The Gun Counter

"Where are we going today, Mr. Peabody?"

"Well, Sherman, we are taking the Wayback Machine to 2016 just before the November election contest between Mr. Trump and Ms. Clinton.": https://technofog.substack.com/p/john-d ... nn-and?s=w

On September 19, 2016, DNC/Clinton Campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann met with FBI General Counsel James Baker, where Baker was provided with data and “white paper” purporting to show covert communications (since proven to be bogus) between Russian Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization.

Too bad that Sussman's testimony doesn't match his texts:

Jim - it's Michael Sussman. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss. Do you have availabiity for a short meeting tomorrow? I'm coming on my own - not on behalf of a client or company - want to help the Bureau. Thanks.

Too bad Sussman couldn't help himself and had to send a bill to the Clinton Campaign.

As it turns out, Sussmann was billing the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Alfa Bank hoax. This text from Sussmann to Baker is damning for Sussmann’s case, proving Sussmann’s efforts at deceiving a top official at the FBI about his clients, and demonstrating how Sussmann tried to convince Baker he was there to supposedly do the right thing.

Sussman is asking that the court to not allow certain facts in his trial:
1. The gathering of Alfa Bank/ Trump data
2. The accuracy of Alfa Bank/ Trump data
3. Christopher Steele (Fusion GPS) and the Steele Dossiers

Durham states the “evidence of a joint venture or conspiracy” will establish that Sussmann and Joffe “worked in concert with each other and with agents of the Clinton Campaign to research and disseminate the Russian Bank-1 allegations.”

That statement from Durham leaves us with an important question: which “agents of the Clinton Campaign” were involved in this conspiracy?

Maybe the "Hildabeest" herself? I'm sure she knows where enough bodies are buried to skate on this one. I figure she will give Sussman an "offer he can't refuse".

My money is that Sussman will take the fall and serve some time in return for not getting "Arkancided".

Wake me when there are indictments

blackeagle603 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 06, 2022 2:53 pm Wake me when there are indictments

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/dur ... -sussmann/

Been at least one. This one was time sensitive, presumably there are others coming but we will see.

Yep, that's all good.

But like I said, "Show me the Indictments."

Years of dog and pony shows, Issa, Gowdy... Sure seems like we're closer but until there are indictments it's (to me) just more bread circuses.

Meanwhile not a single name revealed out of G. Maxwell's customer book.

blackeagle603 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 06, 2022 4:11 pm Yep, that's all good.

But like I said, "Show me the Indictments."

Years of dog and pony shows, Issa, Gowdy... Sure seems like we're closer but until there are indictments it's (to me) just more bread circuses.

Meanwhile not a single name revealed out of G. Maxwell's customer book.

https://nypost.com/2022/04/13/judge-won ... -sussmann/

More interesting developments: https://technofog.substack.com/p/cia-bo ... EFUy4I&s=r

CIA says Sussman's data was "user created"

Timing is interesting

At a minimum, this confirms what we reported nearly two months ago: that the Trump transition data was passed to the CIA. Yet it’s also more than that. The CIA was provided with data all the way back from April 2016.

Oh yeah, that DNC hack

Why does April 2016 matter? Because Russia was alleged to have hacked “the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and DNC networks in April 2016.” Recall that “Crowdstrike was contacted on April 30, 2016 to respond to a suspected breach” of the DNC.

But the CIA knew this was BS by 2017

The CIA reviewed the Trump/YotaPhone data (and the Alfa Bank data) in early 2017. The fact that the CIA accepted this data on President Trump is its own scandal. In any event, the CIA’s findings are significant, as they concluded that the data was not “technically plausible” and was “user created and not machine/tool generated.”

So the CIA knew that Sussman's "evidence" was made-up, but they supported the coup anyway?

D5CAV wrote: ↑Mon Apr 18, 2022 3:44 pm More interesting developments: https://technofog.substack.com/p/cia-bo ... EFUy4I&s=r

CIA says Sussman's data was "user created"

Timing is interesting

At a minimum, this confirms what we reported nearly two months ago: that the Trump transition data was passed to the CIA. Yet it’s also more than that. The CIA was provided with data all the way back from April 2016.

Oh yeah, that DNC hack

Why does April 2016 matter? Because Russia was alleged to have hacked “the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and DNC networks in April 2016.” Recall that “Crowdstrike was contacted on April 30, 2016 to respond to a suspected breach” of the DNC.

But the CIA knew this was BS by 2017

The CIA reviewed the Trump/YotaPhone data (and the Alfa Bank data) in early 2017. The fact that the CIA accepted this data on President Trump is its own scandal. In any event, the CIA’s findings are significant, as they concluded that the data was not “technically plausible” and was “user created and not machine/tool generated.”

So the CIA knew that Sussman's "evidence" was made-up, but they supported the coup anyway?

Sme info as you link

Vonz90 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 2:17 am https://www.foxnews.com/politics/durham ... er-created

Yup. Same info from a different source. Mine was a duplicate. Moderator please delete my post.

D5CAV wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 1:50 am

Vonz90 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 17, 2022 2:17 am https://www.foxnews.com/politics/durham ... er-created

Yup. Same info from a different source. Mine was a duplicate. Moderator please delete my post.

That wasn't my point, just interesting that is is getting out in different ways now after being stuck for a while. I think the damn I about to blow on a lot of this.