aggiehawg said:

---

Lawtouber covering this trial. Recommended by Rekieta.



It's still live as I post this.

---

1:11 from the legal assistant verifies there are all sorts of grand jury subpoenas out on Perkin Couie, and everywhere else in DC. Maybe she is Q? lol

Interesting thread. Bit of a different take. And not a good one if true.

Durham has to use the "FBI was duped" approach, because the alternative is just too toxic, dangerous and unimaginable for the public, according to those who control things. It was always going to be this way.

However, that said, y'all know the reality of our situation. https://t.co/Z3wRXkw65l

— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) May 26, 2022

I don't understand this logic. You can't lie and just say they should have known I was lying. You also can't just say they didn't act on my lie so it doesn't matter. The purpose of the law is to prevent lying that "could" have had material consequences to the investigations.

In an ethical world, correct.

But Garland will use an acquital shut it all down.

We have a guy proven to any intellectually honest person he's guilty of lying - but politics and intellectual honesty are mutually exclusive when it is (D)ifferent sides on trial.

Look no further than the Flynn trial. The Judge ignored the fact that the plaintiff said "we're out, we withdraw" but continued anyway.

That's like a team quitting a basketball game but the ref saying "nuh uhh...we're playing this..." then calling technical fouls against the defense and shooting free throws until he wins.

The third leg of this pathetic stool, the MSM, will tie things off if there's an acquittal. It will be be painted as Trump still probably colluded and is still a liar who wants to kill democracy. No one's mind will be changed. The truth will be obscured.

TURLEY: “I mean, he is facing a jury that has three Clinton donors, an AOC donor, and a woman whose daughter is on the same sports team with Sussmann’s daughter. With the exception of randomly selecting people out of the DNC headquarters, you could not come up with a worse jury” pic.twitter.com/RHqen6AMAc

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 26, 2022

will25u said:

---

TURLEY: “I mean, he is facing a jury that has three Clinton donors, an AOC donor, and a woman whose daughter is on the same sports team with Sussmann’s daughter. With the exception of randomly selecting people out of the DNC headquarters, you could not come up with a worse jury” pic.twitter.com/RHqen6AMAc

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) May 26, 2022

---

Okay, I am old enough to remember the difference between de jure and de facto. Like in Furman v. Georgia. Outlawed the death penalty for a lot of years.

Former Attorney General Bill Barr Says Clinton Guilty Of 'Sedition' https://t.co/sQ58LCLQbD

— Maria Bartiromo (@MariaBartiromo) May 26, 2022

That is indeed a bombshell.

Gator92 said:

---

Book sales must be down...

---

Is he wrong?

BMX Bandit said:

---

From McCarthy:

Quote:

---

So what the Sussmann defense has been able to show is the government has big trouble trying to prove the materiality of the false statement, which is an essential element of it, because the FBI really wasn't fooled and because they went to great lengths to conceal the fact that they had accepted information from a partizan political source.

---

---

Sussmann has a point

No.

Too little, too late.

What's the statute of limitations?

I'd have a lot more respect for him if he'd just STFU. Not a good look for a former AG making the rounds on MSM.

Gator92 said:

---

No.

Too little, too late.

What's the statute of limitations?

I'd have a lot more respect for him if he'd just STFU. Not a good look for a former AG making the rounds on MSM.

---

Every time Hillary files another court document, it gets extended another five years.

Nobody




going




to




jail




Change my mind...

S



T


F




U



..and I'm a gator.

Funny how Barr had to appoint a SC. Must have known Trump wouldn't be re-elected.

W/ revelations that all this was known by 2017 and he did nothing.

I'll give him some credit. No matter the outcome of this trial, at least it will be recorded. But again, nobody is going to jail. Swamp protects the swamp.

Sedition doesn't equal conspiracy. And when was the last time anyone charged w/ sedition must lest convicted? Barr just selling books and collecting appearance checks.

Sussman acquitted and Garland shuts down Durham...

Sussman won't be acquitted, but it could be a hung jury. In that case, does Durham retry the case hoping for a better jury?

will25u said:

---

Durham has to use the "FBI was duped" approach, because the alternative is just too toxic, dangerous and unimaginable for the public, according to those who control things. It was always going to be this way.

However, that said, y'all know the reality of our situation. https://t.co/Z3wRXkw65l

— TheLastRefuge (@TheLastRefuge2) May 26, 2022

---

The 'materiality' defense in the Sussmann trial will also apply to other pending Durham cases. Lying, cheating, and fraud are all immaterial if the FBI was willing to gateway provable hoaxes into 'plausible narratives' to investigate .... while 'investigate' really translates as "go fishing" using all available cyber assets complete with media leaks for cover. Comey and Mueller modus operandi 2016-17.

This FBI/HRC fraud conspiracy is analogous to both the client and bidders all benefiting from an obvious bid-rigging scam. To remove the 'materiality' defense, Durham has to (somehow) name FBI players (e.g. Comey, McCabe, Strzok, et al) as co-conspirators in the fraud.

This article calling bull$hit on what Sussmann brought in, coupled with the weiner laptop revelation, is likely why Sussmann tried to change his 9/19 billing on 11/6. It was an oh $hit moment that only got reinforced on 11/8. https://t.co/mVG73fCef5

— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) May 27, 2022

Gator92 said:

---

Funny how Barr had to appoint a SC. Must have known Trump wouldn't be re-elected.

W/ revelations that all this was known by 2017 and he did nothing.

I'll give him some credit. No matter the outcome of this trial, at least it will be recorded. But again, nobody is going to jail. Swamp protects the swamp.

Sedition doesn't equal conspiracy. And when was the last time anyone charged w/ sedition must lest convicted? Barr just selling books and collecting appearance checks.

Sussman acquitted and Garland shuts down Durham...

---

While I don't doubt your prescience, the good thing for you is that you can quit and give up, which you apparently already have.

I just don't see the value to that POV, not to mention I can't imagine a lot of folks want to hang with you terribly often. I've tried feeling sorry for myself more than once, it's a crappy way to live life.

IF your opinion comes to pass, your welcome to come here next week and emote your clairvoyance.

In the mean time, you might want to take your clairvoyance to Vegas. At least you'll be wealthy.

I appreciate candor, both sides, but let's see what happens. The jury is already stacked against us, but it's not officially over.

If you read this thread about prosecution final arguments it sounds pretty open and shut.

Lets see what the defense says.

Good morning again from the E. Barrett Prettyman courthouse in downtown Washington, DC. The Sussmann-Durham trial will at least start to wrap up today with closing arguments. /1

— Charlie Savage (@charlie_savage) May 27, 2022

Let's hope;
1. this jury is frustrated with having to serve jury duty on Memorial Day weekend,
2. they're 'fed up' with HRC and politics in general,
3. they come to a conclusion that by 'nailing this underling/nobody' the Republicans will 'pick up and go home'
4. 'Profit'

Yeah...I know...'won't happen'!

will25u said:

---

If you read this thread about prosecution final arguments it sounds pretty open and shut.

Lets see what the defense says.

Good morning again from the E. Barrett Prettyman courthouse in downtown Washington, DC. The Sussmann-Durham trial will at least start to wrap up today with closing arguments. /1

— Charlie Savage (@charlie_savage) May 27, 2022

---

Uh, the Sussman - Durham trial? I don't think John Durham is on trial.

"The government is not required to prove that this statement actually influenced the FBI -- only that the statement could have influenced the FBI."

This should put materiality to bed. We will see.

Charlie Savage is doing a great job live tweeting the closing arguments.

Jury has the case. Judge will take verdict, and he is leaving at 2:30, so no verdict today.

Good read about Joffe and skirting CHS rules/regulations to propigate the Alfa lie.

My first Substack article in 6 months. Whenever I take the time to write I can hear the voices of my clients and their families in my head "What about working on my case?" Maybe I can do one a week, on the weekend.https://t.co/HDptqMeVMr

— Shipwreckedcrew.substack.com (@shipwreckedcrew) May 26, 2022

This should have been hammered home harder: “clearly all these swamp guys tell the truth when they’re sworn in but lie their asses off when they’re not. 1001 seeks to prevent this by making it a crime to lie to an official in a material way. This matters.” https://t.co/VT9y86EUXh

— Matt Beebe (@TheMattBeebe) May 27, 2022

With no sense of self-awareness, Sussmann's counsel told the jury that the prosecution was simply "misdirection" and "smoke and mirrors." https://t.co/kr8nH9gHK2 It is curious argument for a client who hid his representation to push a false Russian collusion claim.

— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) May 27, 2022

Key takeaways from Sussmann trial (cont.):

4/5 FBI used a journalist to spy on the Trump campaign and report back as a CHS informant

5/5 FBI confirmed that Rodney Joffe was an FBI informant concerning Russian cyber threats (including possibly the alleged DNC "hack")

— Paul Sperry (@PaulSperry30) May 27, 2022

🚨LIVE 8PM ET TONIGHT👉https://t.co/CNhoyYHFgX#SussmannTrial: Kash & Jan break down what they've seen, from revelations that Rodney Joffe was an FBI source for years to evidence that Sussmann billed the Clinton campaign for the Alfa Bank thumb drives. What will the jury decide? pic.twitter.com/QkthHDBhlN

— Kash's Corner (@KashsCorner) May 27, 2022

Let's talk Jury Instructions. Yesterday the Judge removed the lie happened "on or about" the date of the 19th to say only "on" the date of the 19th. The prosecutor agreed to removing the "about" which I thought was very strange but IANAL so what do I know.

The reason this is significant is that the text stating the lie was on the 18th and the meeting between Baker and Sussmann was on the 19th. The text is black and white, ironclad, and was the predicate for Baker even taking the meeting. The meeting between the two had no witnesses and no notes so it becomes Bakers word against Sussmann's.

Why would the prosecutors agree to this change, and why would the judge even suggest this to begin with? It seems to me this should have been objected to immediately.

It seems to me the prosecution has had several unforced errors in this trial. The deck was already stacked against them and they really couldn't afford these mistakes. Thoughts?

Franklins said:

---

Let's talk Jury Instructions. Yesterday the Judge removed the lie happened "on or about" the date of the 19th to say only "on" the date of the 19th. The prosecutor agreed to removing the "about" which I thought was very strange but IANAL so what do I know.

The reason this is significant is that the text stating the lie was on the 18th and the meeting between Baker and Sussmann was on the 19th. The text is black and white, ironclad, and was the predicate for Baker even taking the meeting. The meeting between the two had no witnesses and no notes so it becomes Bakers word against Sussmann's.

Why would the prosecutors agree to this change, and why would the judge even suggest this to begin with? It seems to me this should have been objected to immediately.

It seems to me the prosecution has had several unforced errors in this trial. The deck was already stacked against them and they really couldn't afford these mistakes. Thoughts?

---

IANAL, but the only thing is that I can think of is that the indictment is for the lie on the 19th. He isn't charged for lying to the FBI on the 18th, only the 19th.

I’m not sure people caught the significance of @carterwpage and @SergeiMillian being on Rodney Joffe’s list of Trump associates.

He didn’t just pick them at random.

— Undead FOIA (@UndeadFoia) May 28, 2022