Durham Finally Decides To nail Hillary Clinton

Even as new evidence emerges, one senior Republican worries that Hillary Clinton may be out of the criminal investigation by Special Counsel John Durham.

Mr. Darrell Issa, the California Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said in an interview with journalist Sharyl Attkisson that the Trump-Russia investigation has been going on for far too long.

“Justice delayed is justice denied” is not a cliché to be dismissed. Issa’s claim was “totally right,” said Attkisson.

“Anything from the Durham report,” Issa said, stopping to snort and shake his head. It wouldn’t matter if it lynched Hillary Clinton, argues the author.

“The time has passed. Also, it serves as a reminder to Congress that placing real-time limitations on activities and genuine flesh on the bones of those actions is vital now more than ever. All parties must consider the amount of time it takes to conclude an investigation or for Congress to receive the facts in order to achieve the truth and compliance quickly.

TRENDING: Joe Biden Officially Most Disliked President in YouTube History, Disables All Comments on All His Videos

Holding an administration accountable in real-time encourages collaboration. “They won’t if they know they may run out of time,” Issa said.

A federal judge refused a bid by Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann to have a “factual background” element of Special Counsel John Durham’s early February court filing stricken out.

Sussmann’s legal team sought last month that portions of the Feb. 11 paper be stricken because they “tainted” a jury’s ability to resolve the case.

“I’m not going to do that,” Judge Christopher Cooper declared during a status hearing. “Any influence it may have had is long gone,” the filing says.

The Epoch Times reported in February:

Sussmann was working for the Clinton campaign in 2016 when he sent an FBI attorney campaign material. Prosecutors said the files apparently reveal a covert relationship between a Russian bank and Donald Trump’s firm, which was Clinton’s principal opponent at the time.

To the FBI, Sussmann allegedly misrepresented himself as not representing any client, while offering documents on behalf of the Clinton campaign.


  • Former President Barack Obama Tests Positive for COVID-19
  • Michelle Obama To Run Against Trump 2024
  • Rep. Jackson Demands Joe Biden Resign, ‘Not Cognitively Capable of Leading

“The false statement stated in the indictment is immaterial as a matter of law,” Sussmann’s lawyers said in a February request to dismiss the charges against their client.

Encouraging honest persons to come forward with tips and limiting the advocacy of lawyers who engage with the government were all cited in the brief as reasons for dismissing the case.

Durham’s lawyers responded by calling his claims “absurd” and asking that the matter be handled in federal court in Washington, DC.

According to the document, “the defendant’s false statement was capable of influencing both the FBI’s decision to initiate an investigation and its subsequent conduct of that investigation.”

Durham’s team responded to Sussmann’s filing by saying “Derelictly disseminating highly explosive allegations about a then-Presidential candidate on behalf of two specific clients, one of whom was the opposing Presidential campaign, the defendant’s false statement to the FBI General Counsel was clearly material.

The defendant’s efforts to mislead the FBI during an election season “certainly had the potential to influence the FBI’s decision-making in any number of ways,” Durham’s team stated.

Durham said in his brief that the Russiagate probe into then-GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump’s campaign would not have happened if Sussmann had not lied to the FBI.