# The Durham indictments prosecuting fake Trump 'collusion' **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 23, 2021, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215 "2021-09-23T20:11:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 25
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/482 "2023-01-27T19:48:20Z")
It’s kinda funny to read ShadowFacts’s linked article in tandem with the OP’s various assertions in this thread. Bonus points for switching to “Narrator Voice:” to read the article clips in. 🤣 > [@Sam\_Stone in post #1](#): > > This week the Durham investigation into the roots of the Russia/Trump collusion story laid down a second indictment, this time against a lawyer for Perkins-Coie, the law firm that represented Hillary Clinton. > > Remember the supposed ‘hidden server’ at Alfa Bank that was supposedly connected to a Trump server for the purposes of passing information? The story was a lie concocted by the Hillary campaign, and a lawyer for the firm that represented her has just been indicted for lying to the FBI. He gave them the manufactured Alfa Bank material, claiming that he was bringing it to them as a ‘concerned citizen’ and not as an agent for anyone. > [@NYT](#): > > Late in the summer of 2021, Mr. Durham prepared to indict Michael Sussmann, a cybersecurity lawyer who had represented Democrats in their dealings with the F.B.I. about Russia’s hacking of their emails. Two prosecutors on Mr. Durham’s team — Anthony Scarpelli and Neeraj N. Patel — objected, according to people familiar with the matter. […] > > Mr. Durham [accused Mr. Sussmann of lying](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/15/us/politics/michael-sussmann-trial-trump-russia.html) to an F.B.I. official by saying he was not conveying the tip for a client; the prosecutor maintained Mr. Sussmann was there in part for the Clinton campaign. > > Mr. Scarpelli and Mr. Patel argued to Mr. Durham that the evidence was too thin to charge Mr. Sussmann and that such a case would not normally be prosecuted, people familiar with the matter said. Given the intense scrutiny it would receive, they also warned that an acquittal would undermine public faith in their investigation and federal law enforcement. […] > > The charge against Mr. Sussmann was narrow, but the Durham team used it to make public large amounts of information insinuating what Mr. Durham never charged: that Clinton campaign associates conspired to gin up an F.B.I. investigation into Mr. Trump based on a knowingly false allegation. > > Trial testimony, however, showed that while Mrs. Clinton and her campaign manager hoped Mr. Sussmann would persuade reporters to write articles about Alfa Bank, they did not want him to take the information to the F.B.I. And prosecutors presented no evidence that he or campaign officials had believed the data scientists’ complex theory was false. > > After [Mr. Sussmann’s acquittal](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/31/us/politics/michael-sussmann-durham-fbi.html), Mr. Barr, by then out of office for more than a year, suggested that using the courts to advance a politically charged narrative was a goal in itself. > [@Sam\_Stone in post #114](#): > > Main Steele Dossier Researcher Arrested in Durham Probe: […] > > So, the Democrats hired a foreign spy, who in turn hired a suspected Russian agent to collect dirt on a Presidential candidate using contacts in the Kremlin. > [@NYT](#): > > Mr. Durham “accomplished something far more important” than a conviction,[Mr. Barr told Fox News](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/justice/barr-says-durham-accomplished-something-far-more-important-than-sussmann-conviction) […] > > And he predicted that a subsequent trial, concerning a Russia analyst who was a researcher for the Steele dossier, would also “get the story out” and “further amplify these themes and the role the F.B.I. leadership played in this, which is increasingly looking fishy and inexplicable.” > [@Sam\_Stone in post #156](#): > > John Ratcliff was the Director of National Intelligence when the Durham investigation started, and he was responsible for providing both classified and unclassified material to the Durham investigation. > > He said that Durham’s indictments so far are just the beginning. Durham has access to the classified information we don’t, and Ratcliff says the stuff in there is absolutely explosive and he expects ‘many’ indictments to come out of it, including indictments of people at the ‘highest levels’ of government. > > Here’s the Danchenko indictment: […] > [@Sam\_Stone in post #378](#): > > Apparently, there is another trial coming in the fall: > > > [@](#): > > > > […] The defendant, [Russian expat Igor Danchenko](https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/10/politics/danchenko-durham-steele-plea/index.html), was charged with five counts of lying to the FBI during his interviews in 2017 where investigators tried to corroborate Steele’s claims. > [@NYT](#): > > That case involved Igor Danchenko, who had told the F.B.I. that the dossier exaggerated the credibility of gossip and speculation. Mr. Durham charged him with lying about two sources. [He was acquitted](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/18/us/politics/igor-danchenko-russia-acquittal-trump.html), too. > [@Sam\_Stone in post #378](#): > > Other than that, we don’t know because Durham hasn’t made it public. Maybe that will be the end, maybe not. > [@NYT](#): > > The two failed cases are likely to be Mr. Durham’s last courtroom acts as a prosecutor. Bringing demonstrably weak cases stood in contrast to how he once talked about his prosecutorial philosophy. Btw, I’m impressed with how several posters in this thread tracked the key legal analyses as the events were unfolding in real time. If I had read everything posted or linked in this thread carefully enough and had the legal background to understand it, I could practically have written that NYT article myself. [hat tip] ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/483 "2023-01-27T20:55:03Z")
There’s a bunch of posts in this thread that are hilarious in retrospect. > [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > He would seem to be implying that he has documented proof that the tech guy explicitly asked for his team to fake up some evidence tying Trump to Russia. > > He seems to be giving Trump the material necessary for him to sue the one guy for defamation or something along those lines - which is probably reasonable - but it seems like he’s alluded to a number of potential crimes along the way: fraud, hacking, etc. The Trump team did take those (obviously false) things that Durham was implying and sued Joffe along with a bunch of other people. As we covered in this thread, that lawsuit was dismissed harshly, and trump’s lawyers are now paying for Joffe’s legal fees due to sanctions ordered in blistering terms. I’ll quote Judge Middlebrooks one more time because it’s hilarious. > This case should never have been brought. Its inadequacy as a legal claim was evident from the start. No reasonable lawyer would have filed it. Intended for a political purpose, none of the counts of the amended complaint stated a cognizable legal claim. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2023, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/484 "2023-01-28T02:36:52Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > This case should never have been brought. Its inadequacy as a legal claim was evident from the start. No reasonable lawyer would have filed it. Intended for a political purpose, none of the counts of the amended complaint stated a cognizable legal claim. If I were the judge, I would have ordered that Trump’s lawyers must put this phrase directly on their CV’s when applying for jobs or meeting new clients. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2023, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/485 "2023-01-28T16:23:13Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > > [@JohnT](#): > > > > > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > > > > > It may turn out to be a total dud, but we can’t say until it is closed. > > > > It’s a dud! > > Calling it “a dud” is looking rather charitable, actually. How about “poisoned nothingburger”? ---
**Author:** ![Quint](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/76d3ee/32.png) [@Quint](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quint)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2023, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/486 "2023-01-29T04:09:14Z")
High five ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2023, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/487 "2023-01-30T16:07:01Z")
There is an OPINION piece in the NY Times today that discusses and contextualizes the findings from the Times’ reporting on Barr and Durham. [I’ll gift link it here](https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/30/opinion/william-barr-durham-report.html?unlocked_article_code=jCixAmIItWRPFL8fMMefB24aXxzuAmVuRZClo5MKwBmKkKPezKPOn4KBlTKSrdm0HTY4BAln_vfyeC3j3LTEIstymkfQgA6nwvpuLzji2vmswLsdRiRurRAZC2O9Kpcsta61W5DffIWPZlsMeFQCLCa5O5qUqolFVASgwvtAOu01uXggh9nGCwnO1rwadmSPXPfMnBz3x12wM6hvACbrVh-RNLZKACuTVqyz5ZyWiikqfB2km396NAXReLygO-562DCwEn93eEfrTRbOSrQy1_X5gEIF1_qGM1ZEi_CNDu_PUm3TS4w3OYJN8BqS4_BqX5PzI6ztRhtuD-AYTm91Yk8h810&smid=share-url) for those interested. Some choice moments: Regarding his supposed “turnaround” on Trump: > Former Attorney General William Barr has spent the last year in a desperate salvage operation for what’s left of his legal and ethical reputation. During his 22 months in office, he allowed his Justice Department to become [a personal protection racket](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/09/opinion/sunday/michael-flynn-william-barr-justice-department.html) for his boss, Donald Trump, and left prosecutors, the F.B.I. and other law enforcement officials subject to the worst impulses of the president. But then, in his 2022 memoir, Mr. Barr did an about-face, [bashing Mr. Trump](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/27/us/politics/bill-barr-trump-january-6.html) for lacking a presidential temperament and singling out his “self-indulgence and lack of self-control.” > The hollow and self-serving nature of this turnabout was always apparent. Mr. Barr never made these concerns public at a time when his dissent would have made a difference. Instead, he left office in 2020 showering compliments on his boss, praising Mr. Trump’s [“unprecedented achievements”](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/14/us/politics/trump-officials-jan-6-testimony.html) and promising that Justice would continue to pursue claims of voter fraud that he must have known were baseless. Regarding the Durham investigation specifically: > Attorneys general are not supposed to interfere in a special counsel’s investigation. The whole point of the system is to isolate the prosecution of sensitive cases from the appearance of political meddling. But the new Times reporting shows that Mr. Barr did the opposite, regularly meeting with Mr. Durham to discuss his progress and advocating on his behalf with intelligence officials when they were unable to come up with the nonexistent proof Mr. Barr wanted to see. > The Durham investigation, of course, has never presented any evidence that the F.B.I. or intelligence agencies committed any misconduct in the course of the Russia investigation, bitterly disappointing Mr. Barr and especially his patron, Mr. Trump, who had assured his supporters for months that it would produce something big. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2023, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/488 "2023-01-30T17:23:46Z")
> [@ShadowFacts](#): > > But the new Times reporting shows that Mr. Barr did the opposite, regularly meeting with Mr. Durham to discuss his progress and advocating on his behalf with intelligence officials when they were unable to come up with the nonexistent proof Mr. Barr wanted to see. This NYT description strikes me as misleading. At least under Mueller’s appointment, he was clearly directed to regularly update the Attorney General (or Rosenstein, since the AG had recused). It’s not unusual for the two to meet, at regularly scheduled intervals. Whether that **should be** or not, I couldn’t say, but it isn’t _unusual_. Likewise, if Durham needs something from the CIA and the CIA is being non-cooperative, then it would not be strange for him to request that the AG intercede on his behalf. It may be that Barr and Durham were being overly chummy and viewing their mission with rose-tinted goggles, but that’s a separate matter from a special counsel meeting with his boss for various reasons. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [January 31, 2023, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/489 "2023-01-31T02:52:01Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > At least under Mueller’s appointment, he was clearly directed to regularly update the Attorney General (or Rosenstein, since the AG had recused). It’s not unusual for the two to meet, at regularly scheduled intervals. Whether that **should be** or not, I couldn’t say, but it isn’t _unusual_. No, this was a hugely exceptional situation between Barr and Durham. It’s not a misleading quote. Please point to any other special counsel who met regularly with their AG or their designee during their investigation(s). I’ll save you some time: They never did. And while AG Garland has reserved the right – as Barr did, for the first time ever, so far as I know – to make any final _charging decisions_, that’s a far cry from meeting “at regularly scheduled intervals” with Jack Smith. If you’ve got a cite to the contrary, I’d love to see it. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [February 2, 2023, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/490 "2023-02-02T18:32:58Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Calling it “a dud” is looking rather charitable, actually. Yeah probably not a dud [![](https://www.alternateending.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/fastandfurryous.jpg) ](https://www.alternateending.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/fastandfurryous.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![N9IWP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/n9iwp/32/3154_2.png) [@N9IWP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/N9IWP)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2023, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/491 "2023-02-28T00:27:11Z")
I believe this is related: [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/u7j5a4Gz42Y/maxresdefault.jpg "Trump's Lawyers Fined $1,000,000+") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7j5a4Gz42Y) Brian ---
**Author:** ![PatrickLondon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/patricklondon/32/4422_2.png) [@PatrickLondon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatrickLondon)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2023, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/492 "2023-02-28T12:38:20Z")
Does he ever draw breath? I hope he doesn’t gabble like that when arguing a case in court. ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2023, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/493 "2023-02-28T14:41:40Z")
I wonder if his YouTube videos have cost or gained him clients. ---
**Author:** ![carrps](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carrps/32/2957_2.png) [@carrps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrps)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2023, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/494 "2023-02-28T18:02:26Z")
Funny. I’ve never noticed him speaking especially fast. I guess he does? But it’s certainly never been an issue for me. ---
**Author:** ![Atamasama](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/atamasama/32/12961_2.png) [@Atamasama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Atamasama)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2023, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/495 "2023-02-28T19:08:20Z")
> [@carrps](#): > > But it’s certainly never been an issue for me. Not only is not an issue for me, he’s one of the few YouTube commentators that speaks quickly enough for me. Most videos are slow and draw things out. Devin gets out the info in a quick and punchy way that doesn’t make me want to stop watching. Note… I know I’m weird. My brain processes things in an odd way. I have trouble with videos that explain things because my mind needs it faster. I also struggle heavily with instructor-led training (and suffered in school because of it). That’s why I usually like reading; my brain can input as fast as it needs to. To me, Devin is normal speed and everything else is slo mo. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2023, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/496 "2023-02-28T19:14:42Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > Not only is not an issue for me, he’s one of the few YouTube commentators that speaks quickly enough for me. Most videos are slow and draw things out. Devin gets out the info in a quick and punchy way that doesn’t make me want to stop watching. I get it. I _have_ to speed up most videos to keep focussed, or I will get bored and let my mind wander between words. I’d actually like greater than the 2x speed I watch most videos at. Legal Eagle usually gets 1.25 or 1.5 speed. ---
**Author:** ![carrps](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carrps/32/2957_2.png) [@carrps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrps)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2023, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/497 "2023-02-28T21:58:45Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > To me, Devin is normal speed and everything else is slo mo. Yes! O.k. Discourse, Yes! Yes! Yes! ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2023, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/498 "2023-03-01T05:20:06Z")
> [@Atamasama](#): > > Note… I know I’m weird. My brain processes things in an odd way. I have trouble with videos that explain things because my mind needs it faster > [@k9bfriender](#): > > I get it. I _have_ to speed up most videos to keep focussed, or I will get bored and let my mind wander between words. I dunno if we’re weird, but I’m one who regularly speeds up any video that’s trying to explain something to me (thankfully most training videos at work have this option). I’m also someone who thinks “Oh yeah, so I can listen to you wander around while you figure out what the meat of the problem actually is!” when my co-worker wants to have a call about something, Sometimes the process of having a call is actually a benefit, but it often would have been better served by the other party actually thinking through what their question was and sending me a chat message about it. ---
**Author:** ![carrps](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carrps/32/2957_2.png) [@carrps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carrps)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2023, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/499 "2023-03-01T22:39:13Z")
We used to have a position designated as Programmer of the Day (POD) who would do nothing but help people with problems during that day (the senior level programmers rotated through it). I told one of them once that I liked to go to them because if I started explaining my problem, halfway through the explanation I’d figure out the solution. Sometimes you just need an ear. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2023, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/500 "2023-03-01T22:40:16Z")
Moderating: The last several posts are far afield of the topic of this thread. Let’s cease with the hijack now, please. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Turek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/turek/32/18782_2.png) [@Turek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Turek)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2023, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215/501 "2023-03-02T12:55:18Z")
> [@carrps](#): > > I told one of them once that I liked to go to them because if I started explaining my problem, halfway through the explanation I’d figure out the solution. Sometimes you just need an ear. > **[Rubber duck debugging](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubber_duck_debugging)** > > In software engineering, rubber duck debugging (or rubberducking) is a method of debugging code by articulating a problem in spoken or written natural language. The name is a reference to a story in the book The Pragmatic Programmer in which a programmer would carry around a rubber duck and debug their code by forcing themselves to explain it, line by line, to the duck. Many other terms exist for this technique, often involving different (usually) inanimate objects, or pets such as a dog or a > Many programmers have had the experience of explaining a problem to someone else, possibly even to someone who knows nothing about programming, and then hitting upon the solution in the process of explaining the problem. In describing what the code is supposed to do and observing what it actually does, any incongruity between these two becomes apparent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215.md?page=24) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-durham-indictments-prosecuting-fake-trump-collusion/951215.md?page=26)