Crime Clinton Lawyer finally charged over Russia-gate hoax.

giusti825

giusti825

ßanned
@Silver
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
11,377
Reaction score
2,821
In the indictment, Sussmann is accused of falsely telling Baker that he did not represent any client when he met him to give the FBI white papers and other data files containing evidence of questionable cyber links between the Trump Organization and a Russia-based bank.

The indictment alleges that in fact Sussmann had turned over this information not as a “good citizen” but rather, as an attorney representing a US technology executive, an internet company and Clinton’s presidential campaign.

So they're accusing him of not disclosing who he was representing as an attorney when he handed over information to the FBI? He'll probably just keep saying he was lawyer, with many clients, and data given to the FBI was not related to any particular client representation. The end.

Maybe now people will stop pretending these obvious fabrications were real.
Click to expand...

Sorry, no. This isn't a get out of jail free card. Who this Sussman guy was working for when he handed over a small piece of evidence has no bearing on whether or not Russia interfered with our election and whether Trump & Co participated in it. Vladimir Putin still ordered The DNC cyber attacks and the leaks of the stolen material. Paul Manafort's sharing of information with Russian intel still took place. Etc. This story has nothing to do with that and doesn't change that.
 
Last edited:
What this actually deals with BTW, is the Trump Org and Alfa Bank story. Relevant details:

For four months, during the summer before the 2016 Presidential election, two servers registered to the bank repeatedly looked up the address of another server, maintained by a mass-marketing firm for the Trump Organization. Thousands of these lookups, which typically precede communication, appeared in logs of the Domain Name System, a global database of online addresses; the traffic was noted by a group of prominent computer scientists with unusual access to those records. But the D.N.S. traces were inconclusive and required sophisticated analysis. The Trump Organization and Alfa Bank denied that they had been communicating at all, and the episode remained a mystery...

Alfa Bank’s relationship with Trump is opaque, and official documents resulting from a series of investigations and counter-investigations into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election offer few decisive conclusions. In the special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report, Petr Aven, the chairman of Alfa Bank, testified that he tried, at Putin’s suggestion, to open a private channel to the incoming Trump Administration. Mueller’s report didn’t mention the Alfa Bank data, but one issued this summer by the Senate Intelligence Committee did. It said that, although investigators did not conclude that the data necessarily reflected communication, they also “could not positively determine an intent or purpose that would explain the unusual activity”; it added that the explanations offered by Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization “were not consistent.” In 2019, an inspector general examining the origins of Mueller’s investigation wrote, “The FBI investigated whether there were cyber links between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, but had concluded by early February 2017 that there were no such links.” An American official who helped investigate Russian interference confirmed that the F.B.I. had looked at the data, with help from outside analysts, but said that its efforts were not extensive.

A different American official, who deals regularly with national-security issues, told me he believes that the F.B.I. and other intelligence agencies never thoroughly investigated the computer traffic—in part, he suspected, because U.S. officials may have been wary of revealing how they had collected the data. “This evidence is very tangible and real,” the official said. “It seems possible that the U.S. government decided not to pursue this because it did not want to expose an important source and method for intelligence gathering.”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-contested-afterlife-of-the-trump-alfa-bank-story
 
Also, this should be noted as well, from the same New Yorker story:

Alfa Bank’s lawyers in the United States have carried out an aggressive campaign to uncover the identity of the sources who gathered the D.N.S. logs, filing lawsuits and serving subpoenas on some of America’s leading computer experts, some of whom helped decipher the logs for The New Yorker. Two lawsuits—filed against “John Doe et al.,” the unidentified scientists who discovered the seeming evidence of communication—claim, without offering evidence, that malicious people doctored the data, in an effort to smear Alfa Bank and the Trump campaign.

Remarkably, Alfa Bank’s legal efforts are proceeding in parallel with the Justice Department and its allies in the conservative press, who have waged a relentless campaign against American intelligence and the F.B.I. for what they describe as a malign effort to concoct a false story about Russia’s efforts to help Trump in 2016. In recent weeks, scientists and others quoted in my story have been summoned to testify to a grand jury impanelled by John Durham, the U.S. attorney appointed by Attorney General William Barr to investigate potential criminal conduct in the Russia probe. It is unclear whether lawyers for the Justice Department and Alfa Bank are working together, but they share an interest in pursuing people who have investigated Trump’s ties to Russia. “There’s a unity of purpose,” one lawyer involved in the litigation told me.

They really want the people who uncovered the info punished.
 
HOLA said:
In the indictment, Sussmann is accused of falsely telling Baker that he did not represent any client when he met him to give the FBI white papers and other data files containing evidence of questionable cyber links between the Trump Organization and a Russia-based bank.

The indictment alleges that in fact Sussmann had turned over this information not as a “good citizen” but rather, as an attorney representing a US technology executive, an internet company and Clinton’s presidential campaign.

So they're accusing him of not disclosing who he was representing as an attorney when he handed over information to the FBI? He'll probably just keep saying he was lawyer, with many clients, and data given to the FBI was not related to any particular client representation. The end.



Sorry, no. This isn't a get out of jail free card. Who this Sussman guy was working for when he handed over a small piece of evidence has no bearing on whether or not Russia interfered with our election and whether Trump & Co participated in it. Vladimir Putin still ordered The DNC cyber attacks and the leaks of the stolen material. Paul Manafort's sharing of information with Russian intel still took place. Etc. This story has nothing to do with that and doesn't change that.
Click to expand...

You people just keep parroting shit for which there is no evidence. It was a LEAK from inside the DNC, not a hack or cyber attack. If it was really a hack or cyber attack, the DNC would have handed their servers over to the FBI instead of having a privately hired tech firm make unsubstantiated claims that cover their asses.
 
giusti825 said:
You people just keep parroting shit for which there is no evidence. It was a LEAK from inside the DNC, not a hack or cyber attack. If it was really a hack or cyber attack, the DNC would have handed their servers over to the FBI instead of having a privately hired tech firm make unsubstantiated claims that cover their asses.
Click to expand...
Oh, Seth Rich, right? Kim Dotcom will be providing the evidence any day now, I'm sure.

Meanwhile, the bipartisan Senate Intel committee, the Mueller Report and the intelligence community assessment in 2017, issued by the DNI, with confirmation by the CIA, NSA and FBI, all state, definitively, that it was done by Russia on Putin's orders. All lying?
 
The charges will be dropped because the Clinton crime family is the law.
 
HOLA said:
Oh, Seth Rich, right? Kim Dotcom will be providing the evidence any day now, I'm sure.

Meanwhile, the bipartisan Senate Intel committee, the Mueller Report and the intelligence community assessment in 2017, issued by the DNI, with confirmation by the CIA, NSA and FBI, all state, definitively, that it was done by Russia on Putin's orders. All lying?
Click to expand...

How do you not see the irony in citing so many agencies and people that are known liars?

Stop parroting the deep state without them presenting the evidence to the public. It makes you look gullible.

It was not a hack from Russia, it was a leak from within the DNC. Both Julian Assange and Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have confirmed this. The VIPS investigation revealed that the transfer speed of the data taken from the DNC was faster than could be accomplished over a network, meaning that the information was transferred to either a flash drive or an external hard drive. There is a reason the DNC did not let the FBI investigate the servers; its because this fact would have been evident.

Julian Assange might not be the nicest person, but he is an honest journalist.
 
giusti825 said:
Maybe now people will stop pretending these obvious fabrications were real. Making up lies to the FBI as an excuse for losing an election to a game show host is still lying to the FBI.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...clinton-lawyer-charged-lying-fbi-trump-russia

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58591969

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/...for-clinton-campaign-with-lying-to-fbi-512316

Click to expand...



<36> so spin this horseshit for 3 years and then brand everyone they don't like as a Russian Agent.

HOLA said:
Meanwhile, the bipartisan Senate Intel committee, the Mueller Report and the intelligence community assessment in 2017, issued by the DNI, with confirmation by the CIA, NSA and FBI, all state, definitively, that it was done by Russia on Putin's orders. All lying?
Click to expand...

I think you need to seriously ask yourself that question at this point.
 
giusti825 said:
How do you not see the irony in citing so many agencies and people that are known liars?

Stop parroting the deep state without them presenting the evidence to the public. It makes you look gullible.

It was not a hack from Russia, it was a leak from within the DNC. Both Julian Assange and Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have confirmed this. The VIPS investigation revealed that the transfer speed of the data taken from the DNC was faster than could be accomplished over a network, meaning that the information was transferred to either a flash drive or an external hard drive. There is a reason the DNC did not let the FBI investigate the servers; its because this fact would have been evident.

Julian Assange might not be the nicest person, but he is an honest journalist.
Click to expand...
The Mueller Report is 448 pages. The Senate Intel Committee's report is 1313 pages. The DNI Report is 15 pages. Is 1700 pages of evidence enough?

If not, you have reputable journalists like Michael Isikoff, David Corn and Luke Harding who will give you a few hundred more.
 
SKYNET said:
<36> so spin this horseshit for 3 years and then brand everyone they don't like as a Russian Agent.



I think you need to seriously ask yourself that question at this point.
Click to expand...
Also, the grand juries that charged the various Russians with crimes. They would have to be in on it too. And all the investigations forwarded to other prosecutors by the Special Counsel's office. They'd have to be involved as well.

So think about this. The CIA, NSA, DNI, FBI, Special Counsel's team with all those elite lawyers, Grand Juries, both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate, outside prosecutors etc etc etc are in cahoots, right? Imagine the effort that must have taken! Sounds like they were pretty determined! It's the DeEp StAtE! They're out for blood! They wanted Trump gone!

Except...wet fart. Mueller won't indict a sitting president because of an office of legal counsel opinion. "Does not conclude that the President committed a crime... also does not exonerate." Doh! Mueller lists 10 episodes of obstruction of justice and then says hey congress you want to do something about it go ahead. Some deep state, huh?

If the conspiracy ran that deep, Trump would have been removed. Obviously. It would be like spending years planning breaking into billionaire's house, because he has a giant vault full gold bars. But then once you get inside you just microwave one of his hotpockets and call it a day. Huh?

Remember, "this is it!" i.e. Trump has plot armor that's like Brotherhood Of Steel power armor, and nothing is going to happen to him? How do you mesh that with the belief that a nefarious, ubiquitous, nearly omnipotent power is hellbent on his destruction? I know how!


https://www.openculture.com/2016/11...ist-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html

8. The enemy is both strong and weak
By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.
 
regmma123 said:
Pawn? You are trapped in a St petersberg troll farm for 8 hours a day
Click to expand...
Even worse. Internet Research Agency trolls actually have to work grueling 12 hours shifts.
 
HOLA said:
So think about this. The CIA, NSA, DNI, FBI, Special Counsel's team with all those elite lawyers, Grand Juries, both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate, outside prosecutors etc etc etc are in cahoots, right?
Click to expand...

<Prem771> you think about it buddy

HOLA said:
If the conspiracy ran that deep,
Click to expand...

then you are wasting your time
 
HOLA said:
The Mueller Report is 448 pages. The Senate Intel Committee's report is 1313 pages. The DNI Report is 15 pages. Is 1700 pages of evidence enough?

If not, you have reputable journalists like Michael Isikoff, David Corn and Luke Harding who will give you a few hundred more.
Click to expand...

Those are reports of investigations based on fabricated information. When I say evidence, I am referring to physical evidence that the Trump campaign was blackmailed and beholden to the Russian government, as asserted. There is no evidence of such a situation. There was no manchurian candidate in the white house. Everyone who was disliked by the Clinton's at one point was called a Russian agent without any evidence. (Bernie, Stein, Tulsi, Trump, etc) It was truly ridiculous. They are all owed apologies and should've probably sued the Clinton campaign.
 
HOLA said:
Also, the grand juries that charged the various Russians with crimes. They would have to be in on it too. And all the investigations forwarded to other prosecutors by the Special Counsel's office. They'd have to be involved as well.

So think about this. The CIA, NSA, DNI, FBI, Special Counsel's team with all those elite lawyers, Grand Juries, both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate, outside prosecutors etc etc etc are in cahoots, right? Imagine the effort that must have taken! Sounds like they were pretty determined! It's the DeEp StAtE! They're out for blood! They wanted Trump gone!

Except...wet fart. Mueller won't indict a sitting president because of an office of legal counsel opinion. "Does not conclude that the President committed a crime... also does not exonerate." Doh! Mueller lists 10 episodes of obstruction of justice and then says hey congress you want to do something about it go ahead. Some deep state, huh?

If the conspiracy ran that deep, Trump would have been removed. Obviously. It would be like spending years planning breaking into billionaire's house, because he has a giant vault full gold bars. But then once you get inside you just microwave one of his hotpockets and call it a day. Huh?

Remember, "this is it!" i.e. Trump has plot armor that's like Brotherhood Of Steel power armor, and nothing is going to happen to him? How do you mesh that with the belief that a nefarious, ubiquitous, nearly omnipotent power is hellbent on his destruction? I know how!


https://www.openculture.com/2016/11...ist-of-the-14-common-features-of-fascism.html

8. The enemy is both strong and weak
By a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.
Click to expand...

The prosecution knew that none of the Russians charged took it seriously and wouldn't show up to an American court over ridiculous electoral fabrications. When one company actually did show up, it completely shocked the prosecution and they asked the judge for more time to prepare their case. The judge threw out the case remarking that if the prosecution was not ready to proceed then they shouldn't have pursued charges and set a court date in the first place.

The rest didn't fly half way around the world over this ridiculous nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,948
Messages
55,456,545
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top