Sussman was deliberately giving false information to the FBI under guise of an innocent bystander citizen, to facilitate an October Surprise for Hillary Clinton. This undermines our election system, and severely hampered our President.
In fact the premise of your entire article seems to be yet another "expert" planting a false narrative to distract from this conspiracy. The Joffe data is the equivalent of the Steele dossier. Fabricated campaign opposition data. Who is paying you
SUSSMANN, Tech Executive-I, and Law Firm-1 had coordinated, and were continuing to coordinate, with representatives and agents of the Clinton Campaign with regard to the data and written materials that SUSSMANN gave to the FBI and the media.
>> It really has nothing to do with the Steele dossier.
I don't think Alfa is mentioned in the Dossier, but given that Fusion GPS also developed the story as part of the same oppo campaign it's certainly related.
Alfa is the subject of report 112 of the dossier and was inserted into the dossier precisely to buttress the subsequent report Sussman planned to give. Steele has already testified in Alfa Bank's civil suit that he was tasked with reporting on Alfa connections (i.e., his reporting on Alfa wasn't organic, growing out of his other inquiries). Robert Graham is right that this case isn't really about the 1001 charge for Sussman misrepresenting who his engagement, but he seems remarkably blind to the big picture.
Graham is probably also underestimating the importance of the misstatement. Baker's testimony generally indicates that he may have declined the meeting had Sussman forthrightly told him who he was representing in the matter. That strikes me as not implausible. The FBI should be cognizant of how a political actor might use the fact of the FBI accepting the report immediately prior to an election to invite media speculation.
Here is a simple way that the DNS data could be both real and a hoax at the same time. If political actors working for the benefit of clintons election accessed the alfabank servers to get them to make the dns queries (such as signing up for marketing emails, or a smtp communication that triggering anti-spam software doing intended dns queries).
I do agree that we would have been better served with all known details revealed to the public in a report, rather then kept up locked up only to be dripped out as evidence in a criminal trial. At the same time, for those of us that believe that "trump russia" was a narrative spun out of a campaign "dirty trick" that had implications not only to cripple trump's first term, but to skew the foreign relations between the US and russia. if this is true, and there's plenty of indication that it is true, then it is critical to use every effective mean to ensure that this does not happen again.
It is obvious to me that who "russia wants" to be elected will be a campaign issue in 2024.
Hillary then gave this false accusation to the press, so she could refer to it in her political statements days before the election.
She was so sure she would win the presidency, she thought this would never see the light of day.
I think you would have preferred that, too.
Sussman was deliberately giving false information to the FBI under guise of an innocent bystander citizen, to facilitate an October Surprise for Hillary Clinton. This undermines our election system, and severely hampered our President.
In fact the premise of your entire article seems to be yet another "expert" planting a false narrative to distract from this conspiracy. The Joffe data is the equivalent of the Steele dossier. Fabricated campaign opposition data. Who is paying you
SUSSMANN, Tech Executive-I, and Law Firm-1 had coordinated, and were continuing to coordinate, with representatives and agents of the Clinton Campaign with regard to the data and written materials that SUSSMANN gave to the FBI and the media.
Some fact checking checking:
>> It wasn’t sold to the media.
Is "it" the Steele Dossier or the Alfa Bank angle? Both were "sold," in the sense of "pitched," to the press. Today in the Sussman trial (https://technofog.substack.com/p/day-2-of-the-michael-sussmann-trial), Laura Seago of Fusion GPS testified that she met with Sussman and Rodney Joffe about the Alfa Bank thing, and once the story was developed, she pitched it to Franklin Foer of Slate. He wrote the story that broke the alleged connection (http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/10/was_a_server_registered_to_the_trump_organization_communicating_with_russia.html).
>> It really has nothing to do with the Steele dossier.
I don't think Alfa is mentioned in the Dossier, but given that Fusion GPS also developed the story as part of the same oppo campaign it's certainly related.
Alfa is the subject of report 112 of the dossier and was inserted into the dossier precisely to buttress the subsequent report Sussman planned to give. Steele has already testified in Alfa Bank's civil suit that he was tasked with reporting on Alfa connections (i.e., his reporting on Alfa wasn't organic, growing out of his other inquiries). Robert Graham is right that this case isn't really about the 1001 charge for Sussman misrepresenting who his engagement, but he seems remarkably blind to the big picture.
Graham is probably also underestimating the importance of the misstatement. Baker's testimony generally indicates that he may have declined the meeting had Sussman forthrightly told him who he was representing in the matter. That strikes me as not implausible. The FBI should be cognizant of how a political actor might use the fact of the FBI accepting the report immediately prior to an election to invite media speculation.
You mean the techies from Georgia tech that joffee hired techies?
Here is a simple way that the DNS data could be both real and a hoax at the same time. If political actors working for the benefit of clintons election accessed the alfabank servers to get them to make the dns queries (such as signing up for marketing emails, or a smtp communication that triggering anti-spam software doing intended dns queries).
I do agree that we would have been better served with all known details revealed to the public in a report, rather then kept up locked up only to be dripped out as evidence in a criminal trial. At the same time, for those of us that believe that "trump russia" was a narrative spun out of a campaign "dirty trick" that had implications not only to cripple trump's first term, but to skew the foreign relations between the US and russia. if this is true, and there's plenty of indication that it is true, then it is critical to use every effective mean to ensure that this does not happen again.
It is obvious to me that who "russia wants" to be elected will be a campaign issue in 2024.