2/ Sussmann wants to admit a ton of emails showing he worked for Clinton campaign and DNC. Durham objects re DNC saying irrelevant and to both saying cumulative and waste of time, but agrees limited allowed to show he was well-respected by FBI & concerned re cyber issues and
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) May 6, 2022
4/ Now this is interesting: pic.twitter.com/B0hCJ12BAl
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) May 6, 2022
6/ Seems Sussmann wants to argue that "clients" references shows he informed them he worked for a client. Ummm, WE. HAVE. SEEN. YOUR. TEXT. Govt' says he needs to show non-hearsay basis to get these notes in. Also, noting Baker has no notes from this meeting.
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) May 6, 2022
8/8 So court's ruling on privilege is next big thing.
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) May 6, 2022
Ive received confirmation that the files provider to Mueller from Dagon and others, are still lost at GT. Georgia Tech is unable to locate them.
— UndeadFOIA (@UndeadFoia) May 6, 2022
fasthorse05 said:
Once again, I've got a sidebar, but with all the money we've sent Ukraine (last was $33 billion), I wonder if Zelensky has told the Dems to keep sending money, or else I'll reveal your shenanigans?
Just a thought.
I mean, Zelensky already has approximately $900 million. I guess you can't play on the world stage unless you're over $1B.
The entire Senate Intelligence Committee is corrupted in Ukraine and so you can't count on or believe any of them regarding anything. And apparently that extends to other areas, such as State, some NSC, etc.Secolobo said:
Why else would pelosi and schiff go over.
Remember the servers that Zelensky's predecessor somehow made disappear. Trump mentioned them to Zelensky, and those servers were maintained by CrowdStrike. Zelensky said the room that once held the Ukraine government servers was empty, sans any equipment, not just wiped, completely gone.fasthorse05 said:
Once again, I've got a sidebar, but with all the money we've sent Ukraine (last was $33 billion), I wonder if Zelensky has told the Dems to keep sending money, or else I'll reveal your shenanigans?
Just a thought.
I mean, Zelensky already has approximately $900 million. I guess you can't play on the world stage unless you're over $1B.
Secolobo said:
If we only had another thread….
(I might add that you can't even search for that thread. It's not just locked. Only if you go to your thread history and the title of that thread pops up but there is nothing there when you try to open it. Nada. No tweets, articles, nada.)
Secolobo said:
If we only had another thread….
(I might add that you can't even search for that thread. It's not just locked. Only if you go to your thread history and the title of that thread pops up but there is nothing there when you try to open it. Nada. No tweets, articles, nada.)
The privilege issue goes to the heart of Durham’s trial strategy. I’m sure he doesn’t absolutely need the documents in dispute, but they would help. Start with the DC jury pool. Polls show it’s about 90% Democrat, including a significant portion of federal employees.
— Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) (@KingMakerFT) May 7, 2022
whatthehey78 said:
Please explain again WHY the trial has to be in DC. Does a Special Counsel not have authority as to where he/she can try their case?
This should give us some insight as to exactly how much support Garland is actually allowing Durham to have. Especially now that Durham is getting into the thick of it with 2 active prosecutions, more hinted at, and a trial about to start.
— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) May 7, 2022
whatthehey78 said:
Please explain again WHY the trial has to be in DC. Does a Special Counsel not have authority as to where he/she can try their case?
Can we just crowdfund it like Zuckerburg did with the election? You know, patriotism and all that?will25u said:
Thread. Larry pondering possible Durham funding issues? May be nothing... May be Durham is underfunded. Should be getting the SCO funding info update soon.This should give us some insight as to exactly how much support Garland is actually allowing Durham to have. Especially now that Durham is getting into the thick of it with 2 active prosecutions, more hinted at, and a trial about to start.
— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) May 7, 2022
NEW:
— UndeadFOIA (@UndeadFoia) May 7, 2022
Judge Cooper has ruled the government can present evidence as to how the data was collected and information on the relationship between Sussmann and Joffe.
Gov cannot suggest that the gathering of information itself was objectionable
Huge blow to Durham. Judge Cooper has ruled that emails between 3rd party conspirators where Sussmann is not CC'd are not relevant.
— UndeadFOIA (@UndeadFoia) May 7, 2022
Door is open a crack, judge will hear any evidence that Sussmann was aware of their content/relevancy.
This will push Durham in the direction of a superceding indictment to charge a conspiracy. https://t.co/XDO6yI449N
— Dr. Shipwreckedcrew.substack.com (@shipwreckedcrew) May 7, 2022
Judge Cooper WILL NOT ALLOW Bill Priestap & Trisha Andersons Notes to be entered as evidence unless Priestep & Anderson testify. 😳😳
— Durham is Coming (@Durham_isComing) May 8, 2022
"Moving to the next issue, the defense seeks to exclude notes taken by two of Mr. Bakers deputies sometime after his meeting with Mr. Sussmann." pic.twitter.com/r7kc93ZEco
FJB said:
Can they just subpoena them to testify?
FJB said:
Can they just subpoena them to testify?
They can try to say that but I believe more likely they take the 5th. Were I their criminal lawyer, that is what I would advise.will25u said:FJB said:
Can they just subpoena them to testify?
Yes but I believe they will say that they don't remember anything about the meeting.
2/ Interesting: Court noting that given DOJ can't question Joffe on propriety of collecting Alfa Bank data, then maybe Joffe will be willing to testify anyway. I doubt it. pic.twitter.com/2cxuWvBfvN
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) May 8, 2022
Post-Twit: I'll have more (likely Monday) on the court's punting on the "joint venture."
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) May 8, 2022
will25u said:FJB said:
Can they just subpoena them to testify?
Yes but I believe they will say that they don't remember anything about the meeting.
Only way to "handle that" is for Durham to grant them immunity. If they are the subject of or have already been indicted and it is sealed, that can't happen.Quote:
They best plead the fifth, but then could face in trial immunity making their fifth plea moot. Interested to see how Durham handles that.
Same. Cooper gave each side a few wins, his reasoning is solid and he even left the door open for Durham on a few of the issues he decided. If there's anything surprising about it, it's that an Obama judge appears to be fairly reasonable. https://t.co/suiELdwm8h
— Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) May 8, 2022