Special Counsel John Durham Indicts Democrat Lawyer Michael Sussmann of Perkins Coie

Special Counsel John Durham Indicts Democrat Lawyer Michael Sussmann of Perkins Coie

September 16, 2021 — Special Counsel John Durham, who was tasked with investigating the corrupt “Russia Collusion” hoax and who previously indicted DOJ lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, has just indicted Perkins Coie lawyer Michael Sussmann.

Rumors of this indictment began swirling yesterday when the New York Times reported that Durham was “seeking” to indict Sussmann for lying to the FBI.

Interestingly enough, Sussmann is tied to Crowdstrike, the firm the Democrat National Committee hired and when that connection came under scrutiny, the DNC claimed their servers were “hacked” by Russia.

So, Hillary’s senior policy advisor (and chief propagandist) Jake Sullivan now works for the Biden Administration, to no one’s surprise.

It’s amazing how effectively the media was used to launder lies from both a partisan political party as well as the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC).

Does this Sussman news indicate that the walls are closing in on John Brennan and his CIA “assessment” team as well as Clinton herself?

When will members of the media be held accountable for KNOWINGLY spreading disinformation and participating in a propaganda warfare campaign against the American people?

It looks as though Durham is playing it absolutely by the book, not pulling the trigger on an indictment unless he absolutely can prove the crime in an airtight case. “I mean, what more evidence do you need? It’s very, very obvious.” –Natasha on the Alfa Bank story in October 2018, to the approval of two other Russiagate disinformation actors.

Interestingly enough, despite the constant attacks on both sides of the political aisle, “Q” was posting and hinting about Sussman years ago. See the following Posts:

This post outlined how the entire operation was run, and Perkins Coie is named as is Christopher Steele.

Sussmann himself is connected to Crowdstrike, and we have to wonder if that company was his avenue to access “non-public” information about the Trump campaign.

It really is incredible reading these posts now, given the current context.

Post 2332 was the most interesting regarding Sussmann and his role with the DNC and Perkins Coie.

This thread by Ross is interesting.

This is truly incredible stuff.

Even the Huffington Post had to report on the story:

A federal grand jury has returned an indictment against cybersecurity attorney Michael Sussmann, who represented the Democratic National Committee in connection with the 2016 Russia hack, accusing him of lying to the FBI about who he was representing.

The grand jury indictment accuses Sussmann of lying when he ‘stated to the General Counsel of the FBI that he was not acting on behalf of any client in conveying particular allegations concerning a Presidential candidate, when in truth, and in fact, as the defendant well knew, he was acting on behalf of specific clients, namely, Tech Executive-1 and the Clinton Campaign.’

The indictment, as The New York Times reported yesterday, was sought by John Durham, whom the Trump administration named special counsel to investigate the Russia probe. The indictment was returned just before the five-year statute of limitations expired.

In a statement to the Times ahead of the indictment, Sussmann’s attorneys said he ‘has committed no crime’ and that a prosecution ‘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.’ – Huffington Post

It’s remarkable there is no formal apology coming from Huffington after they profited for years on the false story. Perhaps it’s not that remarkable given the obvious indications of media collusion with political operatives in recent times.

This confirms the “laundering chart” that Q posted years ago. Durham’s real target here appears to be James Baker from the FBI, and that he is going after Sussmann because each of them contradicted the other.

Interesting, indeed.

I am sure that was simply a coincidence and there was no coordination at all.

This is a real disinformation operation, and a highly coordinated one at that.

Oh, you don’t say …

And that is the big question. Will Baker be called in to explain this?

Will the other leaders of the hoax at the FBI face any repercussions for this?

You can read the full indictment here:

This story is still developing, please check back for updates.

See a spelling or grammar error? Let us know! Highlight the text and press Ctrl+Enter.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments