Great article Brian, but I have one question. You raised the point previously that Sussmann is using a Clinton connected and probably Clinton loyalist lawyer. Given this, wouldn't Sussmann be scared to enter into any plea deal to potentially turn states on the Clintons, given this info goes straight back to Hillary?
If I were in his shoes I would know that I am stuck using Clinton lawyers so that Hillary can keep an eye on me. If I use my own lawyers I will be dealt with by Clinton and if I turn states, I will also be dealt with by the Clintons. So I am better off taking a jail sentence, protecting Hillary and therefore staying alive.
I just don't see Sussmann turning on Clinton, especially as he is using her lawyers I believe. So he may well change his plea, but I don't see him throwing Hillary under the bus to get a lighter sentence given the risk is that he will be off'd.
Durham's conflict of interest briefing was designed to prevent appeal on those grounds, implying he fully anticipates a trial. You could argue that was simply subterfuge and Sussmann is already cooperating but we may never know.
As far as 'It’d been assumed up until Durham revealed it that nobody at Fusion was directly involved in the direct crafting of the Alfa Bank hoax.', Bongino, Breitbart and Solomon have reported extensively about Simpson's 2007 WSJ Op-Ed detailing the other 90% of the plan.
Thanks for doing the heavy lifting. You're making this 🍿💥🍿💥
Love the obvious way the good guys have sat with their people and war gamed all this out.
“ if we were in their shoes what we do?”
“ if this goes sideways and the judge rules this way, what do we do then?”
“ who do we need to make a plea bargain with?”
Thank you for reverse engineering what possibly might be the strategy of Durham. Only time will tell of course, but it gives someone like myself an idea of what all this move-- counter move stuff means.
Great article Brian, but I have one question. You raised the point previously that Sussmann is using a Clinton connected and probably Clinton loyalist lawyer. Given this, wouldn't Sussmann be scared to enter into any plea deal to potentially turn states on the Clintons, given this info goes straight back to Hillary?
If I were in his shoes I would know that I am stuck using Clinton lawyers so that Hillary can keep an eye on me. If I use my own lawyers I will be dealt with by Clinton and if I turn states, I will also be dealt with by the Clintons. So I am better off taking a jail sentence, protecting Hillary and therefore staying alive.
I just don't see Sussmann turning on Clinton, especially as he is using her lawyers I believe. So he may well change his plea, but I don't see him throwing Hillary under the bus to get a lighter sentence given the risk is that he will be off'd.
What's your view on this?
Durham's conflict of interest briefing was designed to prevent appeal on those grounds, implying he fully anticipates a trial. You could argue that was simply subterfuge and Sussmann is already cooperating but we may never know.
As far as 'It’d been assumed up until Durham revealed it that nobody at Fusion was directly involved in the direct crafting of the Alfa Bank hoax.', Bongino, Breitbart and Solomon have reported extensively about Simpson's 2007 WSJ Op-Ed detailing the other 90% of the plan.
Thanks for doing the heavy lifting. You're making this 🍿💥🍿💥
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2017/12/21/report-russia-dossier-based-10-year-old-wall-street-journal-articles/
Great Article, Brian! Thanks!
Love the obvious way the good guys have sat with their people and war gamed all this out.
“ if we were in their shoes what we do?”
“ if this goes sideways and the judge rules this way, what do we do then?”
“ who do we need to make a plea bargain with?”
Thank you for reverse engineering what possibly might be the strategy of Durham. Only time will tell of course, but it gives someone like myself an idea of what all this move-- counter move stuff means.