Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And get paid to do it too. That's gotta sting.So one question I have is whether it is legal for a federally funded university to work directly to support a presidential candidate?
That would be Bush and his Brain(who denies it). Remember John McCain's Black Love Child?Hillary Clinton DIDN'T run the sleaziest campaign in American political history!
Hillary gets "heat" because she keeps lying and denying, Lesh! That's the Clinton modus operandi! Get caught doing something you shouldn't be doing...first you lie about it...then you stonewall it...then you declare that it's ancient history and shouldn't matter! The list of Clinton lies at this point would shut this server down.Actually she's pretty spot on. She gets heat for saying outloud what everyone else whispers.
I actually don't feel hatred towards Hillary, Lesh. She's her own worst enemy. She wants the Presidency so bad she can taste it but every time she thinks that brass ring is almost in her grasp either another scandal rears its ugly head or some unforeseen candidate like Barack Obama or Donald Trump comes out of nowhere to steal it away from her! To be honest I find her to be rather pathetic. She's rapidly becoming the Wile E Coyote of American politics!Wow...nothing there but your own personal hatred.
What a surprise
No she just kept spying on the president elect. What she did is far worse than a riot or hanging Biden.Did she incite a riot when she lost? Did her followers want to hang Joe Biden?
Durham hasn't alleged that the Tech-exec committed a crime when he obtained access to the DNS records. Much less claimed Clinton had anything to do with it.
She did not and Durham hasn’t claimed she did. The tech executive hired the lawyer. Not the other way around.
Yeah! You got her now. Fur Sure Super Spy. Add it to her incredible resume of 40 years worth of unproven Republican accusations and lies. Just toss it on the pile with all the others.......No she just kept spying on the president elect. What she did is far worse than a riot or hanging Biden.
Sussmann has requested that Durham identify who he is alleging Sussmann was coordinating with in the Clinton campaign.Durham sets-out in the indictment, that the purposeful data mining (of non-public data) by Joffe (and his minions) and the data's analysis and the composing and composition of the white papers that Sussmann provided to the FBI and the media, was tainted by the allegiance of ALL the actors to, and coordination with, the Clinton campaign.
It is what you keep saying about Trump. I guess Trump has another 34 years before he gets caught.Yeah! You got her now. Fur Sure Super Spy. Add it to her incredible resume of 40 years worth of unproven Republican accusations and lies. Just toss it on the pile with all the others.......
We love spying on presidents. Telescopic lenses and telescopic microphones. The Right Wing loves to play clips where they were spying on Obama talking to foreign dignitaries. But that's different I bet.....because.....Clinton and the Democrats!Durham sets-out in the indictment, that the purposeful data mining (of non-public data) by Joffe (and his minions) and the data's analysis and the composing and composition of the white papers that Sussmann provided to the FBI and the media, was tainted by the allegiance of ALL the actors to, and coordination with, the Clinton campaign.
View attachment 603062
Durham, above and in his conflict of interest brief, states that Joffe, working with Sussmann on behalf of the Clinton campaign, assembled numerous cyber researchers (Tea Leaves) and employees at multiple Internet companies and researchers at Georgia Tech to assemble the purported data and white papers.
Durham also states that Joffe himself exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data and along with his minions, sought to establish an "inference" and "narrative" tying then-candidate Trump to Russia. Joffe's interest, besides being anti-Trump, was to please certain “VIPs,” referring to individuals at Perkins Coie and the Clinton Campaign.
View attachment 603074
Durham doesn't make any claims about who Joffe was employed by, other than Neustar having a government contract for DNS resolution services in the EOP.
Durham does say that Joffe personally, (using the access to EOP's servers inherent in Neustar's conract) "worked with" Sussmann and Fusion GPS, who was retained by Perkins Coie on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, to assemble the data and craft the white papers for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.
A plain reading of Durham's statement says to me that, Joffe, was "working with" Sussmann, who, as a partner of Perkins Coie, was acting in the interests of Perkins Coie's client Fusion GPS and all this was a cooperative endeavor (including Joffe's minions, working at the direction of Joffe) to gather derogatory information about Donald Trump, which was then carried by "concerned citizen" Sussmann to the FBI . . .
The question is, what does "working with" mean in this arrangement? Who was directing who, or were both working at the direction of Fusion GPS?
It's at this point we need to remember Fusion GPS was in the employ of the Clinton campaign from late April, in a deal brokered by everyone's lawyer; the Clinton Campaign, the DNC, Fusion GPS and Crowdstrike -- MICHAEL SUSSMANN!
Sussmann is the definition of a nexus, which is why he's the focus of Durham's attention for now.
.
It is what you keep saying about Trump. I guess Trump has another 34 years before he gets caught.
Durham: Perkins Coie Allies Connected to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 Campaign Spied on Trump’s Internet Traffic While Trump Was President12 Feb 2022 ~~ By Cristina Laila
Durham: Perkins Coie Allies Connected to Hillary Clinton's 2016 Campaign Spied on Trump's Internet Traffic While Trump Was President | The Gateway Pundit | by Cristina Laila
A new filing from Special Counsel John Durham reveals Perkins Coie allies connected to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign spied on Trump’s internet traffic – WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT.www.thegatewaypundit.com
A new filing from Special Counsel John Durham reveals Perkins Coie allies connected to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign spied on Trump’s internet traffic – WHILE HE WAS PRESIDENT.
As previously reported, Hillary Clinton’s campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann was indicted last September for lying to the FBI.
More from Techno Fog on Durham’s new filing:
Commentary:
There is substantial evidence that Perkins Coie has been used by Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrats to fix and obfuscate DNC illegal actions dating back decades.
Is anybody actually shocked by this? This is what lying, corruption, seditious and traitorous actors do when they know they rarely face any consequences.
The entire federal system has been subverted to work exclusively for the PM/DSA Democrat Commie minions.
Our judiciary has become a coin toss- tails they win and heads we lose
Identifying Perkins Coie LLC as a den of Democrat Socialist Marxist activists is an understatement. It's common knowledge that Soros has given the group millions.
Sussman and Elias are not the only members of Perkins Coie that has been involved in the corrupt actions of Perkins Coie. It's the whole group of attorneys.
Simply, all the proof and documentation in the world exposing PMS/DSA Democrat Leftist scheming, lying, cheating, just does not matter. Democrats are above the law...it's been proven over and over.
**********Law Firm Running Corrupt DNC-Clinton Show Intimately Tied to George Soros - www.independentsentinel.com
The Democratic law firm tied to Fusion GPS, the infamous dossier, and the Clinton campaign, is also tied to George Soros as is Fusion GPS. Law firm Perkins Coie is employed by Soros for day-to-day work attacking Republican initiatives affecting the vote in the United States. The Perkins Coie...www.independentsentinel.com
Of course that is different. Remember when a reporter enlarged a photo of Trump's notes? That is quite different than data mining. Plus you never complained about that. Dirty tricks are different than spying. Clinton was spying and paying for it.We love spying on presidents. Telescopic lenses and telescopic microphones. The Right Wing loves to play clips where they were spying on Obama talking to foreign dignitaries. But that's different I bet.....because.....Clinton and the Democrats!
Not his political one. How did he become the most corrupt politician ever when he never was one until he got elected? Stupid people, like yourself, believe lies because it is safer than rocking the boat. They have you hating your country and claiming it is somehow patriotic.Bah, Trumps' public resume goes back as far as the Hills does. It's YUGE.
Sussmann has requested that Durham identify who he is alleging Sussmann was coordinating with in the Clinton campaign.
Durham has not been able to identify anyone. Furthermore, Durham didn't even interview anyone in the Clinton campaign until 2 months after Sussmann was indicted.
The indictment against Sussmann is half baked. It purports to have evidence of a conspiracy, however it cannot tell us who is engaged in the conspiracy. Saying it wsa with "the Clinton campaign" is not sufficient. One cannot call the "Clinton campaign" to the stand as part of his defense. We need a name. Durham has none.
We love spying on presidents. Telescopic lenses and telescopic microphones. The Right Wing loves to play clips where they were spying on Obama talking to foreign dignitaries. But that's different I bet.....because.....Clinton and the Democrats!
It's going to take more to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Sussmann was working at the behest of the Clinton campaign other than to point out that they were both clients. You need some type of evidence that anyone from the Clinton campaign requested this service of Sussmann. That's the very definition of working at the "behest" of someone.Again, Sussmann, partner at Perkins Coie, was working at the behest of Perkins Coie's clients, the Clinton campaign and Fusion GPS.
What need would that have served? The Clinton campaign's employment of Perkins Coie and Clinton campagn's employment of and funding of Fusion GPS (e.g., Steele dossier) has been known and quite well established; it wasn't a connection that needed to be made or history of cooperation that Durham needed to be confirmed by anyone in the Clinton campaign.
Why does Durham need to lay out his entire case in public filings?
This action comes from an indictment of a grand jury, not from any probable cause affidavit, there is no need for any kind of preliminary hearing where a prosecutor (might) have to present his evidence in a public manner to support the charges . . . That has been done, the charges are deemed legally supported simply by the verdict of the jury (which had been presented with ALL evidence (at the time), even exculpatory).
And your law degree is from where?It's going to take more to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Sussmann was working at the behest of the Clinton campaign other than to point out that they were both clients. You need some type of evidence that anyone from the Clinton campaign requested this service of Sussmann. That's the very definition of working at the "behest" of someone.
In order to determine if that indeed did happen, we would need some kind of evidence. Durham needs to provide his accusation to Sussmann in order for Sussmann to prepare his defense, otherwise the prosecution is not behaving in a constitutional manner. For example, Durham needs to say so and so asked Sussmann to do this for the Clinton campaign. Sussmann would like to ask so and so to take the witness stand and under oath tell us if if that is indeed the case. Durham has not done that and the most likely explanation is that Durham can't because he doesn't actually have evidence of any such thing occurring.
It's going to take more to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Sussmann was working at the behest of the Clinton campaign other than to point out that they were both clients. You need some type of evidence that anyone from the Clinton campaign requested this service of Sussmann. That's the very definition of working at the "behest" of someone.
In order to determine if that indeed did happen, we would need some kind of evidence. Durham needs to provide his accusation to Sussmann in order for Sussmann to prepare his defense, otherwise the prosecution is not behaving in a constitutional manner. For example, Durham needs to say so and so asked Sussmann to do this for the Clinton campaign. Sussmann would like to ask so and so to take the witness stand and under oath tell us if if that is indeed the case. Durham has not done that and the most likely explanation is that Durham can't because he doesn't actually have evidence of any such thing occurring.
jonathanturley.org
