• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Durham grand jury indicts lawyer whose firm represented Hillary Clinton’s campaign

Somerville

Somerville

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
17,873
Reaction score
8,362
Location
On an island. Not that one!
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
An earlier thread noted that Durham had presented a case to a federal grand jury. After two years of investigating the Mueller investigation, charges on one individual have now been laid down. Funny thing about the charge that Durham had presented to the jury - it has nothing to do with what the indicted lawyer had to say about Russian collusion with Trump.

Durham grand jury indicts lawyer whose firm represented Hillary Clinton’s campaign​

A grand jury working with special counsel John Durham’s office handed up an indictment Thursday of lawyer Michael Sussmann, who prosecutors have accused of making false statements to the FBI during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Sussmann, the indictment charges, “lied about the capacity in which he was providing ... allegations to the FBI” of potential cyber links between a Russian bank and a company owned by former president Donald Trump.
[. . .]
Durham was tasked with finding crimes that may have been committed at the FBI and elsewhere in the federal government, but in charging Sussmann, the special counsel is in essence arguing that the FBI was the victim of a crime.
Click to expand...

. . . and what was the crime?

For those who ranted and raved about the cost of the Mueller investigation, all the while ignoring that it actually showed a profit, does anyone think those some individuals will complain about the cost of Durham's investigation which has lasted for longer than the Mueller examination?
 
Somerville said:
An earlier thread noted that Durham had presented a case to a federal grand jury. After two years of investigating the Mueller investigation, charges on one individual have now been laid down. Funny thing about the charge that Durham had presented to the jury - it has nothing to do with what the indicted lawyer had to say about Russian collusion with Trump.



. . . and what was the crime?

For those who ranted and raved about the cost of the Mueller investigation, all the while ignoring that it actually showed a profit, does anyone think those some individuals will comp
Click to expand...
This is the same indictment that came down for a related Manafort charge. It was dropped for not being relevant to other charges. I predict a slap on the wrist at worst.

This is the Durham report? Good thing the djt DoJ funded it for the extra year!
 
This looks outside six degrees of separation.
 
Somerville said:
An earlier thread noted that Durham had presented a case to a federal grand jury. After two years of investigating the Mueller investigation, charges on one individual have now been laid down. Funny thing about the charge that Durham had presented to the jury - it has nothing to do with what the indicted lawyer had to say about Russian collusion with Trump.



. . . and what was the crime?

For those who ranted and raved about the cost of the Mueller investigation, all the while ignoring that it actually showed a profit, does anyone think those some individuals will complain about the cost of Durham's investigation which has lasted for longer than the Mueller examination?
Click to expand...

Hillary's campaign? I thought Durham was bringing down Obama and the rest?

Hillary? Like 2016?
 
Somerville said:
An earlier thread noted that Durham had presented a case to a federal grand jury. After two years of investigating the Mueller investigation, charges on one individual have now been laid down. Funny thing about the charge that Durham had presented to the jury - it has nothing to do with what the indicted lawyer had to say about Russian collusion with Trump.



. . . and what was the crime?

For those who ranted and raved about the cost of the Mueller investigation, all the while ignoring that it actually showed a profit, does anyone think those some individuals will complain about the cost of Durham's investigation which has lasted for longer than the Mueller examination?
Click to expand...
What we know is Mueller found nothing,in fact from his investigation we found out the whole thing was a lie orgnaized by democrats and deep staters in the FBI that hated Trump. Now we see the result is to find out exactly who did this. It's a crime to create false evidence and make false charges and lie to the FBI. So live with it if you are on the left, we sure had to on the right.
 
Somerville said:
An earlier thread noted that Durham had presented a case to a federal grand jury. After two years of investigating the Mueller investigation, charges on one individual have now been laid down. Funny thing about the charge that Durham had presented to the jury - it has nothing to do with what the indicted lawyer had to say about Russian collusion with Trump.



. . . and what was the crime?

For those who ranted and raved about the cost of the Mueller investigation, all the while ignoring that it actually showed a profit, does anyone think those some individuals will complain about the cost of Durham's investigation which has lasted for longer than the Mueller examination?
Click to expand...

How do they get around this?
It was not immediately clear how an individual lying to the FBI’s top lawyer would square with the Justice Department’s historical practice of charging false-statements cases. Typically, such cases are charged when a witness knowingly lies to a special agent conducting an investigation.
Click to expand...

 
Somerville said:
An earlier thread noted that Durham had presented a case to a federal grand jury. After two years of investigating the Mueller investigation, charges on one individual have now been laid down. Funny thing about the charge that Durham had presented to the jury - it has nothing to do with what the indicted lawyer had to say about Russian collusion with Trump.



. . . and what was the crime?

For those who ranted and raved about the cost of the Mueller investigation, all the while ignoring that it actually showed a profit, does anyone think those some individuals will complain about the cost of Durham's investigation which has lasted for longer than the Mueller examination?
Click to expand...
I could have had a huge villa on the Adriatic, with a staff of servants, if I only had the money pissed away "investigating" Hillary Clinton over the past 12 years.

If there's a Guinness Book World Record for being "investigated", I don't think anyone can touch the Clintons.
 
There is no question in my mind that this is an abuse of office by Durham. Even given the most favorable light on what is alleged, there is no crime there. There just isn't.

The crime of making a false statement is governed by 18 U.S. Code § 1001. According to the statute, a violation includes anyone that willfully and knowingly:
  1. falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
  2. makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
  3. makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry.
Material. Not stating who your client is, is simply not material. Even if it is true, which is doubtful. Moreover, it has to be knowingly and willfully false. This is such weak sauce.
 
Last edited:
And I imagine my next disappointment will be that they couldn't come up with voter fraud in AZ. Maybe WI, PA, or GA? 🤞
 
Integrityrespec said:
What we know is Mueller found nothing,in fact from his investigation we found out the whole thing was a lie orgnaized by democrats and deep staters in the FBI that hated Trump. Now we see the result is to find out exactly who did this. It's a crime to create false evidence and make false charges and lie to the FBI. So live with it if you are on the left, we sure had to on the right.
Click to expand...
Way too much bullshit to let slide. Indictments, convictions, guilty pleas, fines . . . even incarcerations. Compared to other Special Prosecutors, the Mueller investigation was a gold mine, worth every minute digging, and every dollar spent.

time.com

Here Are All of the Indictments, Guilty Pleas and Convictions From Robert Mueller's Investigation

He indicted, convicted or got guilty pleas from 34 people and three companies
time.com time.com
 
Demon said:
I feel cheated. I was promised that we'd see Hillary, Comey, Obama and so many more in handcuffs.
Click to expand...

I've been waiting to see them all sent to jail with Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and Brennan and Clapper and, well, everyone.

The citizens of Trump Fan Nation promised. They've been promising for a year now.
 
Integrityrespec said:
What we know is Mueller found nothing,in fact from his investigation we found out the whole thing was a lie orgnaized by democrats and deep staters in the FBI that hated Trump. Now we see the result is to find out exactly who did this. It's a crime to create false evidence and make false charges and lie to the FBI. So live with it if you are on the left, we sure had to on the right.
Click to expand...
I suggest you read the Mueller report, as clearly you did not. Your characterization thereof shows remarkable ignorance. Study up, pal!


- LESSONS FROM THE MUELLER REPORT: PRESIDENTIAL OBSTRUCTION AND OTHER CRIMES

www.govinfo.gov

Meanwhile, more than 1000 former US attorney's state that the evidence in the Mueller Report amounts to indictable Obstruction of Justice under federal prosecution guidelines.

STATEMENT BY FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTORS

We are former federal prosecutors. We served under both Republican and Democratic administrations at different levels of the federal…
medium.com medium.com

Nothing, my A...

Meanwhile, I did hear a commentator remark that Durham was suppose to find the FBI to be a perpetrator of crimes, but this indictment shows the FBI to be a victim of a crime. The same commentator went on to explain the twisted legal argument even in bringing charges. It appears the Durham investigation was/is even more of dud than we thought. It was, however, a nice distraction for The Con men to bite into so that didn't have to face the music on the seriousness of the Mueller charges (see above).
 
Last edited:
tres borrachos said:
I've been waiting to see them all sent to jail with Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and Brennan and Clapper and, well, everyone.

The citizens of Trump Fan Nation promised. They've been promising for a year now.
Click to expand...

Oh, the lovers, yes! I forgot them.
 
Somerville said:
An earlier thread noted that Durham had presented a case to a federal grand jury. After two years of investigating the Mueller investigation, charges on one individual have now been laid down. Funny thing about the charge that Durham had presented to the jury - it has nothing to do with what the indicted lawyer had to say about Russian collusion with Trump.



. . . and what was the crime?

For those who ranted and raved about the cost of the Mueller investigation, all the while ignoring that it actually showed a profit, does anyone think those some individuals will complain about the cost of Durham's investigation which has lasted for longer than the Mueller examination?
Click to expand...
And the guilty parties heading to jail, a lawyer, maybe. One lawyer after years of investigating all those criminal democrats.
 
bongsaway said:
And the guilty parties heading to jail, a lawyer, maybe. One lawyer after years of investigating all those criminal democrats.
Click to expand...

And how much did that cost us?
 
Sussmann, whose firm had previously represented the Democratic National Committee, told the FBI's James Baker in Sep. 2019 that he was not representing a client when pushing for an investigation into Trump. Sussmann denied any wrongdoing, while withholding the fact that he was working on behalf of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.

www.foxnews.com

Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann indicted for allegedly lying to FBI during Russia investigation

A federal grand jury returned the indictment sought by sought by Special Counsel John Durham
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom