MT @SergeiMillian: "Your buddies - Fiona and Steele - will not rescue you this time. You are the ultimate scapegoat."#Dancehnko #Hill pic.twitter.com/aAVLf15ieR
— La Cosa Jostra (@codyave) April 17, 2022
MT @SergeiMillian: "Your buddies - Fiona and Steele - will not rescue you this time. You are the ultimate scapegoat."#Dancehnko #Hill pic.twitter.com/aAVLf15ieR
— La Cosa Jostra (@codyave) April 17, 2022
2/2 Among other things, I obtained the "fallacies" document Manos wrote after indictment dropped where he summarized what he remembered telling Durham. This article and one linked within it includes full details. https://t.co/tuRtPvXlPv
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) April 17, 2022
? What did I miss?sicandtiredTXN said:
Shots fired
richardag said:? What did I miss?sicandtiredTXN said:
Shots fired
Thanks, wasn't sure what your reference was directed at.sicandtiredTXN said:The Tweet directed at Millanrichardag said:? What did I miss?sicandtiredTXN said:
Shots fired
The fusion cell stood down in mid-November according to @DevinNunes, but Sussmann still could've met with individuals who were previously part of the cell. pic.twitter.com/qhsaSfaCEq
— FOOL NELSON (@FOOL_NELSON) April 17, 2022
fasthorse05 said:
Little bit of a sidebar here, but can any of this stuff be used in the lawsuit against the Clinton campaign?
Most pooh-poohed the chances, and I listened to Khan's (I think that's his name) explanation of how he put together the information to bring it to a civil court.
Good point. Means that Durham noticed the peculiar similarities between Fusion's Trump dossier and Sussmann's Alfa dossier. Might also be the case that the Fusion staffer who is cooperating with Durham spilled the beans. In any case, very bad news for Sussmann and his cohorts. https://t.co/YVsGGCYfET pic.twitter.com/gVBcfh1K8W
— Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) April 18, 2022
FBI received Steele Dossier & Alfa Bank white paper on same day - 9/19/16.
— InMyHumbleOpinion (@IMHO1969) April 18, 2022
Existence of Steele Dossier & Alfa Bank white paper were leaked thru Mother Jones & Slate on same day - 10/31/16.
Corn & Sussmann both went to FBI James Baker.
Probably all just a coincidence... pic.twitter.com/FMTSAbrgBb
Pro Tip: The whole "Sussmann only billed the Clinton Campaign because lawyers have to bill all of the time somewhere" defense is blatantly false.
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) April 18, 2022
Durham Upcoming:
— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) April 18, 2022
Oppositions to the motion to compel from 3rd parties (HFA, DNC, Fusion, Perkins Coie, Joffe) are due today (4/18), hopefully not sealed.
Durham's reply due next Monday (4/25).
Hearing on some in limine motions next Wed (4/27 2pm).https://t.co/SgF1TWGvpw
And luckily Durham has receipts, so no one can play dumb and pretend a document doesn't exist if the judge wants it reviewed. The fact that Durham subpeona'd these the same day he indicted Sussmann suggests to me Sussy is a means not an end. pic.twitter.com/6ItvK8AbGK
— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) April 18, 2022
Durham: Five Hillary Clinton Associates Are Taking the Fifth in Russia Hoax Prosecution https://t.co/x61zjIYIo9 via @BreitbartNews
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) April 18, 2022
Buried in the tedious minuitia of Friday's flurry of evidentiary filings in the Special Counsel's case against former Clinton Campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann were three blockbuster take-aways. @FDRLST https://t.co/PLqnIgavJD
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) April 18, 2022
This will definitely be interesting as Dagon knows quite a bit about the the plot and the players in the hoax.Quote:
The third piece of news flowing from Friday's filings concerns the special counsel's grant of immunity to Georgia Tech researcher David Dagonand only to Dagon. "The only witness currently immunized by the government, Researcher-2, was conferred with that status on July 28, 2021," Durham's memorandum explained.
Linkwhatthehey78 said:
Don't Twitter...so, can someone enlighten us as to what Prof. Cleveland's "3 blockbuster takeaways" from Durham's filings are?
TIA!!!
Thank you!aggiehawg said:Linkwhatthehey78 said:
Don't Twitter...so, can someone enlighten us as to what Prof. Cleveland's "3 blockbuster takeaways" from Durham's filings are?
TIA!!!
All you have to do is click on the link in the tweet to take you to the article.,whatthehey78 said:
Don't Twitter...so, can someone enlighten us as to what Prof. Cleveland's "3 blockbuster takeaways" from Durham's filings are?
TIA!!!
Looks like Durham was listening. From Friday's filing: https://t.co/alHyz3bBWp pic.twitter.com/Cq2k2lyQ7L
— Hans Mahncke (@HansMahncke) April 18, 2022
"That mean ol' Special Counsel is making his case public. Doesn't he know Democrats are the only ones allowed to do that, and then it's by illegal leaks or with fake conspiracies fed to their favored reporters because Orange Man Bad." pic.twitter.com/cwpsoW1MXk
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) April 18, 2022
Quote:
"prearranged portal in the EOP dating back to Feb 10th 2013, which was set up by the Whitehouse to effectively find an infection in EOP."
Now Manos has no real explanation in this "fallacies" document for the Trump Tower DNS monitoring or the DNS monitoring in the Upper West Side apartment that also belonged to Trump, I guess since it wasn't an official building like the EOP it really wasn't important enough to try and justify it.Quote:
"monitoring the newly elected administration is simply baseless because we lost access to the EOP data in February of 2017. Which means I had data for 3 months since the four year long project started under the previous administration"
I'm confused. If Durham doesn't have what's under the redactions (ie the motion to compel) he can't produce them in discovery.
— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) April 19, 2022
And if these are coms (35 out of 38) that didn't directly involve Sussmann and he wasn't privy to them...
How does Sussmann know they are irrelevant? pic.twitter.com/ZdpieAYM2R
Joint defense agreement for the "joint venture"😉
— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) April 19, 2022
I am guessing this applies to the fact that Sussman's attorneys are also representing people higher up than him. Did Sussman himself say they were irrelevant, his attorneys that said they were irrelevant or does it matter who said it in court?will25u said:I'm confused. If Durham doesn't have what's under the redactions (ie the motion to compel) he can't produce them in discovery.
— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) April 19, 2022
And if these are coms (35 out of 38) that didn't directly involve Sussmann and he wasn't privy to them...
How does Sussmann know they are irrelevant? pic.twitter.com/ZdpieAYM2RJoint defense agreement for the "joint venture"😉
— Mccabe's Porsche on Blocks (@Larry_Beech) April 19, 2022
His attorneys. At this point the only thing Sussmann would need to say in court to the judge would be regarding his waiver of all of the conflicts of interests his attorneys have towards him.Quote:
Did Sussman himself say they were irrelevant, his attorneys that said they were irrelevant or does it matter who said it in court?
Pretty much. It's a cluster.Line Ate Member said:
Latham attorneys trying to remember which of their clients have seen what documents in regards to this mess.