Durham investigation (Update: Sussman acquitted) (7 Viewers)

It looks like the first shoe has dropped with the Durham investigation with the Clinesmith plea deal. Clinesmith wasn't a low level FBI employee involved in the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

He worked with Strzok to arrange sending an FBI agent into Trump-Flynn briefing, was on the Mueller team, he took part in the Papadopoulos interviews, and he participated in the FISA process.



From the NYT article:


I wonder who else knew about the lies?

Very bad thing for the Clinesmith guy to do. He deserves jail.

What is the hint the guy is talking about in the tweet? I read the New York Times article but have trouble making sense of the tweets a lot of times.
Edit: Nevermind got it. Possible cooperation from someone higher.

This was the guy that hid the fact that Carter Paige worked for the CIA right? I figured there'd be a charge for him, and was wondering what took so long.

UncleTrvlingJim said:

This was the guy that hid the fact that Carter Paige worked for the CIA right? I figured there'd be a charge for him, and was wondering what took so long.

Click to expand...

Yep

Brandon13 said:

Very bad thing for the Clinesmith guy to do. He deserves jail?

What is the hint the guy is talking about in the tweet? I read the New York Times article but have trouble making sense of the tweets a lot of times.
Edit: Nevermind got it. Possible cooperation from someone higher.

Click to expand...

He's saying that Clinesmith could have been charged with a stronger crime, so the lesser charge suggests that he's cooperating. Curiously enough, that's the same argument people were making with the Flynn charge - he was charged with lying to the FBI instead of the being an unregistered foreign agent which would have had a stronger sentence, with the speculation being he would cooperate with the FBI.

did you even read the NYT article? It states there was no anti-Trump conspiracy to the level that is being parroted from right wing pundits and conspiracy theorist.
Last year when this was coming out a lot of us said there would be a few heads that roll for not following procedures but nothing that undercover some great FBI conspiracy against Trump.
Trumps National Security Advisor was found guilty but that isn’t a big deal right. Your pearl clutching is hilarious. Who the heck is Under water Huber. He sounds reliable.

UncleTrvlingJim said:

He's saying that Clinesmith could have been charged with a stronger crime, so the lesser charge suggests that he's cooperating. Curiously enough, that's the same argument people were making with the Flynn charge - he was charged with lying to the FBI instead of the being an unregistered foreign agent which would have had a stronger sentence, with the speculation being he would cooperate with the FBI.

Click to expand...

Yes and his next tweet addresses that point.

SaintForLife said:

Yes and his next tweet addresses that point.

Click to expand...

It also could just be as simple as prosecution believing what the person did was bad, but not 20 years bad.

Nebaghead said:

did you even read the NYT article? It states there was no anti-Trump conspiracy to the level that is being parroted from right wing pundits and conspiracy theorist.
Last year when this was coming out a lot of us said there would be a few heads that roll for not following procedures but nothing that undercover some great FBI conspiracy against Trump.
Trumps National Security Advisor was found guilty but that isn’t a big deal right. Your pearl clutching is hilarious. Who the heck is Under water Huber. He sounds reliable.

Click to expand...

Yes I did read the article. The statement in the article about no anti-trump conspiracy is from Clinesmith's lawyer. If Durham does have evidence of an anti-trump conspiracy, he doesn't have to provide that to Clinesmith's lawyer.

It looks like Clinesmith's lawyer approached Durham about a deal after Ratcliffe declassified some FBI records.

I have a feeling there will be a lot more of these between now and November. Remember, nothing happens in an election year that does not have to do with the election.

Farb said:

I have a feeling there will be a lot more of these between now and November. Remember, nothing happens in an election year that does not have to do with the election.

Click to expand...

Yep I am sure there will be.


Because the DOJ doesn't normally do a forking thing that could be considered political this close to an election.

But that just means the DOJ that has stepped in the way everything and everyone that had a problem with this administration will continue to do so.

So yeah it fits the game plan!

Do you remember the DOJ saying anything about emails two weeks out last time? No they did not because that is considered wrong to influence political sides that close to an election. Infact that is why the investigation into Russian ties to the trump campaign or Flynn was not talked about before the election because that is the way things are supposed to work.

That was Comey and the FBI never gives press conferences about investing that is the DOJ's job because they are the ones that will file charges.

So in essence Barr will be unethical Barr!

The moose said:

Do you remember the DOJ saying anything about emails two weeks out last time? No they did not because that is considered wrong to influence political sides that close to an election. Infact that is why the investigation into Russian ties to the trump campaign or Flynn was not talked about before the election because that is the way things are supposed to work.

That was Comey and the FBI never gives press conferences about investing that is the DOJ's job because they are the ones that will file charges.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you are being serious or being sarcastic....but, yeah, I do remember that. I remember, quite clearly, Comey holding a press conference to announce that they were reopening the case into Hillary Clinton right before the election....quite possibly a move that cost Hillary the presidency.

FullMonte said:

I'm not sure if you are being serious or being sarcastic....but, yeah, I do remember that. I remember, quite clearly, Comey holding a press conference to announce that they were reopening the case into Hillary Clinton right before the election....quite possibly a move that cost Hillary the presidency.

Click to expand...

Dead serious. The FBI has no business announcing an investigation that was a super rogue move by Comey. The FBI builds a case the DOJ then handles the case built by the FBI. So the FBI talking about an investigation is a serious no no!

The reason none of the other on going investigations were not talked about is how things are supposed to be done with our democracy.

The DOJ is not in the political business they are not to help decide anything what so ever with a presidential election.

That is the exact opposite what is gonna keep happening this go around. You can bank on it.

The moose said:

Dead serious. The FBI has no business announcing an investigation that was a super rogue move by Comey. The FBI builds a case the DOJ then handles the case built by the FBI. So the FBI talking about an investigation is a serious no no!

The reason none of the other on going investigations were not talked about is how things are supposed to be done with our democracy.

The DOJ is not in the political business they are not to help decide anything what so ever with a presidential election.

That is the exact opposite what is gonna keep happening this go around. You can bank on it.

Click to expand...

We'll see. Somehow, I have FAR LESS confidence that Barr's DOJ will not do something politically motivated. They already have a ridiculous perception of bending over backwards to help Trump, and Barr's testimony to congress did ZERO to show that wasn't the case.

FullMonte said:

We'll see. Somehow, I have FAR LESS confidence that Barr's DOJ will not do something politically motivated. They already have a ridiculous perception of bending over backwards to help Trump, and Barr's testimony to congress did ZERO to show that wasn't the case.

Click to expand...

Well this case would have not been made public by the last administration this close to an election.

This is just the beginning of Barr being the butt crevasse that he is.

Plenty of more stuff coming down the pipe to be sure.

I guess the silver lining is we will not have to deal with these clowns much longer.

Farb said:

Remember, nothing happens in an election year that does not have to do with the election.

Click to expand...

he said as the USPS began to shut down.

I don’t think this is new information, is it? Wasn’t this exact thing found by Horowitz quite some time ago?

Also, I saw some lawyer types saying it’s pretty funny watching people who defended Flynn (should have never been prosecuted over a “process crime”) go ape over this.

I think Herridge is being very disingenuous with her tweet. IIRC, there is zero evidence of involvement from anyone else with this.

Yep, looked it up: per the AP:

“Yet the five-page charging document is limited in scope and does not allege criminal wrongdoing by anyone other than Clinesmith, nor does it offer evidence to support Trump’s assertions that the Russia probe was tainted by widespread political bias in the FBI. It makes clear that the FBI relied on Clinesmith’s own misrepresentations as it sought to renew its surveillance of former Trump campaign aide Carter Page.”

This is bad by him, for sure, but it amounts to an overzealous action by a single person.