Advertisement

Latest News

February 3, 2022
|

Over the past couple of weeks, a story has been developing about a ‘rift” between Special Counsel John Durham and Inspector General Michael Horowitz concerning some evidence that Durham had not received from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Just how important is this evidence, and why is Durham only now finding out about it? What does it mean to the Special Counsel investigation? Thanks to some outstanding reporting, this story is starting to gel, but some questions are unanswered.

The Epoch Times has a detailed new piece by Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke; it’s “premium,” so we’ve boiled it down and tried to make a complicated legal morass –- which can certainly happen with two investigations going on at the same time –- a little clearer.

Recall that Horowitz’s report was critical of the FBI but ultimately determined –- to the dismay of many, including me –- that the FBI had actually opened “Crossfire Hurricane” in good faith, with adequate “predication” (justification). Keep in mind that the OIG report was internal, dealing only with employees of the Justice (“Justice”) Department, while Durham’s has broad subpoena power and can bring criminal charges.

In a court filing dated January 25, Durham said Horowitz had failed to turn over to his office a couple of cellphones used by FBI General Counsel James Baker. This evidence was needed in connection with two investigations: the prosecution of Clinton attorney Michael Sussmann and the criminal leak investigation of Baker himself.

According to Durham’s updated filing on January 28, Horowitz’s office then told Durham that “the cellphones likely were discussed” in a conference call that took place almost four years ago, on February 12, 2018. But Durham said he doesn’t recall this discussion. He knew nothing about Horowitz’s possession of Baker’s cellphone until he was briefed by a separate FBI investigative team just a few weeks ago, on January 6.

It doesn’t seem likely the phones were discussed during that conference call, because Horowitz didn’t even get them until February 15, three days after the call, and there’s no record he informed Durham about receiving them. And Horowitz doesn’t remember for sure if he mentioned them, even though Durham was investigating Baker at the time for making “unauthorized disclosures to the media," meaning criminally leaking. One would assume those phones would be pretty important.

https://republicans-oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/2019-01-15-JDJ-MM-to-Durham-re-briefing.pdf?platform=hootsuite

It sure looks as though Durham didn’t know about the existence of those phones until Jan. 5, because on that day, he was seeking Baker’s “call log data” from the FBI’s Inspection Division. If he’d known about the phones, would he have needed the logs?

But there’s more of even greater interest in Durham’s January 25 filing. Amazingly, Horowitz also failed to disclose that he and his general counsel had met personally with Sussmann (!) regarding a “cyber matter” in March 2017. He also failed to disclose the identity of a Hillary-connected individual who provided the data to Sussmann that led to that meeting. And this is a big deal --- a huge part of Durham’s case against Sussmann.

Worse, Durham didn’t find this out from Horowitz, but from other sources, including Sussmann’s attorneys, who are entitled to discovery and apparently told him in their discovery meeting on January 20, “Hey, wait a minute, there’s nothing here about our client’s meeting with the OIG.” That material was missing even though Durham’s office had formally requested the OIG provide “all documents, records and information” in their possession regarding Sussmann.

The OIG did turn over some “relevant transcripts of interviews” about Crossfire Hurricane and, on December 17, 2021, a forensic report on the “cyber matter” that Sussmann had reported to the OIG. The “cyber matter” was that one of Sussmann’s clients (apparently “Tech Executive – 1” Rodney Jaffe) “had observed that a specific OIG employee’s computer was ‘seen publicly’ in ‘Internet traffic’ and was connected to a VPN (Virtual Private Network) in a foreign country.”

Horowitz told the Special Counsel that this was all he had. Durham provided it to Sussmann’s defense team on December 23, 2021.

Recall that Rodney Jaffe was coordinating with agents of the Clinton campaign to create the outlandish and quickly discredited story about Trump Tower communicating with Alfa Bank, to make it seem as if Trump had been signaling to the Kremlin. Jaffe was working with computer researchers at Georgia Tech to access private information, after which Georgia Tech got a $17 million Pentagon contract to research cybersecurity.

So, big question: who is this mysterious OIG employee? Why was Sussmann briefing Horowitz on this person’s activities? We want to know why Sussmann, who was a private attorney and not with the DOJ, would have been meeting with Horowitz, an internal affairs investigator, in early 2017. This was just a few weeks after pushing derogatory (and false) information about Trump to the CIA. It was also just a couple of months after Horowitz announced he was looking into the FBI’s handling of Crossfire Hurricane.

Regarding those phones of Baker’s, Durham asked the OIG on January 10 to conduct an “additional forensic examination.” On January 26, the day after Durham’s legal filing on the withheld evidence, the OIG finally responded with the forensic reports. But then, in his filing of January 28, Durham disclosed that Horowitz’s office had still MORE phones relating to the criminal leak investigation of Baker. Durham seems to have just found out about these in the past few days.

If you wonder why investigations take so ridiculously long, this one episode should give you some idea. But what a strange turn of events for defense attorneys to be providing the prosecutor with information that surprised him.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/durham-filing-rebuts-inspector-general-horowitzs-claims-on-missing-cellphones-hints-at-growing-rift_

In case you missed Aaron Mate’s very detailed analysis of Durham vs. Horowitz from January 20 and have some time to catch up, here’s the link. The editors at RealClear Investigations sum it up this way: “As he exposes the role of Hillary Clinton’s campaign in false allegations about Trump-Russia collusion, Special Counsel John Durham is sharply challenging FBI apologists who claim dubious vindication from an inspector general’s finding that the Bureau’s probe was launched in good faith, Aaron Mate reports...”

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/01/20/the_tension_over_truth_and_consequences_gripping_the_fbis_trump-russia_reckoning_812321.html

Here’s another helpful refresher on Durham’s investigation from a few months ago. You might recognize the byline…

https://stream.org/special-counsel-update-durhams-investigation-is-expansive/

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

More Stories

Trump issues abortion statement

Biden's Rogue DOJ

Master Level Trolling

Comments 1-6 of 6

  • jim nall

    02/07/2022 07:31 PM

    So where does this go? will durham get the phones? will someone in the FBI be accused and convicted of lying?

  • Anita Ward

    02/07/2022 11:53 AM

    I pray there isn't another death in the trail leading around the Clintons' activities.........There have been far too many.....even one is too many!

  • Curtis Guhl

    02/07/2022 10:01 AM

    Washington DC has formed into groups that can crush and individual. So the conflict between Durham and Horowitz is important to the crushing of Durham using a time scale. Will an individual with the highest prosecuting power keep his reputation and fend off this assault? He knows a standing president survived this type of assault having fired two or three FBI heads . The American People know it is time to clean house. What type of rebellion will follow next the stealing of elections?

  • Susan Kittrell

    02/07/2022 07:31 AM

    Great info on Durham and Horowitz. I am a member of the Epoch Times and clicked on your link. For some reason, the article has been removed. I can't see Epoch Times doing this, so I wonder if big tech has managed to get it removed.

  • patrick judge sr

    02/06/2022 08:47 PM

    GOVERNOR you sir are a saint. like o LORD A N SAVIOR THAT TURN WATER INTO WINE. you can make a new atricle a funny read. not to mention how much i enjoy ur new letters and the daily prays. i dont have cable so i cant watch ur show live. i do catch it on you tube. your band is so cool.

    now for the most important part. sir, you are liek DR BILLY GRAHAM. you speak the words and teaching of our SAVIOR WITH PASSION AND FEELING. KEEP IT UP


    SARAH IS A BREATH OF FRESH AIR IN YOUR POLLUTED POLITICAL WPRLD. SHE HASA BRIGHT FUTURE. i have gievn to her and will when i can. i do hope THE LORD allows me to live long enuff to vote for her as president. she like you tells it liek it is and takes no prisoners


    MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND YOUR DEAR WIFE AND FAMILY. tell the guys on ur show i love the humor and keep at it. sadly humor is missing in our society

    Patrick,

  • Paul Kern

    02/06/2022 11:26 AM

    So much stonewalling by the left and likely some on the right. It would take someone with the "patience of Job" to get thru all of the "poo" being splattered! The odds seem to favor the return of Christ before is settled.