Share this page!

Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) Profile picture
Twitter logo
May 30 • 9 tweets • 2 min read
FBI agent Hellman testified in the Sussmann trial that he figured out almost immediately that the Alfa Bank -Trump email server connection narrative was bogus. Yet the CH team opened a full counterintelligence investigation that wasn’t closed until January 18, 2017.
So now there’s a new timeline to consider.
1) According to former DNI Ratcliffe, on July 28, 2016, CIA Director Brennan briefed Obama on a plan approved by Hillary on July 26 to “vilify Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services.”
2) September 7, 2016, the CIA referred to Strzok and Comey the investigative matter involving a purported plan by Hillary concerning blaming Trump for Russian hackers “as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server.”
3) September 19 - Sussmann, a lawyer for Hillary’s campaign who claimed not to be representing any client, brings FBI GC Baker data and white papers accusing Trump of having a secret back channel communications link with the Kremlin through Alfa Bank.
September 20- Agent Hellman concludes that the narrative not only does not hold water, but in text messages states that the DNS pings mysteriously started shortly before the start date used by someone supposedly investigating Trump-Russia connections. See this post:
So the major unanswered question is, given Hellman’s suspicions that that data were created to sell a narrative rather than something found accidentally by researchers, and given the CIA’s referral only two weeks earlier,…
Why didn’t the FBI 7th Floor launch an investigation of Hillary as the possible sponsor of a hoax? And why did the 7th Floor instead open a full counter-Intel investigation by Chicago FO into the Alfa Bank narrative being spun by Sussmann, Joffe and friends?
And finally, why did the 7th Floor go to extraordinary lengths to keep secret from the agents in Chicago doing the investigation, the source or sources of the data- even to the extent of not allowing any agent to talk to the Ga Tech researcher, David Dagon?
PS- Then there’s this: “We think it’s a set up.”

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Kingmaker - Big IF! (True)

Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @KingMakerFT

Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) Profile picture
May 29
Great, thought provoking article by @UndeadFoia raising the possibility that the DNC was a false flag op.
I think the timeline supports that suspicion:
1) July 19- Steele memo #95 claims Carter Page is at the focal point of collusion
2) July 21- Danchenko emails Millian to propose real estate project in Russia and asks to meet
3) July 24- Robbie Mook tells press that “experts” are saying Russia hacked the DNC to help Trump
4) July 27-Steele’s memo #95 falsely sourced to Millian, claims Page cut a corrupt quid pro quo bargain with Russia
5)July 30 - Steele, Joffe, Elias, Sussmann and Seago at Perkins C
Read 6 tweets
Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) Profile picture
May 26
@shipwreckedcrew has published a very insightful Substack article about the role of Rodney Joffe as a CHS and as the secret source for the information Sussmann brought to the FBI: shipwreckedcrew.substack.com/p/sussmann-jof…
Not only did Joffe and the FBI agent(s) he worked with violate FBI reporting and protocol for handling of CHSs, but to the extent the information and data he supplied wearing two or more hats was fabricated, cherry picked, or manipulated to present a false narrative,it’s criminal
Not only would there be crimes by Joffe for presenting false or misleading information to the FBI, but Durham may be able to prove a conspiracy to do so. Moreover, this presents the possibility that an outside-the-govt conspiracy intersected with a parallel inside-govt conspiracy
Read 6 tweets
Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) Profile picture
May 25
The Sussmann team called a witness that just blew up on them. They called Thomas Grasso, a former FBI agent, to testify that Joffe was a good guy and knew cyber stuff. Under the defense lawyer’s questions, Grasso said this:
Which sets up this closing argument by the Govt: “You heard defense’s own witness Grasso testify that CHS Joffe knew that the FBI had an investigation into the AlfaBank server question. So how would Joffe know that? Recall the testimony you heard it was close hold- under wraps.
Read 5 tweets
Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) Profile picture
May 22
Another observation from last week’s Sussmann trial. In support of the charge that Sussmann lied to the FBI by denying he was acting for a client when he met with GC Baker, Durham introduced 404(b) evidence of a similar lie Sussmann told the CIA at a February 2017 meeting.
Although the theory for offering that evidence was to show a pattern by Sussmann of concealing his representation of Joffe and the Clinton campaign, there’s another aspect of that evidence that could be equally harmful to Sussmann’s chances. A little background first.
At the CIA meeting in early February, Sussmann presented the same DNS data and narrative about the Alfa Bank connection that he gave to the FBI back in September. But there was a major addition: Sussmann also presented data of use by Russian Yotaphones even after the election.
Read 8 tweets
Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) Profile picture
May 22
The new, officially declared Clintonista narrative is that 1) Hillary approved the plan for the Campaign to give to the press as much dirt on Trump as could be conjured up, linking him to Russia; 2) It didn’t matter whether it was true; the press could be counted on to vet it;
3) Nobody in the campaign wanted any of it to be given to the FBI or other Govt agencies- at least not by the Campaign- and 4) When rogue agents and attorneys such as Steele and Sussmann did feed the made up dirt to the FBI, they did so without the Campaign’s knowledge or consent
So now the die is cast. By Mook acknowledging under oath that Hillary approved the media portion of this “swift boat project,” the Clinton camp has chosen the hill they think they can defend against Durham’s conspiracy investigation: It was against their interest to go to the FBI
Read 6 tweets
Kingmaker - Big IF! (True) Profile picture
May 13
@ProfMJCleveland , in her inestimable way, has concisely captured the issues surrounding the privilege issue in the Sussmann case decided by Judge Cooper yesterday. Her article: thefederalist.com/2022/05/13/cou…
Everything in @ProfMJCleveland ‘s analysis speaks for itself, so I recommend everyone read the article. I would add that it’s particularly ironic the the judge found Fusion didn’t have to turn over documents subject to Rodney Joffe’s attorny-client privilege with Sussmann.
That holding was based on the theory that Joffe, the Clinton campaign, and the campaign’s contractor, Fusion, held a common interest to produce opposition research to give to the press and the FBI.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(