So it is True!!!

[Art]

In the words of "The Church Lady" Isn't that special!!!!" :

In a review of the Durham Investigations that have been released but not yet published provides evidence that the Democratic National Committee did indeed not only hire a tech firm (un named and unindicted...yet) to hack the Trump Campaign servers during the campaign but the servers in the White House while Trump was president. Not only that...the Clinton Campaign did in deed write the checks to the aforementioned tech company to find nastiness on Trump.

This isn't just a crime, It's a breach of national security.

The words "bad as Watergate" are thrown around loosely but if half of this is true it would rise to that level. The "Statute" has probably run on a lot of the original charges but if I was questioned on this I'd be real careful that everything I said was absolutely, consistent, accurate and above board and I'd sure be lawyering up right now. I'll guarantee the process of deciding who to grant some form of immunity to, if necessary, are in process.

Donald Trump, other than his sex life must be the most squeeky clean president since George Washington when you look at the vast private and public resorces used to try to get him for something, anything over six years with absolutely no success. That goes for his family too. Can you imagine if any of his kids were any thing like the womanizing, dope smoking, money laundering Hunter Biden??? They'd all be in Leavenworth.

Unbelievable, these people are truly nefarious.

[kj47]

And now the question is anything going to come out of this? We will have to wait & see.

[Art]

And now the question is anything going to come out of this? We will have to wait & see.

In the terms of long term jail time, or any jail time for people at the top....I think that train has left the station but what is on the table now is devastating and is not going away. I think it's safe to say Hillary Clinton's political career is over and done. Its already in the morning papers, though the main stream cable media isn't talking about it yet.

It'll be downplayed (not talked about) by the libs to the extent possible but you can not "not report" this story straight and have any credibility left if you're the press. The only decision by the NYT is to put it on page one or two, above or below the fold.

[lyman]

nothing to see, move along folks,

HEY LOOK!!

China did something,


will be interesting to see what will come of this

[barretcreek]

One more nail in the coffin of the Globalist crowd. It's not just the Durham investigation or the truckers telling Fredeau where to stick it, or the Kiwis playing 'we're not going to take it'. The international social mix has been in the flammable zone for a while. Just waiting for a spark. A very dangerous time because after the fall is when the Jacobins and Bolsheviks emerge. Find your copy of 'Ten Days that Shook the World' and re-read it carefully.

[togor]

Art sure you're not getting out over your skis on this one? Durham has been more sizzle than steak before.

Barretcreek ironic to label as "anti-globalist" protests around the globe that are linked to a remarkable degree. "Contrarian" seems a better term, and contrarians are wrong most of the time!

[togor]

From a Washington Examiner piece:

"Durham's team has charged Sussmann with lying to the FBI when pushing the Alfa Bank claims. Sussmann allegedly told FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016 that he was not working for any particular client despite doing the bidding of Clinton's campaign, billing his services to her, as well as working on behalf of Joffe. Sussmann denies any wrongdoing and has pleaded not guilty. Durham insists Sussmann repeated the lie in 2017."

When this same charge, lying to investigators, was leveled at some in the Trump circle, it was hailed here as proof that the underlying evidence was weak/non-existent. I regard it as a significant charge, but in all cases, innocent until proven guilty.

Also....how serious was the Trump WH about security? Really? This was the "burner or borrowed cell phone" president who kept boxes with top secret docs in his country club storage closet. His greatest comms fear apparently was the official phone logs!

Now if US citizens really were trying to hack the WH, then they should pay. But I really doubt this will turn out to be true. Too far-fetched. More likely Durham is just doing his bit for the misinfo cause on his way out.

[Art]

You're an engineer, I'm not. I don't contradict engineers about engineering, pilots about flying airplanes or rocket scientists about rocket science.

I have vast experience with the Federal Judicial System as a participant in major cases, at least one of which is in the case law books. Been there done that got the T Shirt and the hat. The first time I've blown my horn on that but maybe now its time. Muller never released anything ever saying Trump "colluded with Russia." That was all media speculation. When the report came out there was no "there there." If Durham put in an official report which he did that he has evidence that the Clinton Campaign and the DNC hacked the Trump Campaign Server, and later the White House Servers he has something and you can take that to the Bank. At the minimum this could be a real 'no bueno" the Dems for quite a spell.

People who had nothing...Adam Schiff who actually lied about having something. Michael Avenatti who suborned perjury, All those reporters who blissfully reported that Muller, despite no evidence at all, had something when he wound up with a bunch of "process crimes" that in the end led to very little. I'll tell you about process crime convictions, especially 18 USC 1001, (false statements and writings.) they're a tactic, they mean nothing in the great scheme, they result in something bigger or they don't. We'd used them in cases I worked on a regular basis. If they resulted in something significant (and they usually did) great. If they didn't at least you had a "stat." If a prosecutor doesn't get a conviction for something he has overseen an unsuccessful investigation. 1001 and similar convictions are a fig leaf.

Are you REALLY saying its Trump's fault he was hacked by the DNC because of bad security and that would mitigate something???? Maybe the bad security was due to "collusion" between his staff, some of whom despised him and the DNC. Hmmmm, just maybe.

The simple fact that this is in an official DOJ report is damning politically, even though the 5 year Statue of Limitations has run or is about to run on the major players and a lot of the minor ones. Every day another potential defendant probably slips off the list. Sorry sports fans, Hillary isn't doing time over this, too late. It is going to be used, if the "Rs" don't use it effectively....shame on 'em. Expect a report that will possibly slam a few minor late actors in late 2017-ealy 2019 . Anything else criminal...no joy.

I don't know Durham, but I have worked with guys like him, he seems a stubborn plodder. Stubborn plodders win a lot.

A P.S. If Durham said he has evidence he doesn't have, and said it in an official document, that in itself is a violation of 18 USC 1001. He will have exposed himself to prosecution, knowing how vindictive the left is I'd not risk it.

[lyman]

I did see a blurb somewhere earlier today where they released a report that was previously redacted (cannot remember the news site that went to court to get it, ) that stated that Trump Jr was under some heat for accessing a password protected website, maybe, when he should not have

protected, private password,
that apparently was not ever private before it was opened (opened as in the website went public)


blah blah blah

as in nothing but drama ,

[togor]

Reread my post, Art.

I said I personally took such charges seriously, and that hacking the White House was a big deal. So big, in fact, that I have doubts. Reasonable doubt? We need to see the evidence.

As a veteran of the system, you understand far better than I the subjective nature of a prosecutor's mind, and the latitude they have. You know who points to that in his own defense? Trump himself! He claims every single prosecution or grand jury indictment of his affairs is political with no evidence whatsoever behind it!

So what am I saying? To be clear, I'm saying....follow the law, habeas corpus, let a jury decide. Until then, presumed innocent. Trump, Sussman, whomever.

Now as for WH security under Trump. Sorry but making it "illegal" is not the standard. Not when there are foreign Intel operations all over DC. Fact is, that if some schlub lawyer penetrated Trump's WH security then it is a monumental failing of the Trump WH. Some heists simply are not supposed to be possible. Agree or disagree? But this is why I think there is more sizzle than steak. Make too big a deal about it and it backfires on the Trump WH.

[Art]

Reread my post, Art.

I said I personally took such charges seriously, and that hacking the White House was a big deal. So big, in fact, that I have doubts. Reasonable doubt? We need to see the evidence.

As a veteran of the system, you understand far better than I the subjective nature of a prosecutor's mind, and the latitude they have. You know who points to that in his own defense? Trump himself! He claims every single prosecution or grand jury indictment of his affairs is political with no evidence whatsoever behind it!

So what am I saying? To be clear, I'm saying....follow the law, habeas corpus, let a jury decide. Until then, presumed innocent. Trump, Sussman, whomever.

Now as for WH security under Trump. Sorry but making it "illegal" is not the standard. Not when there are foreign Intel operations all over DC. Fact is, that if some schlub lawyer penetrated Trump's WH security then it is a monumental failing of the Trump WH. Some heists simply are not supposed to be possible. Agree or disagree? But this is why I think there is more sizzle than steak. Make too big a deal about it and it backfires on the Trump WH.

Until there is a final report there is no real resolution. That being said, this is a big deal.

Things will backfire, "Russia Collusion" backfired on the Dems but overall they benefitted. They had the advantage of being able to start digging before Trump was even inaugurated and they didn't really get any evidence of what they would have really needed, nor did they claim to except the Congressional Committees who it turned out were being actively deceptive. They benefitted none the less mostly on long term speculation.

The fact is there is now very, very strong reason to believe something not just highly unethical but criminal happened with the DNC actually penetrating RNC and White House Security to obtain damaging political information political information against opponets including Donald Trump. Durham's report says this tech burglary was paid for with money to a private firm (the ever present "conspirator unnamed within.") So what you would have would be an electronic Watergate and which seems to be equally ineffective long term but very effective short term. However the seriousness of a crime does not always depend on its effectivness. Nixon didn't get anything of much actual political value from the Watergate job IIRC.

There may not be sufficient useable (remember the "Statute") evidence to indict folks at the top or mid level, but the final report will determine if such an act actually happened and this interim strongly indicates that. Damage will go up or down to the Dems but my somewhat educated opinion shows there to be some, and it will be significant, and remember, the "Rs" will al certainly have the power of the subpoena in Congress next year.
As to the sizzle, I believe there is already more than "Russia Gate."

If Trump runs again, especially against Hillary Clinton he will have that section of report with him, and refer to it regularly and with gusto.

[togor]

Art,

Do you really believe Russia wasn't trying to help Trump win and Hillary lose?

Note I am NOT asking you if there was active coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian intel services.

I'm asking you if you believe Russia was acting to the benefit of the Trump campaign, and the detriment of the Clinton campaign.

[rayg]

Have you ever met someone who just keeps talking about one thing and another! Some call them motor mouths! I am

not referring to Art's great posts,,,

[Art]

Art,

Do you really believe Russia wasn't trying to help Trump win and Hillary lose?

Note I am NOT asking you if there was active coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian intel services.

I'm asking you if you believe Russia was acting to the benefit of the Trump campaign, and the detriment of the Clinton campaign.

I didn't say that. I just didn't believe Trump was a participant in such a scheme, and that has been vindicated. I do know that the Russians were interfering but I also know the blow up hurt Trump more. I also know that when it was said and done Trump was harder on the Russians than Obama or Biden. The whole thing actually probably was a wash historically, but I edge slightly to the Russians preferring Trump over simply creating chaos. To the extent the aftermath hurt Trump, the Rooskies investment was worth it.

[Art]

Note on election interference. Stuff happens all the time, remember when Barak Obama sent his political team to Israel to help defeat Netanyahu. Now that was collusion and interference. Didn't work either.