Sunday Talks, Bartiromo Interviews Nunes and Patel About Sussmann Trial


Posted originally on the conservative tree house on May 15, 2022 | Sundance

In the second segment of the interview with Maria Bartiromo, Devin Nunes and Kash Patel discuss the trial of Michael Sussmann which begins tomorrow. {Direct Rumble Link}

Ultimately the issue in the Michael Sussmann trial is quite simple:

Did the DOJ and FBI know the material Michael Sussmann was giving them came from the Hillary Clinton campaign?

We all know the answer to that question, of course they did.  However, there has been –and continues to be– a game of grand pretense from the DOJ/FBI group where they pretend not to have known.

Two groups: the “insider group” (DOJ/FBI) and the “outsider group” (Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS, Clinton campaign, Sussmann, Elias, Mook, etc).

Claiming the DOJ and FBI were duped, is the government firewall that protects the inside group.  However, this claim is now against the interest of Michael Sussmann who has been accused of false representation and lying to the FBI about the provenance of the information he provided.

In her capacity as the DOJ lawyer assigned to the office of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page played a role in evaluating the provenance of the concocted Trump-Russia information given to McCabe via FBI Chief Legal Counsel James Baker (who received it from Sussmann).

Lisa Page (above left) is legally represented by Amy Jeffries (above right), who is the wife of the trial judge (Michael Cooper) in the Sussmann case.  So, think about it…

…The FBI lawyer (Lisa Page) in charge of vetting the provenance of the fraudulent material from Clinton (via Sussmann), retains legal services from the wife of the Judge now determining whether the provenance was accurately disclosed by Sussmann.

You can’t make this stuff up.

Everyone knows the FBI was aware the Sussmann material (Trump-Russia fabrications) came from Clinton’s campaign.

Lisa Page knew the material she reviewed came from Hillary Clinton. However, everyone in the DOJ and FBI has to pretend they didn’t know, or else they’re in deep shit.

So, this grand pretense is taking place, where everyone inside govt (DOJ/FBI) is pretending not to know the Sussmann stuff came from Hillary Clinton, and everyone outside government (Fusion, Clinton, Perkins Coie, Sussmann, Elias et al) is saying the govt (DOJ/FBI) did know the provenance, or else the outside team would be in big shit for lying or perpetrating fraud.

Enter Special Prosecutor John Durham amid this game of great pretense. That’s really what the Michael Sussmann trial boils down to.

INSIDERS – DOJ/FBI saying they didn’t know (or else trouble).

OUTSIDERS – Sussman saying the DOJ/FBI did know (or else trouble).

The “didn’t know” -vs- “did know” is the firewall between the INSIDERS and the OUTSIDERS. Put another way, the DOJ/FBI were duped -vs- the DOJ/FBI were complicit.

As long as INSIDERS can claim they were duped, they are safe. However, if the OUTSIDERS prove the INSIDERS were not duped, then the spotlight shifts.

If Sussmann wins, it means the DOJ/FBI lose. If Sussmann loses, it means the DOJ/FBI firewall remains intact.

Same thing, another way: If Durham wins, it means the INSIDERS are safe. If Durham loses, it means the INSIDERS are exposed.

That’s why the majority of the previous media participants are not writing about the trial. For them, the dynamics are tenuous. They want Sussmann to win, but the media don’t want their INSIDERS exposed. If the insiders are exposed it means the DOJ and FBI knew the information came from Hillary Clinton, AND they pushed that false Trump-Russia information into the media via leaks.

Then the story circles around to the media claiming they were duped by the DOJ and FBI feeding them false information – versus the media admitting they knew the information was false, yet they used the method of reception from the DOJ/FBI to enhance the credibility of claims they knew were fraudulent.

It’s all FUBAR. A through the looking glass game of grand pretense. A public pantomime of silliness and abject nuttery.

Everyone involved, both inside and outside government, are still pretending not to know things.

The trial is ridiculous theater, created to give the illusion of legitimacy to a series of events and investigations that is designed around this game of pretending.

One example of the nuttery. Judge Christopher Cooper is the trial judge. If Michael Sussmann is NOT Guilty, it means the FBI did know he was representing Hillary Clinton when he passed the information along. That means the DOJ/FBI insiders are exposed.

If the DOJ/FBI insiders are exposed, Lisa Page could need Judge Cooper’s wife again.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.