HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Durham Is Said to Seek In...

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:25 PM

Durham Is Said to Seek Indictment of Lawyer at Firm With Democratic Ties

Source: New York Times

The lawyer, Michael Sussmann, is accused of lying to the F.B.I. in a 2016 meeting about Trump and Russia. He denies wrongdoing.

WASHINGTON — John H. Durham, the special counsel appointed by the Trump administration to scrutinize the Russia investigation, has told the Justice Department that he will ask a grand jury to indict a prominent cybersecurity lawyer on a charge of making a false statement to the F.B.I., people familiar with the matter said.

Any indictment of the lawyer — Michael Sussmann, a former federal prosecutor and now a partner at the Perkins Coie law firm, and who represented the Democratic National Committee on issues related to Russia’s 2016 hacking of its servers — is likely to attract significant political attention.

Donald J. Trump and his supporters have long accused Democrats and Perkins Coie — whose political law group, a division separate from Mr. Sussmann’s, represented the party and the Hillary Clinton campaign — of seeking to stoke unfair suspicions about Mr. Trump’s purported ties to Russia.

The case against Mr. Sussmann centers on the question of who his client was when he conveyed certain suspicions about Mr. Trump and Russia to the F.B.I. in September 2016. Among other things, investigators have examined whether Mr. Sussmann was secretly working for the Clinton campaign — which he denies.

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/15/us/politics/durham-michael-sussmann-trump-russia.html

49 replies, 3091 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 49 replies Author Time Post
Reply Durham Is Said to Seek Indictment of Lawyer at Firm With Democratic Ties (Original post)
Zorro Sep 15 OP
msongs Sep 15 #1
Alien Life Form Sep 15 #6
Comfortably_Numb Sep 15 #8
dem4decades Sep 15 #16
PatSeg Sep 16 #37
Comfortably_Numb Sep 16 #38
PatSeg Sep 16 #40
Comfortably_Numb Sep 16 #41
PatSeg Sep 16 #42
Comfortably_Numb Sep 16 #43
PatSeg Sep 16 #45
Comfortably_Numb Sep 16 #46
PatSeg Sep 16 #47
Corgigal Sep 15 #2
JohnSJ Sep 15 #3
SheltieLover Sep 15 #4
AZSkiffyGeek Sep 15 #5
JohnSJ Sep 15 #11
monkeyman1 Sep 15 #21
Celerity Sep 15 #25
Ford_Prefect Sep 15 #27
monkeyman1 Sep 15 #28
JohnSJ Sep 15 #29
joetheman Sep 15 #14
JohnSJ Sep 15 #17
onecaliberal Sep 15 #7
JohnSJ Sep 15 #13
onecaliberal Sep 15 #22
monkeyman1 Sep 15 #30
JohnSJ Sep 15 #31
monkeyman1 Sep 16 #32
JohnSJ Sep 16 #34
monkeyman1 Sep 16 #35
JohnSJ Sep 16 #36
Dawson Leery Sep 15 #9
gab13by13 Sep 15 #10
Chin music Sep 15 #12
onecaliberal Sep 15 #23
Chin music Sep 15 #24
LineLineLineLineReply :
onecaliberal Sep 15 #26
BlueIdaho Sep 15 #15
Chin music Sep 15 #18
JohnSJ Sep 15 #19
Chin music Sep 15 #20
former9thward Sep 16 #33
gab13by13 Sep 16 #39
BlueIdaho Sep 16 #44
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Sep 16 #48
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Sep 16 #49

Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:29 PM

1. rachel is talking to herself about this. some day she may actually get to the point nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:33 PM

6. I thought the same thing..on and on and on

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #1)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:36 PM

8. It's why I had to give up watching her. I know "different stokes" and I respect that.

I just cannot listen to the same ol’ phrase or fact repeated 19 times in a soliloquy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comfortably_Numb (Reply #8)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:05 PM

16. She could do her show in 30 minutes, with commercials, I agree, I can't watch either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #1)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 03:35 AM

37. It is so frustrating

I rarely watch her anymore. She literally repeats the same phrases over and over again. I have actually skipped forward numerous times while watching her and it still feels like it takes forever. I start to long for a commercial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatSeg (Reply #37)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 05:41 AM

38. You nailed it... press skip and STILL land on the same word/phrase, repeat and same thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comfortably_Numb (Reply #38)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 09:00 AM

40. Yeah, as if I'd accidentally hit rewind

Too often it feels like she uses a lot of filler words to expand a five or ten minute segment into 20 or 30 minutes. I lead a fairly dull life, but I really do have better things to do than listen to the same thing repeated over and over again. Plus it insults my intelligence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatSeg (Reply #40)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 09:10 AM

41. I can't believe we have had this convo without the "turn the channel", etc flames.

The shame is she does tackle stories that interest me, but then the repetition overwhelms me. I played a “count the number of times she says the same thing” out loud and my wife was even amazed at how high the count went….it’s like “how to use 11 minutes of original content to fill a 21 minute block.” Sorry, not sorry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comfortably_Numb (Reply #41)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 10:42 AM

42. Oh my, I feel like I'm talking to myself

If it had been just once and awhile, I wouldn't have paid that much attention, but more and more it was happening pretty much every night.

I agree, there have been stories I was and still am interested in, but 20 to 30 minutes of meandering and repetition is just too much. This sort of approach probably works very well in a high school or college classroom, but not on a news show. It is also commonly used on news magazine shows like Dateline, where they stretch a 30 minute story into one hour.

As for the "turn the channel" folks, obviously that is what we are doing. Still I feel like it is a loss, as there was a time when I really enjoyed Rachel's show, a time when there was less repetition, giggling, and animated hand gestures. Sometimes, I really want a professional, polished delivery, plus some actual news. The rest of the time, I can watch Stephen Colbert or Seth Meyers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatSeg (Reply #42)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 11:04 AM

43. I feel the same. 30 plus years teaching in a university classroom, and I can assure you, if I tried

that “repetition” style I would have lost most of those folks within minutes. I always try to make the point one time clearly, and then maybe BRIEFLY touch on it for context through the class. And you called it, the giggling and histrionics are insufferable. It’s Chris Hayes, Brianna Keiler, and Nicole Wallace for me. It doesn’t matter how important your topic, if your delivery alienates your listeners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comfortably_Numb (Reply #43)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 12:22 PM

45. Yes, the attention span of young people

is a fleeting thing. I can imagine it can be hard to hold it for very long.

I believe it is important that a journalist or host's appearance and delivery should not distract from what they are actually saying. Not only is the giggling unprofessional, I've found it is often at the most inappropriate times. The first time it jumped out at me was election night 2016, when the networks were about to call the election for Trump. Rachel laughed and at that moment I thought I might not be able to watch her again. I later forgave her, thinking it was just a nervous laugh, but still a little more self control on such an important occasion is not too much to ask of such a highly regarded news host. The viewers were devastated, many in tears. It was no time for laughter.

Over time, I found her doing it more and more, as if she was hosting a late night talk show, not a news show. I don't watch MSNBC to be entertained, I watch it to be informed.

I watch less cable news these days, but I usually try to catch Brian Williams. His delivery is practically flawless, his occasional dry wit priceless, and he never waves his arms about or giggles. Sometimes I watch Chris Hayes or Lawrence O'Donnell and if it is daytime, no one tops Nicole Wallace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PatSeg (Reply #45)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 12:31 PM

46. Ditto. Everything you said. Inappropriate laughter is just that-inappropriate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comfortably_Numb (Reply #46)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 01:02 PM

47. We made it this far and not one "turn the channel" flame!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:31 PM

2. Someone

wants to keep the Federal money vein open.

Just tell him to stop. We have hurricane and fire storm victims to assist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:31 PM

3. Why are trump hold overs like Durham still in the DOJ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #3)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:32 PM

4. My 1st thought!



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #3)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:33 PM

5. I think it's because he's a special counsel

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AZSkiffyGeek (Reply #5)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:45 PM

11. So. Garland could let him go. This is a fishing exhibition seeking an indictment for allegedly

Lying to the FBI

It is a gift o conspiracy kooks to imply Clinton was somehow involved in falsely accusing trump of Russian connections




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #11)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:28 PM

21. hell , the whole damn republican taliban lie , how can ya's tell the difference !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #11)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:37 PM

25. here are statutes covering removal

https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-28/chapter-VI/part-600

The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Celerity (Reply #25)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:50 PM

27. I believe conflict of interest would do it, not to mention unprofessional behavior.

False accusation and misrepresenting evidence is quite unprofessional enough.

Or the old favorite "he fell down a flight of stairs" could work... Sauce for the gander too, they say. Incapacitated by serious injury works for me. Durham is a nasty piece of work: a hammer in search of a nail. I imagine that his email and phone logs would make for very interesting reading.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #11)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 11:25 PM

28. WHY IS THIS BIILY BARR POS STILL AROUND ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monkeyman1 (Reply #28)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 11:33 PM

29. Because they need cause. I suspect a conflict of interest with Durham, and his connections to

the previous administration

That he filed this two days before the statue of limitations expires is suspicious indeed, and implies he wants to keep this going indefinitely

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #3)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:57 PM

14. Why does the MSM still cover their antics? And why do we post about them? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joetheman (Reply #14)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:12 PM

17. Ask The NY Times. Even the headline the times decided to use wants to imply Clinton involvement

without any evidence

They did so well with the email lie, er, story


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:36 PM

7. What the hell are all of these Trump people still doing in office.

Self inflicted nothing-burger as usual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onecaliberal (Reply #7)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:47 PM

13. Very disappointed in Garland for not cleaning house

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #13)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:35 PM

22. We cannot allow them to be left behind. They're just waiting

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #13)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 11:44 PM

30. why !

would you like to be thrown in this mess & this short of time make a judgement call like this ! just short of nine month's & this mess billy barr left for the D.O.J. ! nobody is a damn miracle worker . give the man a break & back him . Jeeze , arm chair lawyers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monkeyman1 (Reply #30)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 11:49 PM

31. I am not a lawyer, I am watching our republic slowly going down the drain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #31)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 12:50 AM

32. that answer doesn't even deserve a reply !

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monkeyman1 (Reply #32)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 01:16 AM

34. Lol, you just did

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #34)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 01:33 AM

35. shit !!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to monkeyman1 (Reply #35)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 01:39 AM

36. ..............................

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:40 PM

9. Why are Trump tools still in office?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 09:42 PM

10. Based on the information released so far,

this is a big nothingburger. Merrick Garland had the authority to dismiss this, but declined.

Based on what Barbara McQuade on Rachel said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)


Response to Chin music (Reply #12)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:36 PM

23. So much that. 👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻👆🏻

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onecaliberal (Reply #23)


Response to Chin music (Reply #24)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:38 PM

26. :

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:04 PM

15. Statute of Limitations for this case

Runs out this weekend. This is a Hail Mary attempt to file something… anything… before that Bozo Durham loses his Special Council standing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueIdaho (Reply #15)


Response to BlueIdaho (Reply #15)

Wed Sep 15, 2021, 10:14 PM

19. Yes, and why Garland should have let him go when he came on board

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #19)


Response to JohnSJ (Reply #19)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 01:04 AM

33. Durham is a career DOJ prosecutor.

He has been there for 38 years. He is not going anywhere until he decides to go. The AG does not have the power to "let go" career employees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 06:34 AM

39. The thing is,

no attention is being paid to why Putin's bank was apparently communicating with Trump Tower?

So what if Hillary was the client, what difference does that make? I want to know about Trump's server.

Democrats are terrible at controlling the narrative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gab13by13 (Reply #39)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 11:47 AM

44. This is the great unanswered question

While everyone is distracted by the bright shiny object, the Trump/Putin/AlfaBank connection gets swept under the carpet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 01:06 PM

48. Jackass trying to justify his existence

He'll spend a lot of money and won't get a conviction.

Oh and BTW Durham, your goatee looks like a patch of pubic hair.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorro (Original post)

Thu Sep 16, 2021, 07:33 PM

49. Attorney indicted on charge of lying to FBI as part of Durham investigation

A federal grand jury on Thursday indicted attorney Michael Sussman on a charge of lying to the FBI during the 2016 campaign, marking the second prosecution brought by John Durham, the special counsel tapped by former President Trump to investigate the FBI's probe into Russian interference.

The indictment alleges that Sussman, an attorney at the firm Perkins Coie with ties to the Democratic Party, misrepresented who he was working for when he presented evidence to the FBI in 2016 of a link between the Trump Organization and the Russian financial company Alfa Bank.

-snip-

Two attorneys representing Sussman did not immediately respond when asked for comment, but issued a statement earlier Thursday in anticipation of the indictment.

"Michael Sussmann is a highly respected national security and cyber security lawyer, who served the U.S. Department of Justice during Democratic and Republican administrations alike," attorney Michael Bosworth and Sean Berkowitz said in the statement. "Mr. Sussmann has committed no crime. Any prosecution here would be baseless, unprecedented, and an unwarranted deviation from the apolitical and principled way in which the Department of Justice is supposed to do its work. We are confident that if Mr. Sussmann is charged, he will prevail at trial and vindicate his good name."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/attorney-indicted-on-charge-of-lying-to-fbi-as-part-of-durham-investigation/ar-AAOwzvd

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread