on trial, but the entire basis of the case is that Sussmann went to the FBI and lied to them about the Alfa Bank conspiracy theory, which asserted that the former president had a secret server communicating with the Russians.

On what planet can a juror who outright says they have a strong animus against Trump be impartial in judging someone who’s on trial for actively trying to destroy Trump with falsities? It’s absolutely insane that this woman made it into the final jury pool.

She’s not the only one, though. Other jurors also revealed that they donated to Hillary Clinton in 2016 and/or donated to Joe Biden in 2020. Given that most people never donate to any political campaign for president, it seems unreasonable that doing so wouldn’t be disqualifying. There are plenty of other possible jurors to choose from who aren’t overtly political to the point where they gave money to Clinton.

Further, the jury pool itself is comprised of 11 women and only five men. Why does that matter? Because women, specifically liberal women like you’d find in Washington, DC, represent one of the strongest demographics for the Democrat Party.
I see an aquittal.

Posted by Deacon Blues 2022-05-18 00:00|| || Front Page|| [8 views ] Top

#1

Maybe the DC swamp just decided better to allow a STAGED Trial situation?

In order to be able to claim vindication based on a predetermined innocent outcome?

Posted by NN2N1 2022-05-18 08:49|| 2022-05-18 08:49|| Front Page Top

#2 Our justice system is broken. bought D.A.s! A scotus justice who can't decide on a persons gender. We need a country without democrats. Soon.

Posted by irish rage boy 2022-05-18 09:34|| 2022-05-18 09:34|| Front Page Top

#3 The judge's wife is the lawyer representing Lisa Page.

Kangaroo Court. Total joke.

Posted by Spanky Grundy8875 2022-05-18 09:42|| 2022-05-18 09:42|| Front Page Top

#4 Ref #2: I the past 70 yrs means anything, We have pretty much always "needed a country without democrats."

Posted by Besoeker 2022-05-18 09:46|| 2022-05-18 09:46|| Front Page Top

#5 The swamp holding a trial on the swamp. What could go wrong??

Posted by 49 Pan 2022-05-18 10:40|| 2022-05-18 10:40|| Front Page Top

#6 This just in: On the first day of the trial of Hillary’s lawyer, Michael Sussmann, the Durham team’s opening statement and its first witnesses attempted to walk a fine line to show that the Democratic National Committee lawyer used his unique position to get the FBI to investigate Trump for secretly communicating with a Russian bank to get to Putin.
Durham’s team argues that the FBI was duped into treating seriously the Trump-is-a-Russian-secret-agent-with-super-secret-ties-to-a-Moscow-bank story that the Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer brought to it. They will argue in court that if the FBI had known it was Hillary’s oppo-research, they would have dismissed it out of hand.
I hope ya'll don't have high blood pressure. This whole thing is a joke.

Posted by Deacon Blues 2022-05-18 14:20|| 2022-05-18 14:20|| Front Page Top

#7 /\ They will argue in court that if the FBI had known it was Hillary’s oppo-research, they would have dismissed it out of hand.

Accepted the Sussmann (Clinton operative) reporting without checking his sources did they? Once the BS was discovered, the FBI continued to pursue (doubled down) on the issue.

They're sticking with their "monitoring Carter Page" (D.C. intelligence community insider) and sometimes Trump Campaign worker story.

Sorry, I'm not buying any of it.

Posted by Besoeker 2022-05-18 14:30|| 2022-05-18 14:30|| Front Page Top

PJ - Durham Pretends FBI Was Duped by Hillary's Lawyer Into Participating in Her 'October Surprise'

Posted by Besoeker 2022-05-18 14:40|| 2022-05-18 14:40|| Front Page Top

#9 They might get Sussman but the crooked FBI is in the clear.

Posted by Deacon Blues 2022-05-18 15:33|| 2022-05-18 15:33|| Front Page Top

#10 A bridge too far, and the deep state sees, once again, proof that nothing happens if you are inside the swamp, even if you commit sedition, as long as its conservatives you are thwarting.

Posted by NoMoreBS 2022-05-18 18:27|| 2022-05-18 18:27|| Front Page Top

#11 Notably,Elias mentioned Jake Sullivan as someone at the Clinton Campaign who knew about the Trump/Russia research (though there is uncertainty as to whether Sullivan knew about Fusion’s activities). Elias would give the campaign these updates.

A brief aside: Jake Sullivan’s wife is Margaret Goodlander - who serves as counsel to Attorney General Merrick Garland. We understand that she has not recused herself from anything having to do with the Special Counsel’s investigation. We further understand that Goodlander is keeping close tabs on Durham’s investigation. We’ll report on that down the road…

Anyway, Elias also testified that the Clinton Campaign paid them (Perkins Coie) a “flat fee” for their legal services. Why is this important? Because it explains why Sussmann would block bill the Clinton Campaign (see tweet below). (“Block billing” is having a multi-hour entry with a generalized description. Example: “6.5 hours on confidential project.) For flat fee work, attorneys are generally allowed block billing because the client isn’t paying the hourly rate.

Posted by Frank G 2022-05-18 20:25|| 2022-05-18 20:25|| Front Page Top

05:38 Richard+Aubrey
05:37 Frank G
05:33 Besoeker
05:30 Grom the Reflective
05:27 Besoeker
04:32 Bobby
02:43 Elmaper+McGurque1612
02:40 Elmaper+McGurque1612
01:38 Grom the Reflective
00:17 EMS Artifact