Hillary Caught Red-Handed on Russia Collusion
Special Counsel John Durham continues to dig, and the Clinton campaign looks dirtier and dirtier.
Former President Donald Trump long ago ran out of patience with Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation of the “investigators.” Paradoxically, though, it appears that the longer Durham’s “Russia collusion” probe continues, the more satisfied the former president may be with the eventual results.
Durham keeps on digging, and he keeps getting closer to the truth. According to Durham in his recent motion for hearing in the case against Hillary Clinton’s campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann, he outlines how Sussmann tasked a tech company to bolster Clinton’s claimed “Russia collusion” narrative: “Tech Executive-1 tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia. In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain ‘VIPs,’ referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton campaign.”
In other words, as Fox News notes: “Lawyers for the Clinton campaign paid a technology company to ‘infiltrate’ servers belonging to Trump Tower … in order to establish an ‘inference’ and ‘narrative’ to bring to government agencies linking Donald Trump to Russia.”
Clinton, in fact, promoted that fake “inference” and “narrative” on October 31, 2016, just ahead of the presidential election, declaring, “Computer scientists have apparently uncovered a covert server linking the Trump organization to a Russian-based bank.” That same day, Jake Sullivan, then the Clinton campaign’s senior policy advisor and now Joe Biden’s inept national security advisor, stated, “This line of communication may help explain Trump’s bizarre adoration of Vladimir Putin.”
Of course, those “government agencies” were the ones that ultimately investigated Trump. Not only did the Clinton campaign spy on Trump, but it concocted the fake “Russia collusion” narrative to get the CIA and the FBI to spy on Trump. Why? Because when one campaign spies on another, the media sees it as merely a dirty trick, merely as oppo research. But when the CIA and the FBI get involved, the investigation automatically becomes newsworthy.
Politics doesn’t get any scummier than this. Of course that collusion narrative collapsed but only after inflicting maximum damage to the Trump administration.
Thus, as former Trump Chief of Staff Mark Meadows puts it: “They didn’t just spy on Donald Trump’s campaign. They spied on Donald Trump as sitting President of the United States. It was all even worse than we thought.”
Donald Trump himself agrees. Durham’s latest filing “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.
“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,” Trump added. “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.”
Columnist Byron York makes an excellent point about the trajectory of this investigation and its fact pattern — a point that seems to have held true during more than one partisan investigation of the Trump presidency:
One of the most contentious claims Donald Trump ever made was his insistence that he had been the target of spying. He made the charge in several different ways. For example, in March 2017, Trump, just two months in office, tweeted, “Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!” Two years later, in April 2019, he was less specific but equally adamant when he said, “There was absolutely spying into my campaign.” In August 2020, during his Republican National Committee acceptance speech, he said, “Remember this: They spied on my campaign.”
Each time, all the usual anti-Trump voices rushed to accuse the president of lying. But over the years, a series of facts emerged that, while they did not support some of Trump’s most specific charges — Obama did not wiretap Trump in Trump Tower — did support the larger idea that Trump was indeed the target of spying.
The American people seem to have caught on to the fraudulent nature of Russiagate, and a new poll indicates that they want to see Hillary Clinton investigated for her role in it — and that includes most Democrats. “The survey, conducted by TechnoMetrica Institute of Policy and Politics in New Jersey last month, polled 1,308 Americans about the mushrooming investigation and found that "nearly three out of four of those polled who are following the story said they think it’s important prosecutors investigate Clinton for her role,” and that includes 66% of Democrats.
When it comes to investigations, a prosecutor can be confident he’s over the target when the subjects of his probe start complaining about how long it’s taken and how costly it’s become. Of course, Robert Mueller’s investigation of the Trump campaign took two years and cost nearly $32 million, while the Durham probe, as CNN recently complained, has so far cost just $3.8 million.
It’s been nearly five years since then-House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes first alerted Donald Trump that the Obama administration may have been spying on him. How right he was. And how wrong the mainstream media were. If only we knew where to direct Nunes to get his reputation back.
As for Spygate, and far as time and money are concerned, the sanctimonious bean counters on the Left can pound sand. Unlike Mueller, Durham is investigating real and serious crimes that strike at the heart of our Republic. He should dig until every last question is answered. And he should spare no expense to get to the truth.
To that end, Trump’s former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, who previously provided Durham with substantial documentation regarding Clinton’s Russia collusion co-conspirators, reaffirmed what he said last November: that Durham is closing in on those conspirators, and that there will be “quite a few more indictments” to come.
(Political analyst Hans Von Spakovsky provided in-depth details on the Durham filing and Clinton’s nefarious characters central to propagating the “collusion” conspiracy. More details on Durham’s filing as it regards Clinton, Sussmann, tech exec Rodney Joffe, are outlined under the National Review editor’s assessment: “Durham’s Jaw-Dropping Revelation.”)
Start a conversation using these share links: