Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, May 31, 2022

A federal jury delivered a major setback to special counsel John Durham on Tuesday, acquitting well-connected lawyer Michael Sussmann on a charge that he lied to the FBI in 2016 ...



Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Now THAT was a hoax!

#1 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-05-31 12:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Poor Jeff. He was sure that this would be a slam dunk. Jeff loses again.

#2 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-05-31 12:28 PM | Reply


The jury ultimately rejected those claims, apparently swayed by the argument from Sussmann's lawyer, Sean Berkowitz, who said the prosecution was trying to turn a brief 30-minute meeting more than five years ago into a "giant political conspiracy theory."

Jurors were tasked with answering a fairly simple legal and factual question " whether Sussmann lied about his client and whether that lie was relevant to the FBI investigation. Prosecutors argued Sussmann's lie was just one part of a larger scheme by Clinton loyalists to use the FBI and news reporters to launch a damaging, last-minute revelation against Trump that would tip the election to Clinton.

What a hoax!

#3 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-05-31 12:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Just another Republican hoax.


#4 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-05-31 12:46 PM | Reply

Now it's time to investigate the investigator of the investigators of the Russia/Trump investigations, right?

Looks like malicious prosecution to me based on possible fraudulent manipulation of evidence and testimony.

Bring it on!

#5 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-05-31 01:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

On the Special Counsel's Weird Prosecution of Michael Sussmann (September 20, 2021)

...Attorney General William Barr appointed John Durham, lo these increasingly-many years ago, to investigate a supposed scandal inside the FBI: There had been an attempted coup, President Trump alleged, and Barr himself hinted that there had been an effort spuriously to investigate a candidate for president. The FBI counterintelligence investigation of figures surrounding Donald Trump, the attorney general warned darkly, may have begun earlier than the FBI said it did. It may not have been properly predicated. There may have been other agencies involved.

Durham himself at times lent his solid reputation as a career prosecutor to such fantasies. When the Justice Department's inspector general found that the investigation of L'Affaire Russe had been properly predicated and had, in fact, begun when the FBI always said it had, Durham publicly questioned the judgment. He also has taken a mind-bogglingly long time to complete his as-yet almost-wholly unproductive investigation, which has gone on longer than the Mueller investigation itself, building up expectations among many Trump supporters that Durham was going to deliver the goods.

And until this week, Durham's investigation had added exactly zero new facts to the public's understanding of the FBI's handling of the Russia matters. The only case he had brought"against a low-level FBI lawyer for altering a document in connection with a surveillance application"was entirely derivative of facts developed by the inspector general. Durham had, beyond that one case, issued no findings or reports and had charged nobody with anything. He had merely existed and, by existing, allowed expectations and conspiracy theories to swirl around him.

But now Durham has spoken on his own. He has indicted a cybersecurity lawyer named Michael Sussmann for allegedly making a single false statement in a conversation in 2016 with then-FBI General Counsel Jim Baker. The allegedly false statement concerned not Trump or Russia, but whom Sussmann represented when he brought Baker some information about an alleged electronic connection between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank. (Disclosure: Baker is a personal friend and former colleague at Brookings and Lawfare.)

The indictment is, in other words, far removed from the grave FBI misconduct Durham was supposed to reveal. Very far removed. In fact, it doesn't describe FBI malfeasance against Trump at all, but portrays the FBI as the victim of agitprop brought to it by outside political operatives. It describes the FBI as diligently running down the leads it had been fed by these operatives and then, well, dropping the matter when it learned they had no merit. The misconduct it portrays is an alleged lie by Sussmann that is, at best, wholly peripheral to the substance of the allegations Durham was supposedly peddling.

Even taken on its own terms, the document is one of the very weakest federal criminal indictments I have ever seen in more than 25 years covering federal investigations and prosecutions. ...

[emphasis mine]

#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-05-31 01:47 PM | Reply

Durham's probe has run more than a year longer than Mueller's original probe he was allegedly investigating. He managed to come up with two weak ass cases the first of which was just laughed out of court.

#7 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2022-05-31 02:07 PM | Reply

laughed out of court.

That's what I call a Republican special.

#8 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-05-31 02:10 PM | Reply

First, Hunter's laptop goes no where.
Now this goes nowhere.

It almost sounds like Benghazi all over again.

Republicans will still believe the grand conspiracy though because Republicans are dumb enough to believe anything they want.

#9 | Posted by Sycophant at 2022-05-31 02:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Repubs whine about political prosecutions... unless it's them doing the prosecuting.

This is yet another, "But, Hillary!" meme gone down the tubes.

#10 | Posted by Corky at 2022-05-31 02:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 5

Jeffyjbellberly and the National Review are looking for their pacifier and scrabbling to erase their miserably wrong predictions of guilt

#11 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2022-05-31 02:50 PM | Reply

This was the "star case" of Durham's 3+ year, multimillion tax dollar fiasco where over 95 percent of all such Fed cases end in convictions.

Donald must be eating metal plates right about now.

#12 | Posted by Corky at 2022-05-31 03:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Durham's BS investigation found absolutely NOHING, so to satisfy Reichwing media he rush filed this BS indictment against a Clinton ally before the statute of limitations ran and it turned into donut. Durham should be investigated and indicted himself, I hope Sussmann sues for malicious prosecution.

#13 | Posted by _Gunslinger_ at 2022-05-31 03:18 PM | Reply

Next up, jury exonerates Hunter's laptop of crashing while RudyG was installing fake data.

Proclaims user error.

#14 | Posted by Corky at 2022-05-31 03:22 PM | Reply

Durham's probe has gone on more than a year longer than the Mueller probe it was purportedly investigating. And it's biggest "get" was this absurd indictment that was ignominiously tossed this afternoon. This was never a true investigation or prosecution. It was always a political assignment created by Bill Barr for the benefit of Donald Trump. Corrupt from the first moment, fruit of the poison tree.
What he said.

It's beyond absurd that a criminal investigation of those who investigated the nexus between a hostile foreign government's disinformation operation and those associated and leading one of our two major party's domestic presidential campaign has now lasted a year longer than the predicate investigation - especially when multiple governmental entities have all reached the conclusion that there was both connected conduct and activities between both parties in service of Donald Trump's election campaign.

#15 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-05-31 03:54 PM | Reply

Jurors deliberated for six hours, spread over two days, before delivering the unanimous verdict to a courtroom filled with the defendant's family and members of the news media.

The jury forewoman, who did not give her name, told reporters outside the courthouse that "I think we could have spent our time more wisely."

"It didn't pan out in the government's favor and that's on them," she also said.

How often do you hear a jury foreperson publicly criticize the prosecution after a trial? But here we are ... with Durham's 3 year Dung-fest. Bon appetit!

#16 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-05-31 04:28 PM | Reply

$2.3 Million down the sh#tter. Thanks, Republicants!

#17 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-05-31 04:40 PM | Reply

And how much of the taxpayer's money was wasted on this 'witch hunt'?


#18 | Posted by OCUser at 2022-05-31 04:41 PM | Reply

@#16 ... And how much of the taxpayer's money was wasted on this 'witch hunt'? ...

Was wasted? Or has been, and is still being, wasted?

The Sussman case was supposed to be Special Counsel Durham's big achievement so far in his three years of investigating.

#19 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-05-31 06:45 PM | Reply

If that's the best Durham could come up with in this amount of time, all I can say is WEAK!

#20 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-05-31 07:42 PM | Reply

The only people more pathetic than those with faith in Merrick Garland are those with faith in John Durham.

#21 | Posted by JOE at 2022-05-31 07:53 PM | Reply

@#18 ... If that's the best Durham could come up with in this amount of time, all I can say is WEAK! ...

I wouldn't even give him that much credit.

Because the appellation of "WEAK" implies he had a valid goal and had trouble attaining that goal.

I had always doubted he had a valid goal, especially when fmr AG Barr said that SC Durham would wrap up his investigation right before the 2020 election. The investigation and its timing seemed to have been chosen for political effect.

But this case's outcome has all but confirmed my initial impression of SC Durham's investigation reason for being.

#22 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-05-31 07:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's quite the list and includes everyone from James Comey to Hillary Clinton to former President Barack Obama:

Like, here's the list of government officials Fox News hoped would be investigated/arrested/jailed under the "investigate the investigators" rubric. They got... a failed charge against a lawyer no one had ever heard of.

#23 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-05-31 07:58 PM | Reply

Q informed me that Sussman must he acquitted now in order to be found super mega guilty later. Trust the plan.

#24 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-05-31 08:27 PM | Reply

As if the SC Durham harassment were not enough...

GOP plots '23 probes

...Top Republican congressional aides huddled this month with conservative think-tank leaders on Maryland's Eastern Shore to hone tactics and messaging for Biden administration probes, Axios has learned.

Why it matters: If the GOP wins control in the midterms, leaders want to kick off high-profile investigations as soon as the new Congress is seated. Republicans plan to draw on investigative power from allies across Washington.

Details: The retreat was hosted by the Heritage Foundation, the Conservative Partnership Institute and the American Accountability Foundation, a nonprofit run by Trump administration alumni that's dogged Biden nominees with independent investigative work....

Oh, great. More vacuous Benghazi style investigations.

#25 | Posted by LampLighter at 2022-05-31 09:19 PM | Reply

We don't often get to see such an 'in your face' rejection of GOP -------.

#26 | Posted by moder8 at 2022-06-01 01:49 AM | Reply

Speaking of debunking Right-wing myths, here's another one that we can put to rest:

Michael Flynn's Identity Was Not Improperly Revealed By Obama Officials, Secret DOJ Report Finds

The 52-page document was obtained by BuzzFeed News in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.


#27 | Posted by OCUser at 2022-06-01 09:36 AM | Reply

...Durham's 3+ year, multimillion tax dollar fiasco...


3.8 million so far. I don't know what he's worth in private practice, but it appears that so long as he can keep milking this special investigation, he's winning.

#28 | Posted by El_Buscador at 2022-06-01 09:52 AM | Reply

I don't know why anyone listens to Sean Hannity

#29 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2022-06-01 10:25 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Gotta love the deflections by the GQP: biased jury, all of them! No Republicans exist in D.C.!
All potential jury members hated Trump in advance! et cetera
Just like the Big Lie, the outcome they don't like can't possible be based in law interpreted by a judge and jury of their peers.

#30 | Posted by e1g1 at 2022-06-01 11:02 AM | Reply

It's the judge!
It's the jury!

- - the party of "personal responsibility"

#31 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2022-06-01 11:07 AM | Reply

This was the "star case" of Durham's 3+ year, multimillion tax dollar fiasco where over 95 percent of all such Fed cases end in convictions.
Donald must be eating metal plates right about now.
#12 | POSTED BY CORKY AT 2022-05-31 03:16 PM | FLAG:

And the 41 million 3 year Mueller investigation based on a false pee tape got you where? It got Biden elected so for you it was successful.

#32 | Posted by fishpaw at 2022-06-01 11:20 AM | Reply

"It's the judge! It's the jury!"

"You had no right to discover my wrongs!!!"

#33 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-01 11:24 AM | Reply

"And the 41 million 3 year Mueller investigation based on a false pee tape"

No, based on Team Trump violating the FBI's warning about possible Russian interference, to the point where they still contacted Russians over 100 times while lying about it to the American people.

What reality did YOU live through?

#34 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-06-01 11:29 AM | Reply

It got Biden elected so for you it was successful.


The laziness, incompetence, greed, and shear evil of Trump got Biden elected.

#35 | Posted by Zed at 2022-06-01 11:30 AM | Reply

- Mueller investigation based on a false pee tape got you where?


"Russiagate Was Not a Hoax
The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence confirmed what the Mueller report could not.

The committee fills in the gaps somewhat. It reports that Manafort and Kilimnik talked almost daily during the campaign. They communicated through encrypted technologies set to automatically erase their correspondence; they spoke using code words and shared access to an email account.

It's worth pausing on these facts: The chairman of the Trump campaign was in daily contact with a Russian agent, constantly sharing confidential information with him. That alone makes for one of the worst scandals in American political history."

But hey, you've been told this all before many times over.... but your man-crush on Donald will, apparently, never die.

#36 | Posted by Corky at 2022-06-01 11:59 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Durham got this sucker to trial. This is a huge win for the con men. It shows how far you can get on flimsy evidence, sets that as a milestone. More to come...

#37 | Posted by chuffy at 2022-06-01 04:44 PM | Reply

And the 41 million 3 year Mueller investigation based on a false pee tape got you where? It got Biden elected so for you it was successful.

#32 | Posted by fishpaw

The mueller investigation was based on many things. Including trump inexplicably hiring the same guy who had installed putin puppets in governments across europe to run his campaign. Why'd he pick that guy? WHy was he sharing trump's polling data with putin?

You'll run away and not answer.

#38 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-06-01 05:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

All Republicants are lying cowards.

#39 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-06-01 08:32 PM | Reply

It got Biden elected so for you it was successful.


Biden got Biden elected. The report helped Trumpy get Trumpy impeached.


Maybe you with all your whining and lying and attempts to overturn the election you missed it.


#40 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-06-01 11:04 PM | Reply

Just a reminder to all those Trump supporters, Biden won a POTUS election from his basement.

IOW, Trump lost to a geriatric, dementia riddled Biden while he campaigned from his COVID free basement while Trump got himself and many others around him infected, almost costing his life.

Trump lost and had only he conceded the election, just like every other losing POTUS candidate in history, Ashli Babbitt would still be alive.

Yet you fnkcs willfully ignore that fact. Why is that? Don't you recognize blood on an a wanna-be oligarch's hands when you see it?!

#41 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-06-02 01:28 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Once again, Hillary Clinton is TOTALLY EXONARATED!

#42 | Posted by bored at 2022-06-02 02:40 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable

Drudge Retort