The New York Times needed to put four of their top Trump-Russia narrative engineers on a defensive story about John Durham possibly indicting Perkins Coie lawyer Michael Sussmann over his involvement in pushing the Trump-Russia fraud to the FBI on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
Michael Sussmann was one of the primary story-tellers used by The New York Times as a source to write articles about the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory. Durham might indict Sussmann for lying to the FBI, because Sussmann said he wasn’t working for Hillary Clinton, yet Sussmann billed Hillary Clinton for the hours he spent pushing the Trump-Russia story.
Yeah, that might be a problem.
The wording of The Times story is rather humorous in their collective effort to retain credibility and yet draw some distance from their ally now under scrutiny. Keep in mind, as you read this paragraph, Sussmann hired Crowdstrike, the cyber security firm who claimed the DNC was hacked by Russians and generated the Alfa bank conspiracy theory:
(NYT) […] Donald J. Trump and his supporters have long accused Democrats and Perkins Coie — whose political law group, a division separate from Mr. Sussmann’s, represented the party and the Hillary Clinton campaign — of seeking to stoke unfair suspicions about Mr. Trump’s purported ties to Russia.
This next paragraph is even more funny:
Eyes of a mouse. Ears of an elephant. Heart of a lion, and the mindset of an insurgent.
First, the new forced vaccination rules…
I can confirm the basic background of these stories; however, unlike all others I will not disclose details. You may remember my outlines about “ballot mules”, and a process of reviewing massive amounts of data {
What the Mueller probe was to President Trump, the J6 Committee is to the MAGA movement.
Reuters is writing today that current and former FBI officials have reversed course and said there is scant evidence that any right-wing or extremist group coordinated any attack on Capitol Hill.