Look, this isn't rocket science or material for a Mensa admission test: Why is John Durham's ongoing DOJ sideshow picking up barely 3 weeks before the January 6th Committee commences public hearings? And why are the perpetual WSJ political hacks Holman Jenkins Jr. and Kimberley Strassel continuing to savagely attack the likes of Fusion GPS, Hillary, Christopher Steele and their "collusion" in going after poor Trump in 2016? The reason is obvious: to try to rehabilitate Trump's image (as a damned traitor) before the mid-terms while distracting from the televised public hearings of the January 6th House Select Committee.
In two columns, now within two weeks, each about the "collusion hoax", this termite loser Jenkins Jr. has sought to discredit and slander a pair of people (Hillary and Christopher Steele) each with more gravitas and creds than he has amassed in his whole, miserable disinfo and troll career. All of which is playing off of Durham's misbegotten probe and diversion effort. Take Jenkins Jr's earlier (May 3rd) effort ('Hillary Clinton and the Durham Inquiry') in which he barked:
"Why, when Hillary Clinton was expected to trounce Donald Trump in 2016, did she devote campaign resources, always in short supply, to a risky, unnecessary and possibly illegal effort to smear Mr. Trump with the Russia-collusion slur?"
This disreputable POS - possibly in the throes of a magic mushroom high, appears not to recall the material passed on to Hillary originated with Fusion GPS. This was an oppo research outfit originally launched by a conservo news site, The Washington Free Beacon, Must we then do the twerp's background research for him, again? Evidently yes.
Long story short, the Fusion oppo research was funded by big GOP donor Paul Singer. Singer wanted background intel done on the orange-hued, two bit Queens' chiseler and lowlife whom he didn't trust. Singer and a group of old guard GOP donors hired Fusion GPS to do the job of digging up whatever could be found on Trump and it wasn't difficult. For example, what was revealed in a New Republic expose on the rat's history with Russia (Aug./Sept. 2017, p .29):
"A review of the public record reveals a clear and disturbing pattern: Trump owes much of his business success, and by extension his presidency, to a flow of highly suspicious money from Russia. Over the past three decades, at least 13 people with known or alleged links to Russian mobsters or oligarchs have owned, lived in, or even run criminal activities out of Trump Tower and other Trump properties. Many used his apartments and casinos to launder untold millions in dirty money .....
Taken together, the flow of money from Russia provided Trump with a crucial infusion of financing that helped rescue his empire from ruin, burnish his image, and launch his career in television and politics....It's entirely possible that Trump was never more than a convenient patsy for Russian oligarchs and mobsters."
So uh, yeah, Trump is a Russkie asset - maybe even a Manchurian candidate - and it doesn't take a Mensa level IQ to figure that out. Subsequently, after Trump won the Repub primary, the material was THEN handed off to the Clinton campaign. This was NOT in any way sinister or illegal as little Holman and tag team pal, Kim Strassel, continue to insinuate. Nor in any way conspiratorial, certainly like seeking the help of a hostile foreign power to meddle in a presidential campaign. Specifically in the piece "Trump and His Associates Had More Than 100 Contacts With Russians Before the Inauguration," The NY Times tracked down "more than 100 in-person meetings, phone calls, text messages, emails and private messages on Twitter," all made by "at least 17 campaign officials and advisers [who] had contacts with Russian nationals and WikiLeaks, or their intermediaries."
Further, foreign intercepts of meetings of Trump
cronies, e.g. Carter Page, with Russian (GRU) agents meant that the
U.S. FBI had to enter the picture with
its own FISA warrants, surveillance, etc. Not to do so would have violated
agreements with foreign intel sources, assets, and would have amounted to
dereliction of duty.
"Democratic lawyer Michael Sussmann is charged with lying to the FBI to instigate an investigation into fanciful evidence about computer links between Russia’s Alfa bank, the Trump campaign and the Kremlin."
But back up a few steps and catch your breath. What is this codswallop based on? The case against Sussmann, one of three people Durham has prosecuted, was curious to many legal observers from the start. This is because of how unusual it was from a prosecutorial and evidentiary perspective. Durham's primary "gotcha guy" Baker was only one witness, but he took no notes, Further, he gave testimony to Congress that suggested he did not remember what Sussmann had told him about whom Sussmann was representing at the meeting. Kinda sketchy, no? I think so!
Look, the Durham - David C. Weiss (U.S. Atty for Delaware) case turns in large part on a relatively obscure evidentiary rule, get this: that allows lawyers to “refresh the recollection” of a witness. This is usually when he cannot remember something. How sweet is that for the quasi prosecution? Imagine, you attend a meeting alone with someone, but take no notes, and later can't remember a key fact. But.... it turns out you might have recounted the meeting to a colleague, and when you review that colleague’s notes, you remember the fact in question.
Now, those notes are not admissible evidence themselves — they reflect multiple levels of hearsay — but if you are on a witness stand, your lawyer (Durham's lawyer in this case) can show you the notes, and then, having had your recollection “refreshed,” you can testify about it. This hypothetical sounds a lot like what the government claims happened with Baker. Neat huh? But little Holman doesn't tell you any of this. Ask yourselves why.
Now, true, we don't know exactly what else Baker has given to Durham and his team of prosecutors. But still it is highly unusual and extremely risky to build a prosecution around the memory of a single witness (Baker), like Durham has done. Particularly someone who, at best. cannot remember the key fact in question- and oh, by the way- until years later. And then using other people's notes compliments of the prosecution.
Then there is Kim Strassel's own contribution (May 13, p. A13, John Durham Goes to Court ) to hyping this Durham probe and Clinton-FBI- GPS Fusion "collusion" horse pockey, blabbering about Durham:
"Each of his filings follows the same, deliberate strategy—lengthy briefs and long exhibits full of names, emails and documents, all of which connect the dots and expose the web that enabled this hoax, and the lies that kept it hidden."
In fact, no "dots" of any significance were connected other than what's in Kim's and Jenkins' - and likely Durham's team's - febrile minds. As one New Yorker Intelligencer contributor notes, "the very conduct of Durham's team provides further reason to maintain skepticism toward any claims it makes that have yet to be tested in an adversarial setting." Then pointing out the inclusion of irrelevant details "crammed into dubious legal categories" - which have a lot more to do with "Durham's conservative-friendly public relations campaign" than establishing that Igor Danchenko broke the law.
Well, holy macaroni, to look at the spate of recent WSJ op-eds citing Durham - by Jenkins Jr., Kim Strassel et al- it definitely seems Durham is getting lots of mileage and future solid resume material from Murdoch Inc. 's WSJ branch. Say if he decides to offer his services as a legal consultant at FOX after leaving the DOJ. All of which again makes me wonder why Garland is letting this Trump-Barr carpetbagger hang around, wreak havoc and undermine Mueller's original correct assessment, e.g.
Opinion | Biden’s Justice Department Should Not Be Pursuing Trump’s Political Vendetta - POLITICO
As well as undermining and distracting from the work of the January 6th committee. .But let's not diverge too far, the fact is Trump's Russian connections are ironclad and have been from the get go as I already showed above. This is a fact Holman Jenkins Jr. still can't swallow as manifested in his latest codswallop (May 13, p. A13):
This semi-drugged, shrooming imp is still trying to spread the blarney that Durham is following any kind of genuine legal path, as opposed to conducting his own PR side show to sidetrack and disrupt the soon to be public Jan. 6 Committee hearings. Holman scribbles for example:
"Unless you’re a coward like 90% of the media and 100% of the foreign-policy class in Washington, you realize now the furor that consumed the country for three years did not originate with Donald Trump or even Russia, but with a Clinton-sponsored hoax."
Coward? Give me a break. "Clinton-sponsored hoax"? I believe you really mean Mueller-proved conspiracy to bushwhack this nation by getting a Russkie pawn into highest office. Whatever "furor" consumed this country is all on the Traitor Trump who ought to have been hung five times over by now, for all the harm he's done. Including finally proving his Russian-alliance by attempting an authoritarian-style insurrection and coup so he could be Putin Jr.
As I earlier showed - all Jenkins Jr caterwauling to the contrary- the evidence is there of Trump's role as Putin's stooge, irrespective of the evidence Christopher Steele presented and which Jenkins dismisses as "garbage." And in the wake of Jenkins' unloading his bowels on Steele in his last column, let's do get a reality check. Steele, as I've written before, is no clown or stooge or even a "spook" likely to be fooled as the WSJ stable of asswits claims. According to one Financial Times account Steele was the "UK intelligence expert on Russia". It is, therefore, highly unlikely he'd be 'fooled" by any kind of false intel or disinformation as the WSJ trolls seem to believe. James Nixey, the head of Chatham House's Russia and Eurasia program, informed the AP that sections of the dossier document created by Steele "read exactly as reports from the secret services".In regard to the infamous "pee tape" about which so much consternation has erupted, I already posted over a year ago that I believe it exists as a form of kompromat. It fits exactly what a former KGB spook like Putin would do, to ensure compliance from an American traitor (see David Rothkopf's book 'Traitor') - and also fits Trump's character from what we already know about his vindictive rat nature. (In this case getting back at Obama by having two Russian whores pee on the bed he slept in while staying at Moscow's Ritz Carlton hotel). Where oh where is this tape? Doh! Putin has control of it and will release it if Trump refuses to comply with an order to attempt to get back into office in 2024 and transform the U.S. into an autocratic satellite state under Russkie control
Jenkins, like Kimberley Strassel, is living in a fantasy, magic mushroom world - an alternative universe. As Harvard Law prof Lawrence Tribe already made clear Trump "welcomed the Russian attack, benefited from it, and tried to cover it up." All of which makes him a goddam traitor no matter what specious crap Jenkins and Strassel try to hurl at the memetic wall, hoping it will stick. Or how they praise Durham's sham trial, only designed to neutralize the investigators and distract from the crime of insurrection and the Russia- Trump conspiracy. We can see how deep-seated Jenkins' divorce from reality is when we come upon this balderdash:
"As can also be seen now with perfect clarity, Mr. Trump’s own contributions to the collusion legend, which are still adduced by certain morons in the press as evidence, received whatever shaky valence they had only by association with the false Steele narrative."
Process this : This errant, overpaid hack is baldly asserting that only "certain morons" in the press saw as evidence Trump's open admissions of his fealty to Putin and the Russians. As MSNBC's Chris Hayes put it on numerous occasion in his 'ALL In' show:
"In other words, folks, if he says it out in the open it doesn't count. It's just a joke so don't take it seriously".
But that gambit in the light of Mueller's report disclosures (Vol. 1) no longer works and the true morons are those like Jenkins Jr. who try to re-frame Trump's defense in terms of him merely being an outspoken, noisy blowhard. As when Trump barked in July, 2016:
"I will tell you this, Russia if you're listening, I hope that you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. You will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let's see if that happens."
But which the noisome hack Holman reconstructs thusly (ibid.):
"Mr. Trump’s joke about Russia releasing Hillary’s emails was just that, an inappropriate joke. And so on, right through to his unfortunate performance at the Helsinki summit and his ill-advised alighting on Ukraine policy for half a second. An unseasoned (and blowhardy) politician was flailing under an unprecedented assault from fabricated treason allegations and a press determined to paint his election as illegitimate."
A joke, you asswipe fool? No, you are the joke. Or worse, an accomplice to Trump's nefarious designs to try to take over the nation's highest office again. But the whole effort to try to rehabilitate Trump as the actual victim - merely preyed upon by a press that refused to take Trump's outbursts and open declarations as "blowhardy jokes" - is beyond vile. It is itself, in my opinion, the admission of an accessory after the fact to Trump's own sedition and treason. It is "assisting someone who committed a crime" (open sedition, collaboration with a hostile foreign state, and attempted insurrection), in order to ensure that criminal will get a second opportunity to succeed.
"Jokey, blowhardy" outpourings of a poor little hyper- charged asshole, merely reacting to 'deep state' moves? Nope, this is what Strassel and Jenkins Jr. want you to believe, and evidently Merrick Garland too, who for some odd reason has let this Durham dog and pony show go on.
A show and a sham that ought to have long since been terminated by now. This is given Durham is deliberately acting as a Barr-Trump aligned mole within the DOJ to destroy the credibility of not only Mueller's report, but the public televised hearings of the House Select Committee next month- giving FOX all kinds of paranoid rot to feed its viewers to counter the facts presented. The cancer of Trump and his Russian-assisted takeover failed for now, but this nation is still on a precipice and it behooves every American to know how real the threat is and that it can happen again. Complacency or being rendered dumb and numb by inflation is not an option. Not now. Plugging ears and screaming "No, no, no"! won't get it done.
Want to get a taste - just a taste - of how bad things will be if we let these Reep traitors and jackals back in power? Check out this!
"Barr had an obviously subjective intent: proving that the Russia investigation writ large was an effort to attack Trump and little more. In recent weeks,
Durham’s thrust has become more clear. He apparently hopes to prove that Clinton’s team intentionally deceived the government to impugn Trump with allegations of ties to Russia."