Tag

Clinton

Browsing

(RepublicanWire.org) – Hillary Clinton was heavily rebuked after urging the European Union to pass legislation to stop the spread of “disinformation” and “extremism” online on Thursday evening.

Conservative Twitter users showed complete disdain for Clinton’s tweet on Friday, reminding her that she was part of the effort to tie former President Trump to the Russia Collusion “hoax”. They also accused her of wanting to “control” speech and having a “totalitarian impulse.”

“I urge our transatlantic allies to push the Digital Services Act across the finish line and bolster global democracy before it’s too late,” she added, speaking about a new law proposed by the European Union which will force Big Tech companies to better police illegal content posted online.

Actor Adam Baldwin mentioned Hillary’s “tyrannical impulse,” tweeting, “No, your totalitarian impulse is wrong. Best and least restrictive practice is for the free market to distill and decide ideas. GTFO of the way!”

“Once they called the revelations from Hunter’s laptop ‘disinformation’ they made it clear the word simply means ‘stuff damaging to Democrats.’ It shocks me that journalists take cries of ‘disinformation’ seriously still,” author and Washington Examiner columnist Tim Carney tweeted about tech platforms censoring the Hunter Biden laptop story in 2020.

Carney continued: “…and so we know exactly what the below [Hillary’s tweet] means. Democrats want to use the force of the government to push Big Tech to censor news and commentary that makes them look bad.”

“Like her co-conspirator Obama, Hillary Clinton also wants the government to regulate and censor speech she doesn’t like,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton tweeted, referencing the former president’s recent initiative to counter “disinformation” online. 

“Our Republic is under assault. A former president (Obama) and former and possible presidential candidate (Hillary Clinton) just reconfirmed support for mass government monitoring and censorship of Americans,” Fitton said in another tweet.

Many are calling for Americans to stand up against global censorship.

(RepublicanWire.org) – Special Counsel John Durham filed new evidence Monday night in the case against Democratic Party lawyer Michael Sussmann, who has been charged with making a false statement to a federal agent during a September 2016 meeting with the FBI.

Sussmann allegedly failed to disclose his clients, including Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, to the FBI when he offered information in 2016 that he claimed demonstrated a secret channel between the Trump Organization and Kremlin-allied Alfa Bank.

During the meeting, Sussmann allegedly falsely claimed that he was not at the meeting on behalf of any client.

Durham’s latest filing shows that the evening before the lawyer’s meeting, he sent a text to an FBI official saying, “I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the bureau.” 

The text message offers new evidence outside of the one-on-one meeting that Sussmann did in fact claim he was not participating in the meeting on behalf of a client.

The new filing also includes rceferences to the dossier compiled by former British spy Christopher Steele. A number of the allegations included in the Steele dossier, which was used by the FBI to obtain surveillance warrants against former Trump campaign aide Carter Page, have since been discredited.

Steele was a subcontractor for Fusion GPS, a research firm that Sussmann’s former law firm, Perkins Coie, had hired to look into potential links between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Marc Elias, a campaign law specialist and one of Sussmann’s partners at Perkins Coie, was representing the Clinton campaign and hired Fusion GPS.

Though Sussmann’s indictment does not mention the Steele dossier, Durham’s new filing refers to the dossier and Steele, including a meeting with Sussmann that Steele has said included the alleged suspicions data scientists had about odd internet data they thought might indicate a secret channel between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank.

Sussmann’s lawyers asked the judge to block prosecutors from making arguments and introducing evidence related to the dossier.

Sussmann’s defense lawyers claimed Durham is promoting a “baseless narrative that the Clinton campaign conspired with others to trick the federal government into investigating ties between President Trump and Russia.”

“But there was no such conspiracy; the special counsel hasn’t charged such a crime; and the special counsel should not be permitted to turn Mr. Sussmann’s trial on a narrow false statement charge into a circus full of sideshows that will only fuel partisan fervor,” attorneys for Sussmann wrote.

Meanwhile, the new Durham filing asked the judge to prevent the defense from making arguments and presenting evidence “that depict the special counsel as politically motived or biased based on his appointment” by the Trump administration.

“The only purpose in advancing these arguments would be to stir the pot of political polarization, garner public attention and, most inappropriately, confuse jurors or encourage jury nullification,” it said. “Put bluntly, the defense wishes to make the special counsel out to be a political actor when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth.”

(RepublicanWire.org) – Special counsel John Durham has filed a motion asking a federal court not to dismiss charges against a lawyer once associated with the 2016 Democratic presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton.

The filing comes after attorneys for the lawyer, Michael Sussman, asked the court to throw them out.

The Epoch Times reports:

Michael Sussmann was representing the Clinton campaign when in 2016 he passed along information to an FBI counsel. His lawyers say the documents “raised national security concerns” while prosecutors describe them as purportedly detailing a covert channel between a Russian bank and the business of Donald Trump, Clinton’s rival at the time.

Sussmann was charged with lying to the FBI because he falsely told the counsel he was not providing the allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client despite presenting the information on behalf of the Clinton campaign, prosecutors say.

In a filing in February, Sussmann’s lawyers moved to dismiss the charge, claiming their client “did not make any false statement to the FBI” but even if he had, “the false statement alleged in the indictment is immaterial as a matter of law.”

“Allowing this case to go forward would risk criminalizing ordinary conduct, raise First Amendment concerns, dissuade honest citizens from coming forward with tips, and chill the advocacy of lawyers who interact with the government,” the filing stated.

“The Special Counsel’s unprecedented and unlawful overreach should not be countenanced, and the single count against Mr. Sussmann should be dismissed,” it continued.

In its reply on Friday, Durham’s team urged the court to reject the Sussmann filing.

“The defendant’s false statement to the FBI General Counsel was plainly material because it misled the General Counsel about, among other things, the critical fact that the defendant was disseminating highly explosive allegations about a then-Presidential candidate on behalf of two specific clients, one of which was the opposing Presidential campaign,” their filing said.

“The defendant’s efforts to mislead the FBI in this manner during the height of a Presidential election season plainly could have influenced the FBI’s decision-making in any number of ways,” Durham’s team argued.

If the case does go to trial, Durham will likely argue that the evidence proves the bureau could have done something prior to starting a full investigation into the matter, to include an assessment, and should have delayed making a decision until after the 2016 election or declined to have launched a probe at all.

Last month, Just The News’ John Solomon predicted who he believes Durham’s next target will be.

In an interview with Fox News, he explained that he believes Durham is dealing with “two buckets.”

In one “bucket,” there are the last two indictments against officials who were connected to Hillary Clinton and their plan to feed the FBI false information about Trump-Russia conspiracies.

He then said the other “bucket” focuses on the FBI and whether agents knowingly mislead the FISA court to obtain warrants to spy on members of Trump’s 2016 campaign.

“Pete Strzok’s opening electronic communication which starts the Crossfire Hurricane investigation states they are looking at whether individuals associated with the Trump campaign were coordinating conspiring with Russia,” Solomon told Maria Bartiromo.

“When they put the first FISA in, in October, the Trump campaign is mentioned a dozen times in the first FISA, and as I mentioned in the last segment, the allegation is a well-developed conspiracy between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and Russia to hijack the election,” he added, noting further that Strzok’s claim a day earlier in an interview with MSNBC that the probe was not about the Trump campaign is false.

“Of course, it was about the campaign,” he said, adding:

But Durham developed really significant evidence that red flags, the stop-now warning signs go all the way back to August when Bruce Orr, in 2016 came to the FBI and said Christopher Steele is dumping a dossier. He hates Trump. He’s hired by Hillary Clinton and most of his information is raw and uncorroborated.

A month after the CIA sends a warning to the FBI, this is something John Ratcliffe declassified, saying Hillary Clinton is trying to play a dirty trick on Donald Trump to tie him to Russia to get out of her e-mail thing. All through the fall, they keep a spreadsheet of what’s right and wrong of the Steele dossier. It’s all wrong. Can’t corroborate, they can’t collaborate the information. The FBI never should have started the investigation and I think that’s where John Durham’s investigation is focused right now.

(RepublicanWire.org) – The vast majority of Democrats in a new survey said they want to see 2016 presidential nominee Hillary Clinton legitimately investigated over her reported role in a plot to ‘spy’ on GOP rival Donald Trump’s campaign and later after he won the election, his White House.

“A growing chorus of Democrats believe 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton should be questioned by special advisor John Durham for her alleged role in the Russian secret server scandal in a poll conducted before bombshell revelations that her team spied on Donald Trump’s campaign,” the Daily Mail reported on Sunday.

“In a poll last month, 66 percent of Democrats wanted Clinton questioned, a whopping 22 percentage points higher than how many in her party demanded a probe last October, according to TechnoMetrica Institute of Policy and Politics (TIPP) research,” the report noted.

“The amount of Republicans demanding answers is also swelling, rising to 91 percent in January from 80 percent last October,” the report continued. “Among the independent crowd, those wanting the former secretary of state probed rose to 74 percent from 65 percent.”

Interestingly, the most recent results came before Clinton’s campaign team was linked to a technology firm a Feb. 11 court filing by Durham claims electronically eavesdropped on servers at Trump Tower and the Executive Office of the President under Trump.

“Both polls were completed before Special Counsel John Durham last week released a bombshell report that claimed Clinton’s campaign team tried to spy on former president Trump’s computer servers in a failed attempt to tie him to Russia,” the report noted further.

Following the initial reports regarding Durham’s findings, the Washington Free Beacon reported, citing Federal Election Commission records, that President Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign along with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee also used the same tech firm, Neustar Information Services, ahead of the elections.

The outlet noted:

According to Durham, Neustar’s chief technology officer, Rodney Joffe, accessed sensitive web traffic data that the company maintained on behalf of the White House executive office in order to collect “derogatory” information about Donald Trump.

Joffe allegedly provided the information to Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, who in turn gave it to the CIA during a meeting in February 2017. Durham charged Sussmann in September with lying to the FBI about his investigation of Trump.

The Biden campaign’s payments raise questions about whether Joffe continued snooping on Trump in the most recent election. The Biden and Clinton campaigns are the only two presidential committees to have ever paid Neustar, according to Federal Election Commission records.

Biden’s campaign paid Neustar $18,819 on Sept. 29, 2020, the records show. The Clinton campaign paid the firm $3,000 in May 2015 for mobile phone services. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee paid $3,000 to Neustar in 2017. Neustar executives and staffers contributed $17,906 to Biden’s campaign, FEC records show.

The Free Beacon adds that it wasn’t clear whether Neustar executives were aware of Joffe’s prior work with the Clinton campaign.

Following Durham’s findings, Trump sounded the alarm over the findings which he said substantiates his many previous claims that his campaign was “spied on.”

“The latest pleading from Special Counsel Robert Durham provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia,” he said in a statement.

“This is a scandal far greater in scope and magnitude than Watergate and those who were involved in and knew about this spying operation should be subject to criminal prosecution. In a stronger period of time in our country, this crime would have been punishable by death. In addition, reparations should be paid to those in our country who have been damaged by this,” he added.

Pundits are already discussing the next presidential election less than a year into President Joe Biden’s first term. Many politicos believe the 46th POTUS isn’t going to be on the ticket the next time around and are discussing who might run for the Democratic Party. Hillary Clinton’s name is being thrown into the mix but her allies are reportedly laughing off the possibility.

Clinton, who lost to former President Donald Trump in 2016, recently stirred up rumors about a possible run after posting a message on Twitter about the next presidential election being crucial for America.

The former first lady and secretary of state has also been in the spotlight a lot lately, attending conferences and being very vocal on Twitter. However, although some believe she might be thinking of making another run for the White House, others think it’s a bad idea. Dick Morris, a conservative who served as the chief advisor to former President Bill Clinton’s campaign until 1996, told the Washington Examiner he doesn’t think Hillary would “be a serious candidate.” A former 2008 Hillary surrogate told the website, “There’s no appetite. None. Zero,” for her to run. The sentiment was repeated time and again.

If Hillary thinks she’s going to rise from the ashes of her 2016 political defeat, she might have another thing coming.