Senators Urge Attorney General Not to Interfere With Durham Investigation
By Zachary Stieber
February 17, 2022Updated: February 17, 2022
Forty-six senators are urging Attorney General Merrick Garland not to interfere with Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the counterintelligence probe of Donald Trump’s campaign.
Durham is investigating the error-riddled probe that plagued former President Trump for years. The investigation has led to a former FBI lawyer pleading guilty to manipulating a key email regarding a former Trump campaign associate and charges against Russian analyst Igor Danchenko and former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman.
In his latest filing, Durham revealed that the White House and Trump’s residences were surveilled while he was in office.
As Durham continues his work, Garland should respect his independence and make sure he has all the resources he needs, Sens. John Kennedy (R-La.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and nearly the rest of the Republican caucus in the upper chamber said in a letter (pdf) dated Feb. 16.
“As you are aware, Special Counsel Durham continues to uncover alarming information related to the origins of the FBI investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Those findings include the highly concerning, and potentially criminal, manipulation and exploitation of federal law enforcement resources to target American citizens, including a presidential candidate, based upon fabricated evidence that had been procured and disseminated by individuals closely connected with a rival political campaign,” the senators wrote.
“The fraudulent abuse of the FBI’s investigative powers by those malign actors has left a dark stain on the reputation and credibility of the nation’s premier law enforcement agency. We hope you agree that those responsible for that manipulation and exploitation must be identified and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law by Special Counsel Durham. We further expect you will support his important work until all those responsible for the fraud committed upon the American people are brought to justice.”
A request for comment from Garland wasn’t returned.
The only Senate Republicans who didn’t sign the letter were Sens. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).
Durham was a U.S. attorney when he was tapped by William Barr, the attorney general under Trump. Durham resigned from the U.S. attorney position in February but maintained the special counsel role.
When being considered by senators, Garland, nominated by President Joe Biden, told them that he saw “no reason” that Durham shouldn’t be allowed to continue to probe into the botched FBI investigation.
“I don’t have any reason, from what I know now, which is really very little, to make any determination on that ground,” he said at the time. “But I have no reason to think he should not remain in place.”
In October 2021, Garland was asked during a separate hearing whether he would commit to letting the Durham investigation proceed free from political influence.
Garland said Durham’s budget was approved and that “you would know if he weren’t continuing to do his work.”
“I’m not determining what he’s investigating,” Garland added.
Hillary Clinton Responds to John Durham Court Filing
By Jack Phillips
February 16, 2022Updated: February 17, 2022
Former presidential candidate Hilary Clinton on Wednesday denied claims that her 2016 campaign spied on former President Donald Trump following a court filing submitted last week by special prosecutor John Durham.
In a Twitter post, the longtime Democrat wrote that “Trump & Fox are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from his real ones. So it’s a day that ends in Y.” She added, “The more his misdeeds are exposed, the more they lie.”
On Feb. 12, Durham wrote that a technology executive who was allegedly aligned with the Democrat Party and the Clinton campaign spied on Trump’s residences and the White House when he was president.
That filing was made in connection to Durham’s case against Michael Sussmann, a lawyer who worked on behalf of the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee in 2016. Durham’s team alleged that Sussmann lied to the FBI when he told the bureau that he wasn’t working for any client when he provided false documents that claimed to have linked the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.
Sussmann, the filing said, “assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign,” according to the filing. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty, and his lawyers on Monday said the filing included “prejudicial—and false—allegations” against their client.
The tech executive, identified in reports as Rodney Joffe, also “tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia,” the filing said, adding that the Joffe’s employer “had come to access and maintain dedicated servers” for Trump’s executive office.
Through a spokesperson, Joffe told news outlets this week that he is an “apolitical Internet security expert” and “legally provided access to DNS data obtained from a private client that separately was providing DNS services to the Executive Office of the President (EOP).”
Over the past weekend, in response to Durham’s court filing, Trump issued a statement saying the development vindicates his longtime claims that the Democrats and corporate news outlets unfairly and falsely linked his campaign to Russia.
“It shows how totally corrupt and shameless the media is,” Trump said in the statement. “Can you imagine if the roles were reversed and the Republicans, in particular President Donald Trump, got caught illegally spying into the Office of the President?”
He added: “All hell would break loose and the electric chair would immediately come out of retirement. The good news is, everybody is talking about not only this atrocity against our Nation, but that the press refuses to even mention the major crime that took place.”
On Monday, a White House spokesperson declined to comment on Durham’s findings.
“That’s something I can’t speak to from this podium, so I refer you to the Department of Justice,” White House deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters.
White House, Hillary Clinton Decline to Comment on Durham Allegations
By Katabella Roberts
February 16, 2022Updated: February 16, 2022
A White House spokesperson on Monday declined to comment on Special counsel John Durham’s allegations that Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) spied on former President Donald Trump’s residences and the White House when he was in office in order to bring a “narrative” to federal government agencies linking him to Russia.
Deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked three times at a press briefing by Fox News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich to answer questions regarding the allegations.
But each time, the White House spokesperson referred her to the Department of Justice.
“Does the President have any concerns about a candidate for president using computer experts to infiltrate computer systems of competing candidates, or even the president-elect to—for the goal of creating a narrative?” Heinrich asked.
“That’s something I can’t speak to from this podium, so I refer you to the Department of Justice,” Jean-Pierre initially answered.
“Is what’s being described in that report—monitoring internet traffic—is that spying?” Heinrich then asked, to which Jean-Pierre responded, “Again, I can’t speak to that report. I refer you to the Department of Justice.”
Trying again to get an answer, Heinrich continued, “Generally speaking though, would monitoring Internet traffic be—” but was cut-off mid-sentence by Jean-Pierre who replied, “Jacqui, my answer is not going to change. I refer you to the Department of Justice.”
The Epoch Times has contacted The Department of Justice for comment.
Meanwhile, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton refused to answer questions regarding the alleged spying when asked by a Daily Mail reporter on Feb. 15.
Did you pay to spy on the Trump campaign,” Hillary was asked by the reporter in New York City. “When are you going to comment on the spying allegations, Hillary?”
Clinton declined to answer both questions and continued walking while waving at the reporter.
Special counsel John Durham’s team alleged in a court filing (pdf) on Feb. 12 that a tech executive aligned with the Democratic Party spied on Trump’s residences and the White House when he was president.
Durham’s team alleged that Michael Sussmann, a lawyer who had worked on behalf of the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, had “assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign,” according to a section in the court filing, titled “Factual Background.”
Billing records he obtained reflect that Sussmann “repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations.”
Sussmann is currently charged with making a false statement to the FBI when he gave the agency false documents that allegedly linked the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.
He has pleaded not guilty and is scheduled to go to trial in May.
“In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data,” the filing stated. “Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract.”
The executive also “tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia,” the filing states, adding that the executive’s employer “had come to access and maintain dedicated servers” for Trump’s executive office.
The technology executive was not named in the filing.
Lawyers for Sussman, in response to the Durham filing, said on Feb. 14 that the motion included “prejudicial—and false—allegations that are irrelevant to his motion and to the charged offense, and are plainly intended to politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool.”
They also argued that the information that Sussmann provided to federal government agencies related to the Executive Office of the President concerned the time period when Democrat Barack Obama was still president, not Trump.
Trump also issued a statement regarding the unsealed filing, stating on Feb. 12 that it “provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection.”
Trump has continuously denied that he had any business interests in Russia or colluded with Russian officials during the 2016 election and asserts he is the target of a witch hunt.
Katabella Roberts is a reporter currently based in Turkey. She covers news and business for The Epoch Times, focusing primarily on the United States.
The New York Times and Washington Post are among the first establishment media outlets to report on the allegations against Hillary’s campaign associates, though the reporting came at least three days after the news first broke. CNN reported the court filings Tuesday morning.
MSNBC, NBC, ABC, and CBS news channels have ignored the recent revelations, according to Fox News.
The Act of 1871: The “United States” Is a Corporation – There are Two Constitutions
(POPEYE) Since the Act of 1871 which established the District of Columbia, we have been living under the UNITED STATES CORPORATION which is owned by certain international bankers and aristocracy of Europe and Britain.
In 1871 the Congress changed the name of the original Constitution by changing ONE WORD — and that was very significant as you will read.
Some people do not understand that ONE WORD or TWO WORDS difference in any “legal” document DO make the critical difference. But, Congress has known, and does know, this.
1871, February 21: Congress Passes an Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia, also known as the Act of 1871.
With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress creates a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, a ten mile square parcel of land (see, Acts of the Forty-first Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).
The act — passed when the country was weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War — was a strategic move by foreign interests (international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the coffers and neck of America.
Congress cut a deal with the international bankers (specifically Rothschilds of London) to incur a DEBT to said bankers. Because the bankers were not about to lend money to a floundering nation without serious stipulations, they devised a way to get their foot in the door of the United States.
The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. The corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved in and shoved the original Constitution into a dustbin. With the Act of 1871, the organic Constitution was defaced — in effect vandalized and sabotage — when the title was capitalized and the word “for” was changed to “of” in the title.
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is the constitution of the incorporated UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
It operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it governs the Republic. It does is not!
Capitalization is NOT insignificant when one is referring to a legal document. This seemingly “minor” alteration has had a major impact on every subsequent generation of Americans.
What Congress did by passing the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia, an INCORPORATED government. This newly altered Constitution was not intended to benefit the Republic. It benefits only the corporation of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and operates entirely outside the original (organic) Constitution.
Instead of having absolute and unalienable rights guaranteed under the organic Constitution, we the people now have “relative” rights or privileges. One example is the Sovereign’s right to travel, which has now been transformed (under corporate government policy) into a “privilege” that requires citizens to be licensed.
By passing the Act of 1871, Congress committed TREASON against the People who were Sovereign under the grants and decrees of the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution.
The Act of 1871 became the FOUNDATION of all the treason since committed by government officials.
Which performers/celebs supported HRC during the 2016 election?
Katy Perry, Lady GAGA, Madonna, Beyonce, Jay Z, Amy Schumer, Miley Cyrus Julianne Moore, Elton John, Jamie Foxx, Olivia Wilde, Adele, Steven Spielberg, Drew Barrymore, Kerry Washington, Ellen Degeneres, Eva Longoria, Robert De Niro https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/celebrities-who-support-hillary-clinton-election-2016/
Bruce Springsteen, Sigourney Weaver, Meryl Streep, Demi Lovato, Lena Dunham, Ja Rule, Kim Kardashian, Magic Johnson, Miley Cyrus, Brittney Spears, Cee Lo Green, Kanye West, Drake, Lil’Wayne, Jamie Foxx, Justin Timberlake, Justin Beiber, Rosie O Donnel, Oprah Winfrey, Snoop Dogg, Numerous Sports figures, I.e. (Shaquille O’Neal, Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Michael Jordan, The Williams Sisters, etc), Tyler Perry, R. Kelley, All the Kardasians, Taylor Swift, Amber Rose, Martin & Charlie Sheen, Barbara Walters, Kathy Griffin, Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, Woody Allen, Brad Pitt, Johnny Depp, Seth Mc. Farlane, Matt Groening, George Takei, Harvey Weinstein, Tom Cruise, Kevin Spacey, Wendy Williams, William Baldwin, Dr. Dre, Eminem, Bon Jovi, George Clooney, Jennifer Lopez, Pharrell Williams, Billy Joel, Sister Sledge, Jessica Biel, Demi Lovato, Amy Schumer, Sarah Silverman, Ellen DeGeneres, Elizabeth Banks, Elton John, Lady Gaga, Bryan Cranston, Kat Dennings, Angela Bassett, Drew Barrymore, Shonda Rhimes, J.J. Abrams, Eva Longoria, Scarlett Johansson, Kerry Washington, Olivia Wilde, Reese Witherspoon, Julianne Moore, Lena Dunham, Robert De Niro, Matt Damon, Cher, Madonna, John Legend, Samuel Jackson…basically all the MSM icons.