Did you notice that 'news' of the FBI having permanent agents stationed within the Perkins Coie law firm... only came out AFTER the verdict?
Durham would have known about the FBI presence within the Perkins Coie law firm months or years ago, but it wasn't brought up once during the Sussman trial. They made it seem as if Sussman went to the FBI headquarters with the "Russia Collusion" story. It's now much more probable that Sussman didn't actually go anywhere. He simply colluded with the FBI agents at his own law firm. :>(
Durham might have Sussman exactly where he wants him. Several cases of perjury that could put Sussman in prison for decades... unless he fully cooperates. This new information would also enable Durham to get a full new trial against Sussman and the Perkins Coie law firm management.
Translation: "The moronic jury and the judge fell hook line and sinker for our most basic strategy of losing a battle to win the war. Good luck suckers, I will be seeing you all soon"
Breaking: Prosecutor known for busting up rico operations and dirty FBI agents, who has never lost a case decides to bring a case to trail he cannot win.
He actually had HRC supporters and doners on the jury? Did this man just get out of law school or did the dnc fall right into his trap. He compelled a whole bunch of people to tell the truth in court, he got what he wanted.
They got Mook to admit under oath in open court that Hillary Clinton HERSELF approved the sharing of known fake Russian info on Trump. Get it? He said she was in on it from the start! This is getting so fucking good. Oh, and Sussman can STILL be charged in a RICO case! Durham is brilliant.
Post a picture of Durham with the JAWS music playing. He is playing the long game, and the testimony that came out in this small fish trial was HUGE. HILLARY is guilty of SEDITION. Next Up???
Durham, I think did know this would happen. When it was discovered that a juror's child was on the same team as Sussman's daughter and the judge did not remove her from the jury, I knew something was up.
not sure I would glean the same from this statement...
seems it could be just an after the game hand-shake to be a good sport...
Remember that Durham himself was not the prosecutor in this case, and its possible these attorneys do not have knowledge of the big PLAN. In that context, this statement makes more since. Thank you to his team for solid work, which he wanted because he NEEDED this case to convince the public.
Convince the public, get a bad result, inflame the public, and then poor FBI gas on the flame with the Matt Gaetz report.
seems it could be just an after the game hand-shake to be a good sport...
Yeah, right...lol
Convince the public, get a bad result, inflame the public, and then poor FBI gas on the flame with the Matt Gaetz report.
Bad result???.... We now have The connection between Hillary Clinton, through Robby Mook's testimony… and the FBI… These are all critical and prove the collusion...
When I was listening to the trial transcripts of the Mook testimony, I didn't feel what he said was that damning for Hillary.
It's not a crime to give the FBI information, and that is essentially what Mook said she approved. He didn't say the level of detail she was involved, just that she approved of "helping the FBI"... which is not a crime...
The media ran with it because everyone is looking for a win in an otherwise boring trial.
The Matt Gaetz release is a 1000x more damning. Violating people's right to privacy is a federal crime.. its fucking awful bad...
Accessing this database by unauthorized individuals in an effort to create smear campaign again your political foe is extremely serious.
Thats what was just discussed in the Matt Gaetz report.
Unfortunately, due to the statute of limitations, Durham ran out the clock on the statute of limitations. Was it on purpose? Probably. The Democrats are a huge criminal cabal that runs everything in the government. They are protected.
When are you guys going to understand facts from one trial cannot be used in another. It also cannot be used to charge someone else that becomes suspect due to any testimony. You cannot use testimony at any trial to charge anyone.
Does that apply to RICO prosecutions as well? Seems to me that when they went after the mob with RICO, evidence produced in one trial was used to go after higher ups in another trial.
That’s not how RICO or organized crime prosecutions work - you are able to use the threat of legal prosecution or enhanced sentencing to convince a witness to “flip” or cooperate against other defendants. You get one guy to flip, then use him to get another, and so on. They agree to provide information and testimony in exchange for a favorable plea deal or reduced sentencing.
Has nothing to do with using evidence “produced” in one trial in another.
In fact, Sussman’s acquittal means Durham cannot use this strategy to further some larger investigation. It’s essentially the opposite of that.
Ok, thanks for the info. Let me ask you a question then. Why do you think Durham, a prosecutor who has never lost a case (from what I’ve heard) would choose to prosecute Sussman in DC with a presiding judge that has a professional relationship with Sussman, the judges wife was Lisa Page’s lawyer, one of the jury members kids is a rowing mate with Sussman’s kid, and several of the jury members were Clinton supporters and donors without asking for the judges recusal or challenging the questionable jurors? It’s almost like he intentionally wanted to lose the case.
Of course.
Did you notice that 'news' of the FBI having permanent agents stationed within the Perkins Coie law firm... only came out AFTER the verdict?
Durham would have known about the FBI presence within the Perkins Coie law firm months or years ago, but it wasn't brought up once during the Sussman trial. They made it seem as if Sussman went to the FBI headquarters with the "Russia Collusion" story. It's now much more probable that Sussman didn't actually go anywhere. He simply colluded with the FBI agents at his own law firm. :>(
Durham might have Sussman exactly where he wants him. Several cases of perjury that could put Sussman in prison for decades... unless he fully cooperates. This new information would also enable Durham to get a full new trial against Sussman and the Perkins Coie law firm management.
Translation: "The moronic jury and the judge fell hook line and sinker for our most basic strategy of losing a battle to win the war. Good luck suckers, I will be seeing you all soon"
Breaking: Prosecutor known for busting up rico operations and dirty FBI agents, who has never lost a case decides to bring a case to trail he cannot win.
Hahaha, yeah. And he looked smug about it for some reason no one can figure out.
He actually had HRC supporters and doners on the jury? Did this man just get out of law school or did the dnc fall right into his trap. He compelled a whole bunch of people to tell the truth in court, he got what he wanted.
Exactly. Two great tweets that explain so much.
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1531674888649547781
Durham did not push for the recusal of Judge Chris Cooper in Sussman case despite:
Cooper being professional friends with Sussmann
Cooper’s wife represented former FBI lawyer Lisa Page
Cooper and his wife were married by Merrick Garland (!!!)
Cooper appointed by Obama
https://twitter.com/johncardillo/status/1531702621332963335
Sussman trial:
Judge's wife is Lisa Page's lawyer
One of the juror's kids is Sussman's kid's rowing teammate
Multiple jurors were Hillary supporters/donors
There was never going to be a conviction.
There is only one way to get justice against these criminals.
They got Mook to admit under oath in open court that Hillary Clinton HERSELF approved the sharing of known fake Russian info on Trump. Get it? He said she was in on it from the start! This is getting so fucking good. Oh, and Sussman can STILL be charged in a RICO case! Durham is brilliant.
Does anybody have a photo or video of Durham smiling after the verdict?
Durham is actually an SCP. He is a creature that looks human but can erase himself from any photos at will.
That's quite a trick. But hard to argue with.
I'd love to see that as well!
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IEJreFuw/is-is-that-a-smile-on-durhams-fa/c/
👌
Nice! Thanks fren!
https://greatawakening.win/p/15IEJreFuw/is-is-that-a-smile-on-durhams-fa/c/
Post a picture of Durham with the JAWS music playing. He is playing the long game, and the testimony that came out in this small fish trial was HUGE. HILLARY is guilty of SEDITION. Next Up???
Durham, I think did know this would happen. When it was discovered that a juror's child was on the same team as Sussman's daughter and the judge did not remove her from the jury, I knew something was up.
not sure I would glean the same from this statement...
seems it could be just an after the game hand-shake to be a good sport...
Remember that Durham himself was not the prosecutor in this case, and its possible these attorneys do not have knowledge of the big PLAN. In that context, this statement makes more since. Thank you to his team for solid work, which he wanted because he NEEDED this case to convince the public.
Convince the public, get a bad result, inflame the public, and then poor FBI gas on the flame with the Matt Gaetz report.
Yeah, right...lol
Bad result???.... We now have The connection between Hillary Clinton, through Robby Mook's testimony… and the FBI… These are all critical and prove the collusion...
When I was listening to the trial transcripts of the Mook testimony, I didn't feel what he said was that damning for Hillary.
It's not a crime to give the FBI information, and that is essentially what Mook said she approved. He didn't say the level of detail she was involved, just that she approved of "helping the FBI"... which is not a crime...
The media ran with it because everyone is looking for a win in an otherwise boring trial.
The Matt Gaetz release is a 1000x more damning. Violating people's right to privacy is a federal crime.. its fucking awful bad...
Accessing this database by unauthorized individuals in an effort to create smear campaign again your political foe is extremely serious.
Thats what was just discussed in the Matt Gaetz report.
It is a part of the show....
https://gab.com/ROYALMRBADNEWS/posts/108402680079806541
Unfortunately, due to the statute of limitations, Durham ran out the clock on the statute of limitations. Was it on purpose? Probably. The Democrats are a huge criminal cabal that runs everything in the government. They are protected.
When are you guys going to understand facts from one trial cannot be used in another. It also cannot be used to charge someone else that becomes suspect due to any testimony. You cannot use testimony at any trial to charge anyone.
Does that apply to RICO prosecutions as well? Seems to me that when they went after the mob with RICO, evidence produced in one trial was used to go after higher ups in another trial.
That’s not how RICO or organized crime prosecutions work - you are able to use the threat of legal prosecution or enhanced sentencing to convince a witness to “flip” or cooperate against other defendants. You get one guy to flip, then use him to get another, and so on. They agree to provide information and testimony in exchange for a favorable plea deal or reduced sentencing.
Has nothing to do with using evidence “produced” in one trial in another.
In fact, Sussman’s acquittal means Durham cannot use this strategy to further some larger investigation. It’s essentially the opposite of that.
Are you a lawyer?
Yes. Lawfag here.
Ok, thanks for the info. Let me ask you a question then. Why do you think Durham, a prosecutor who has never lost a case (from what I’ve heard) would choose to prosecute Sussman in DC with a presiding judge that has a professional relationship with Sussman, the judges wife was Lisa Page’s lawyer, one of the jury members kids is a rowing mate with Sussman’s kid, and several of the jury members were Clinton supporters and donors without asking for the judges recusal or challenging the questionable jurors? It’s almost like he intentionally wanted to lose the case.
What a tactful and mannerly statement, something the Left knows nothing about.
Yup yup