akm91 said:

---

Still in line behind Brennan for me.

---

Quote:

---

"As I see it," Swecker explained, "Joffe, who worked for Neustar at the time, had a contract with either the Executive Office of the President or the [presidential] transition team, and he used information gleaned from his contractual relationship to provide that private information to the Clinton campaign. Depending on the actual facts on the ground, it could constitute mail or wire fraud, and if it were an actual government contract, perhaps fraud against the government that is, the Executive Office of the President."

Added Swecker: "There could be other criminal statutes [invoked] as well" -- including conspiracy -- "but to me, the key issue is his contractual relationship. He also engaged researchers at Georgia Tech who were working on a government contract and being paid by the U.S. government."

---

akm91 said:

---

That happened back in August

---

whatthehey78 said:

---

Is there a date we can expect updates or new revelations? Curious minds want to know.

---

will25u said:

---

whatthehey78 said:

---

Is there a date we can expect updates or new revelations? Curious minds want to know.

---

Its been coming out in filings for those indicted.

There may be a report at the end, or if Durham gets shut down prematurely, but Durhams story will be told through his indictments.

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

CNN. MSNBC, NBC, CNBC etc etc are all defending Hillary with the same article she tweeted by Vanity fair!!

What's next Vogue?

Vanity fair is just copy and paste stuff from old NY Times articles that have since been debunked, and those in hiding are crying in the corner clutching their bogus Pulitzers

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

Wait, what? I can't keep up.

Yesterday morning, it was too complex of a story for the reader to wrap their heads around. Yesterday afternoon, the narrative was that Fox was feeding this story to brain dead viewers. This morning, it is a huge nothing burger that is being built out of thin air.

Libs are in a "fling **** everywhere and see if any of it sticks" mode.

ETA: Obvious man is obvious, but Durham must be over the target.

---

akm91 said:

---

That happened back in August

---

benchmark said:

---

Interesting things you didn't know about Joffe. Lots to unpack in this excellent article. True investigative journalism isn't dead.

RCI Paul Sperry: The Checkered Past of the FBI Cyber Contractor Who 'Spied' on Trump

Quote:

---

"As I see it," Swecker explained, "Joffe, who worked for Neustar at the time, had a contract with either the Executive Office of the President or the [presidential] transition team, and he used information gleaned from his contractual relationship to provide that private information to the Clinton campaign. Depending on the actual facts on the ground, it could constitute mail or wire fraud, and if it were an actual government contract, perhaps fraud against the government that is, the Executive Office of the President."

Added Swecker: "There could be other criminal statutes [invoked] as well" -- including conspiracy -- "but to me, the key issue is his contractual relationship. He also engaged researchers at Georgia Tech who were working on a government contract and being paid by the U.S. government."

---

---

richardag said:

---

benchmark said:

---

Interesting things you didn't know about Joffe. Lots to unpack in this excellent article. True investigative journalism isn't dead.

RCI Paul Sperry: The Checkered Past of the FBI Cyber Contractor Who 'Spied' on Trump

Quote:

---

"As I see it," Swecker explained, "Joffe, who worked for Neustar at the time, had a contract with either the Executive Office of the President or the [presidential] transition team, and he used information gleaned from his contractual relationship to provide that private information to the Clinton campaign. Depending on the actual facts on the ground, it could constitute mail or wire fraud, and if it were an actual government contract, perhaps fraud against the government that is, the Executive Office of the President."

Added Swecker: "There could be other criminal statutes [invoked] as well" -- including conspiracy -- "but to me, the key issue is his contractual relationship. He also engaged researchers at Georgia Tech who were working on a government contract and being paid by the U.S. government."

---

---

Joffe should be in jail. Bilked people illegally using a scam, typical Democratic Party leadership BS.

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

Hillary tweets

Trump & Fox are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from his real ones. So it's a day that ends in Y.

The more his misdeeds are exposed, the more they lie.

For those interested in reality, here's a good debunking of their latest nonsense.https://t.co/iYY8Uxuogx

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) February 16, 2022

---

Quote:

---

"What Trump and some news outlets are saying is wrong," attorneys Jody Westby and Mark Rasch told the Times. "The cybersecurity researchers were investigating malware in the White House, not spying on the Trump campaign, and to our knowledge all of the data they used was nonprivate DNS data from before Trump took office."

---

VegasAg86 said:

---

sicandtiredTXN said:

---

Hillary tweets

Trump & Fox are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from his real ones. So it's a day that ends in Y.

The more his misdeeds are exposed, the more they lie.

For those interested in reality, here's a good debunking of their latest nonsense.https://t.co/iYY8Uxuogx

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) February 16, 2022

---

Quote:

---

"What Trump and some news outlets are saying is wrong," attorneys Jody Westby and Mark Rasch told the Times. "The cybersecurity researchers were investigating malware in the White House, not spying on the Trump campaign, and to our knowledge all of the data they used was nonprivate DNS data from before Trump took office."

---

Vanity Fair

The indictment (2/11/22) says "The Government's evidence at trial will also establish that among the Internet data Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited was domain name system ("DNS") Internet traffic. (emphasis added) See paragraph 5

Among means there is other data. Their knowledge/reading comprehension is questionable.

---

fasthorse05 said:

---

I haven't taken the time to confirm, but did he REALLY have legal authorization to hack Trump Towers, Trump's medical information, AND the EOP?

First of all, who in the hell can deliver that kind of power? Secondly, I also understand true access to the EOP had to be done by an insider. If so, I definitely want him/her taken down for a very long time.

---

txags92 said:

---

I would think a competent lawyer would be telling Hillary to shut up about now. People in the crosshairs of a good investigator like Durham don't usually end up benefitting from shooting their mouth off to the press about what a nothingburger the investigation is.

---

Quote:

---

Attorneys for Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann filed a motion Thursday to dismiss the case against him in Special Counsel John Durham's investigation, claiming a case of "extraordinary prosecutorial overreach."

"Defendant Michael A. Sussmann, by and through undersigned counsel and pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12(b)(3)(B), respectfully moves this Court to dismiss the Indictment because the single count therein "fails to state an offense,'" the filing reads.

Sussmann has been charged as part of Durham's investigation with making a false statement to a federal agent. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty.

Durham's indictment against Sussmann, says he told then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016, less than two months before the 2016 presidential election, that he was not doing work "for any client" when he requested and held a meeting in which he presented "purported data and 'white papers' that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel" between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin.

But in the motion to dismiss Thursday, Sussmann's legal team called the case one of "extraordinary prosecutorial overreach."

"It has long been a crime to make a false statement to the government. But the law criminalizes only false statements that are materialfalse statements that matter because they can actually affect a specific decision of the government," the lawyers wrote, adding that, by contrast, false statements "about ancillary matters" are "immaterial and cannot give rise to criminal liability."

---

Quote:

---

"Accordingly, where individuals have been prosecuted for providing tips to government investigators, they have historically been charged with making a false statement only where the tip itself was alleged to be false, because that is the only statement that could affect the specific decision to commence an investigation," the lawyers wrote. "Indeed, the defense is aware of no case in which an individual has provided a tip to the government and has been charged with making any false statement other than providing a false tip. But that is exactly what has happened here."

The lawyers argued that Sussmann "voluntarily" met with the FBI in the fall of 2016 to "pass along information that raised national security concerns."

"He met with the FBI, in other words, to provide a tip," Sussmann's lawyers wrote. "There is no allegation in the indictment that the tip he provided was false. And there is no allegation that he believed the tip he provided was false.

---

Quote:

---

The lawyers argued that Sussmann "voluntarily" met with the FBI in the fall of 2016 to "pass along information that raised national security concerns."

---

Quote:

---

"He met with the FBI, in other words, to provide a tip," Sussmann's lawyers wrote. "There is no allegation in the indictment that the tip he provided was false. And there is no allegation that he believed the tip he provided was false.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

"He met with the FBI, in other words, to provide a tip," Sussmann's lawyers wrote. "There is no allegation in the indictment that the tip he provided was false. And there is no allegation that he believed the tip he provided was false.

---

Nice way to dump on your former client. Joffe lied to me!!! I just repeated it to the FBI! I didn't know he had illegally obtained this information!!

---

CyclingAg82 said:

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

Wait, what? I can't keep up.

Yesterday morning, it was too complex of a story for the reader to wrap their heads around. Yesterday afternoon, the narrative was that Fox was feeding this story to brain dead viewers. This morning, it is a huge nothing burger that is being built out of thin air.

Libs are in a "fling **** everywhere and see if any of it sticks" mode.

ETA: Obvious man is obvious, but Durham must be over the target.

---

Libs are the brain dead morons and the ones that believe the State Media when they start flinging crap everywhere.

It is still - even after all these years of watching the leftist loons the media - mind boggling.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

"He met with the FBI, in other words, to provide a tip," Sussmann's lawyers wrote. "There is no allegation in the indictment that the tip he provided was false. And there is no allegation that he believed the tip he provided was false.

---

Nice way to dump on your former client. Joffe lied to me!!! I just repeated it to the FBI! I didn't know he had illegally obtained this information!!

---