Suss This

Given the glacial pace of John Durham’s investigation, it’s easy to assume that nothing is really going to come of his efforts; it’s a drill we’ve all seen before. Before Lucy pulls the football away yet again, let’s note that Durham did establish something long suspected:

John Durham released a potential smoking gun in the case against Michael Sussmann on Monday night, as he published documents showing the Democratic cybersecurity lawyer messaged the FBI general counsel that he was not working on behalf of any client, when in fact he was working for the Clinton campaign.

So what did Sussman say?

On Monday evening, however, Durham revealed Sussmann conveyed that lie in a text message to [FBI general counsel James] Baker on Sept. 18, 2016 — the night before their meeting at the bureau.

“Jim – it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss,” Sussmann wrote to the FBI top lawyer. “Do you have availibilty [sic] 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.”

Except he wasn’t. He was indeed representing the Clinton campaign. As the linked article from the Washington Examiner explains:

Sussmann’s lawyers have said Sussmann met with the FBI in September 2016 “to pass along information that raised national security concerns” and characterized this as simply “to provide a tip.” The lawyers contended that Sussmann was “charged with making a false statement about an entirely ancillary matter — about who his client may have been when he met with the FBI — which is a fact that even the Special Counsel’s own indictment fails to allege had any effect on the FBI’s decision to open an investigation.”

Durham countered that “the defendant made his false statement directly to the FBI General Counsel on a matter that was anything but ancillary: namely, the existence … of attorney-client relationships that would have shed critical light on the origins of the allegations at issue.”

“The defendant’s false statement to the FBI General Counsel was plainly material because it misled the General Counsel about, among other things, the critical fact that the defendant was disseminating highly explosive allegations about a then-Presidential candidate on behalf of two specific clients, one of which was the opposing Presidential campaign,” Durham wrote.

Do I have any reasonable expectation that Sussmann will ultimately be brought to justice, let alone his clients? Forget it D, it’s Chinatown. And as Sussmann’s client famously said in yet another context:

What difference does it make? We know. And while stories are soft pedaled or buried entirely, they are out there to know. And in the case of the Clintons, it means they won’t be coming back.

17 thoughts on “Suss This

  1. Given the glacial pace of John Durham’s investigation

    It’d be nice to think that that glacial metaphor also includes the way that glaciers raze the landscape. But as is discussed above, it won’t, so I’d suggest changing that “glacial” to “snail’s”.

  2. It boggles the mind that Barr appointed a special counsel to spend years to come up with this piddling case while refusing even to minimally investigate a highly publicized conspiracy to illegally withhold public funds to extort a foreign ally for domestic political purposes.

  3. I agree with jdm, snail is a more accurate description. And it is a constant drip… drip… drip… As far as justice, fuggetabutit… Piddly fine for Clintoon campaign for admission of guilt of creating and politicizing a fake dossier? That’s not even a slap on the wrist, that’s a kiss-off for somebody who should be sporting ball and chain.

  4. It’s no coincidence that Barr is the successor to the fixers that came before him like Michael Cohen and Roy Cohn. Barr was hired by Trump for a reason. Just because he finally had to admit the election wasn’t stolen doesn’t change that fact.

  5. I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.

    Guess who?

  6. Have been thinking about the Ukraine extortion plot a lot lately for some reason.

  7. Dear GOD, the troll is still dreaming about the failed attempt to get Trump on extortion. Guess what sunshine, guess who is on tape saying he got a prosecutor fired or he wouldn’t send money. Yup, gropey joe.

    Guess what Zalensky, alleged target of the “extortion” said: yeah,nah bro, no threat of extortion in the call.

    The walls are closing in, aren’t they troll. Crackhead hunter is under grand jury investigation, and it leads back to the “big guy”.

    So yeah, keep crying about a failed shampeachment, keep dreaming that they are gonnna get Trump. Cuz they are hot on the trail of you know who.

  8. The best case scenario that I can see for the Durham Probe is for the current snails pace to continue until February 2025, when a, hopefully GOP appointed, new AG can lead to DOJ into a new era of actually doing it’s damned job.

  9. Seriously, it’s talking like there is gonna be a redo on all that Ukrainian BS.

    Guess what else troll, the completely political investigations in NY have petered out, dunzo, no mas, nada, nothing here but our dreams of taking down orange man bad being shattered.

  10. “‘The defendant’s false statement to the FBI General Counsel was plainly material because it misled the General Counsel about, among other things, the critical fact that the defendant was disseminating highly explosive allegations about a then-Presidential candidate on behalf of two specific clients, one of which was the opposing Presidential campaign,” Durham wrote.’

    Pretty damning. Since the lie was made in writing, it will be hard for Sussman to claim that his recollection is different.
    He knew that what he was doing, lying to the FBI, was a crime that some pretty high-placed people had been imprisoned for. He figured the Deep State anti-Trumpers would protect him. Sussman’s lie had real-world effects, the investigation into the bogus charges resulted in real harm to the presidency of the man elected by the American people to lead them. That was its purpose.

  11. “I hope Garland continues letting this investigation run it’s course.”

    In reality he has little choice. Thankfully he doesn’t serve on the SCOTUS!

  12. Well said MP.

    Can’t wait for the troll’s next post: walls closing in on Trump.

    Hahahahahahahahahahaha

  13. This investigation of the investigation has gone on significantly longer than the original investigation.

  14. Emery, you do realize that the investigation of Trump continued for three years, and the Durham investigation started only on December 1, 2020, right? Last I checked, 16 months is < 3 years. Or are you working with the "New Math"?

    And yes, investigations take a while when those being investigated are stonewalling them in the way that Hilliary's campaign and Sussman are. For that matter, Durham also is dealing with investigators who were never too enthusiastic about investigating Hilliary to begin with in the FBI. So putting the guilty in jail where they belong is going to take some time.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.