The available evidence calls into question the FBI's explanation for how its Trump-Russia conspiracy probe began. John Durham has already previewed that he will challenge it.
Top notch work as always, Aaron. The details you lay out in your articles always amaze me. It tells me you really are the perfect person to parse through all of the convoluted details of this clear malfeasance to cover-up Democratic party skullduggery during the Trump Presidency. The name "crossfire hurricane" does enlighten one to the real motivations behind investigating Trump. As the Democratic party truly saw him as a dangerous storm they had to deal with, no matter how much propaganda it took, or the lies that controlled the media for 4 years straight. My guess is now with the covid narrative dying, Trump hysteria will be rekindled once again. I am just glad we have the "Buzzsaw" to chop the msm narratives to pieces.
The technocrats are losing it and hopefully taking the failed attempt at technocratic totalitarianism with them. I write about technocratic totalitarianism here on substack, I'd would love to get feedback from a writer I truly respect, whether we agree or not.
Thanks for your work, Aaron. I can't wait to see you back on JD being witty as hell.
They always have the "1930s Redux" narrative to fall back on, which of course is why this Durham Report is so damaging. It challenges there number one means of keeping Trump out the Oval Office, regardless of the damage it does to the institutions. You should check out this article at The TransAtlantic, I think you might get something out of it...
Aaron, your reporting on this issue has been truly awesome, thank you so much for all you've done. You've endured being smeared as a "Trumper" just for telling the truth. I reluctantly voted for Trump, I'm not a huge fan, but we should all care about this abuse, it's outrageous. Whether we like Trump or not, this behavior by the intel community is really dangerous and destructive.
Agreed. Specifically its this "1930s Redux" theme that is constantly pushed. Whether a Trump supporter or Trump loather, the Durham Report findings make it clear that we have to challenge this narrative. It's so obfuscating of where constitutionally dangerous developments truly come from. If you're interested, check out this little article in The TransAtlantic.
Thanks for the update on what John Durham is up to in his relentless pursuit of FBI misfeasance; apparently exclusively focused on some form of political retaliation or retributive justice.🙄
I can't tell if this is a joke or not, but so far (and without knowing where it ends), Durham's pursuit appears to be of campaign surrogates and contractors for misleading the FBI and other government agencies rather than a relentless pursuit *of* the FBI. I hope that it doesn't end that way, because I have convinced myself that certain actors in the FBI and DoJ - and unquestionably the SCO's office - have acted in bad faith. But there are a couple of contrary indicators that are hard to explain.
The fact that the FISA court did not disbar the lawyers who applied for the warrants against Carter Page after publicly stating they made "material misstatements" in order to fraudulently acquire them is stunning. The FISA court is supposed to protect citizens from this violation of the 4th amendment and FBI lawyers lied in order to violate Page's civil rights. That fact alone shows to me that the FBI is beyond redemption. This was intentional so they could indirectly surveil Trump. Whether right or left leaning this should have everyone screaming foul.
First of all you appear to be factually very uninformed regarding the function and powers of the FISA court; as your fellow traveler "ih8edjfkjr" attempted to explain until coughing up the nonsense that:
"The FISA court cannot disbar an attorney." because😜 "They don't own a bar association."
Secondly the sad fact that DOJ lawyers and their FBI counterparts often fabricate evidence to intentionally prosecute faux trials in inquisional artifices disguised as courts of law is no remarkable revelation, it has been commonly known for decades.
Regarding that which is "stunning", it appears that this very recent willingness to accept blindly and repeat continuously the "alternative facts" coined by serial liars and propagandists, has given credence to overt ignorance in place of informed reason.
You have no idea my work history so I'll just have to assert that my work had a lot to do with the FISA court so to say I'm "uninformed" is ridiculous. Perhaps you should check your condescension at the door.
The FISA court was constructed to supposedly protect people's 4th amendment rights. To pretend otherwise is ridiculous. They clearly failed to do it as was shown by the IG report which detailed that 99% of the court requests were approved so our civil rights have basically been suspended by a court that rubber stamps everything. The lawyer which made the lying allegations against Page is already practicing law again.
For those familiar with the FISA court, it is drilled into us that people's rights are protected because the lawyers are required to present exculpatory information and ensure that their evidence is strong. That all goes out the window when the lawyers fabricate data to go after innocent citizens. The lawyer perjured himself. He should be disbarred.
The FISA court cannot disbar an attorney. They don't own a bar association. They prohibited some of them from practicing in front of the FISA court, which is all they can do.
So, you "...can't tell if this is a joke or not..." sort of defines your clarity regarding Bill Barr's appointment of Durham to launch a counter investigation of the prior administration's DOJ (FBI) and the somewhat sinister relationship it entertained with the Clinton campaign operatives. Could this simply be just another bipartisan CONservative melodramatic narrative designed to distract and confuse the believers❔
If GEORGE (the magazine) were still alive, it would certainly have something to say about this.👼
In watching the press struggle to portray DNS lookups described by Durham as benign activities involving generally available server data, please note a very significant technical exception. Durham says Joffe and his company somehow had commandeered DNS services for the EOP and Trump comms. With that access it is a very short leap to use DNS tunneling to access and exfiltrate all manner of data from the target network. Everything — emails, texts, documents — is available for surveillance. Control DNS services and you can tunnel past firewalls and all security. Perhaps that’s why Durham calls the Neustar arrangement “sensitive.” It damn sure is. Don’t let them blow smoke about benign lookups. This is an unbelievable development that exposes the security of our country to all sorts of nefarious outcomes. Tunneling is as old as the internet. https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/cyberpedia/what-is-dns-tunneling
Thank you Aaron for your excellent reporting. THIS is what real journalism is! The takeaway from this article is the US govt is massively corrupt at all levels. It is almost hopeless to fix as no matter WHO we vote for, these folks are still there!
When Mueller was investigating the Trump Administration, we had reams of stories speculating about what he was about to reveal. It seems that Aaron Maté here is following in that lamentable tradition. Of course, the Durham investigation might be much more significant than it has been so far. I'll believe it when I see it, thank you.
Are you seriously claiming that some of the information in the Sussman and Danchenko indictments are not significant and did not change your view of the mendacity of the Clinton campaign and its friends in promoting theories they knew were false?
It's not clear what form of journalistic muck you're drilling into to garner a comparison of Aaron Mate's work product with that of a DOJ operative like Mueller. Try reading sans political bias, and feel how that may enhance your substantive comprehension.✔
Yes, it is clear you have not understood my comparison of stories about the ongoing Mueller investigation, with this story about the ongoing Durham investigation. The first turned out, as Aaron Maté had maintained, without foundation. It remains to be seen whether this speculation, by Mr Maté, has any more veracity.
The subhead reads: "The available evidence calls into question the FBI's explanation for how its Trump-Russia conspiracy probe began. John Durham has already previewed that he will challenge it." Maybe he will; maybe he won't. Let us see.
Whether a Trump supporter, Trump loather, or Trump indifferent-er, the Durham Report findings ought to make it obvious that we have seriously to challenge the "1930s Redux" narrative that has been pumped out obsessively across our political discourses. It's so obfuscating of where constitutionally dangerous developments truly come from. If this thought interests readers here, do check out this little article in The TransAtlantic.
CBS news claims: "Witnesses called on Tuesday testified that Sussmann, who pleaded not guilty to the single count brought against him, was not involved in the collection or evaluation of the Alfa Bank data." This isn't true is it? Who testified to that? If they say someone said it, they should say who it is. Why isn't it even reported why they don't say who it was? If only.
Excellent reporting and sourcing.
Top notch work as always, Aaron. The details you lay out in your articles always amaze me. It tells me you really are the perfect person to parse through all of the convoluted details of this clear malfeasance to cover-up Democratic party skullduggery during the Trump Presidency. The name "crossfire hurricane" does enlighten one to the real motivations behind investigating Trump. As the Democratic party truly saw him as a dangerous storm they had to deal with, no matter how much propaganda it took, or the lies that controlled the media for 4 years straight. My guess is now with the covid narrative dying, Trump hysteria will be rekindled once again. I am just glad we have the "Buzzsaw" to chop the msm narratives to pieces.
The technocrats are losing it and hopefully taking the failed attempt at technocratic totalitarianism with them. I write about technocratic totalitarianism here on substack, I'd would love to get feedback from a writer I truly respect, whether we agree or not.
Thanks for your work, Aaron. I can't wait to see you back on JD being witty as hell.
https://christopherfalcon.substack.com/p/technocratic-totalitarianism?r=ylx40&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
They always have the "1930s Redux" narrative to fall back on, which of course is why this Durham Report is so damaging. It challenges there number one means of keeping Trump out the Oval Office, regardless of the damage it does to the institutions. You should check out this article at The TransAtlantic, I think you might get something out of it...
"Enough With the 1930s Analogies! The Durham Report is in, and it's Sober Reading" – https://thetransatlantic.substack.com/p/durham-report-trump-russia-nazis-history?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Reporting like this is what separates Aaron from anyone else, great work as always
Thanks for being so dedicated to finding the truth and being so damn good at it! :~)
Bravo Aaron for your high integrity, persistence and incredibly detailed research reporting.
I see multiple Pulitzer Prizes coming to you soon...
;-))
A PP would be the death knell! lol
Aaron, your reporting on this issue has been truly awesome, thank you so much for all you've done. You've endured being smeared as a "Trumper" just for telling the truth. I reluctantly voted for Trump, I'm not a huge fan, but we should all care about this abuse, it's outrageous. Whether we like Trump or not, this behavior by the intel community is really dangerous and destructive.
Agreed. Specifically its this "1930s Redux" theme that is constantly pushed. Whether a Trump supporter or Trump loather, the Durham Report findings make it clear that we have to challenge this narrative. It's so obfuscating of where constitutionally dangerous developments truly come from. If you're interested, check out this little article in The TransAtlantic.
"Enough With the 1930s Analogies! The Durham Report is in, and it's Sober Reading" – https://thetransatlantic.substack.com/p/durham-report-trump-russia-nazis-history?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
@ Aaron Mate 👍🎯
Thanks for the update on what John Durham is up to in his relentless pursuit of FBI misfeasance; apparently exclusively focused on some form of political retaliation or retributive justice.🙄
As Usual,
Thom Williams (aka Ethan Allen☠)
I can't tell if this is a joke or not, but so far (and without knowing where it ends), Durham's pursuit appears to be of campaign surrogates and contractors for misleading the FBI and other government agencies rather than a relentless pursuit *of* the FBI. I hope that it doesn't end that way, because I have convinced myself that certain actors in the FBI and DoJ - and unquestionably the SCO's office - have acted in bad faith. But there are a couple of contrary indicators that are hard to explain.
The fact that the FISA court did not disbar the lawyers who applied for the warrants against Carter Page after publicly stating they made "material misstatements" in order to fraudulently acquire them is stunning. The FISA court is supposed to protect citizens from this violation of the 4th amendment and FBI lawyers lied in order to violate Page's civil rights. That fact alone shows to me that the FBI is beyond redemption. This was intentional so they could indirectly surveil Trump. Whether right or left leaning this should have everyone screaming foul.
"Stunning" if you believe Julie Kelly is an intellectual and that Trump's 60+ court losses were just an unlucky streak.
Irrelevant to the illegal spying on Carter Page.
@ Laura ❔👼/ih8edjfkjr 🙄/MediaFan🎯
First of all you appear to be factually very uninformed regarding the function and powers of the FISA court; as your fellow traveler "ih8edjfkjr" attempted to explain until coughing up the nonsense that:
"The FISA court cannot disbar an attorney." because😜 "They don't own a bar association."
Secondly the sad fact that DOJ lawyers and their FBI counterparts often fabricate evidence to intentionally prosecute faux trials in inquisional artifices disguised as courts of law is no remarkable revelation, it has been commonly known for decades.
Regarding that which is "stunning", it appears that this very recent willingness to accept blindly and repeat continuously the "alternative facts" coined by serial liars and propagandists, has given credence to overt ignorance in place of informed reason.
As Usual,
Thom Williams (aka Ethan Allen☠)
You have no idea my work history so I'll just have to assert that my work had a lot to do with the FISA court so to say I'm "uninformed" is ridiculous. Perhaps you should check your condescension at the door.
The FISA court was constructed to supposedly protect people's 4th amendment rights. To pretend otherwise is ridiculous. They clearly failed to do it as was shown by the IG report which detailed that 99% of the court requests were approved so our civil rights have basically been suspended by a court that rubber stamps everything. The lawyer which made the lying allegations against Page is already practicing law again.
For those familiar with the FISA court, it is drilled into us that people's rights are protected because the lawyers are required to present exculpatory information and ensure that their evidence is strong. That all goes out the window when the lawyers fabricate data to go after innocent citizens. The lawyer perjured himself. He should be disbarred.
The FISA court cannot disbar an attorney. They don't own a bar association. They prohibited some of them from practicing in front of the FISA court, which is all they can do.
The lawyer perjured himself. He should be disbarred for perjury.
@ ih8edjfkjr 🤣
So, you "...can't tell if this is a joke or not..." sort of defines your clarity regarding Bill Barr's appointment of Durham to launch a counter investigation of the prior administration's DOJ (FBI) and the somewhat sinister relationship it entertained with the Clinton campaign operatives. Could this simply be just another bipartisan CONservative melodramatic narrative designed to distract and confuse the believers❔
If GEORGE (the magazine) were still alive, it would certainly have something to say about this.👼
As Usual,
Thom Williams (aka Ethan Allen☠)
Sadly, the Democrats have proven Trump to be correct. It was fake news and it was a hoax.
It's worse than that. It has shown how dangerous this 1930s narrative has become. Have a peek at this little article, I think you might appreciate it.
https://thetransatlantic.substack.com/p/durham-report-trump-russia-nazis-history?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
In watching the press struggle to portray DNS lookups described by Durham as benign activities involving generally available server data, please note a very significant technical exception. Durham says Joffe and his company somehow had commandeered DNS services for the EOP and Trump comms. With that access it is a very short leap to use DNS tunneling to access and exfiltrate all manner of data from the target network. Everything — emails, texts, documents — is available for surveillance. Control DNS services and you can tunnel past firewalls and all security. Perhaps that’s why Durham calls the Neustar arrangement “sensitive.” It damn sure is. Don’t let them blow smoke about benign lookups. This is an unbelievable development that exposes the security of our country to all sorts of nefarious outcomes. Tunneling is as old as the internet. https://www.paloaltonetworks.com/cyberpedia/what-is-dns-tunneling
If you are an aficionado of FBI Shenanigans, you might find this interesting...
https://thetransatlantic.substack.com/p/so-the-fbi-has-a-foreign-policy-now/comments
Thank you Aaron for your excellent reporting. THIS is what real journalism is! The takeaway from this article is the US govt is massively corrupt at all levels. It is almost hopeless to fix as no matter WHO we vote for, these folks are still there!
When Mueller was investigating the Trump Administration, we had reams of stories speculating about what he was about to reveal. It seems that Aaron Maté here is following in that lamentable tradition. Of course, the Durham investigation might be much more significant than it has been so far. I'll believe it when I see it, thank you.
Are you seriously claiming that some of the information in the Sussman and Danchenko indictments are not significant and did not change your view of the mendacity of the Clinton campaign and its friends in promoting theories they knew were false?
@ Michael Meo 🦨
It's not clear what form of journalistic muck you're drilling into to garner a comparison of Aaron Mate's work product with that of a DOJ operative like Mueller. Try reading sans political bias, and feel how that may enhance your substantive comprehension.✔
As Usual,
Thom Williams (aka Ethan Allen☠)
Yes, it is clear you have not understood my comparison of stories about the ongoing Mueller investigation, with this story about the ongoing Durham investigation. The first turned out, as Aaron Maté had maintained, without foundation. It remains to be seen whether this speculation, by Mr Maté, has any more veracity.
@ Michael Meo 🙄
What specific "speculation," by Mr. Mate," are you referring to as being "lamentable"❔
As Usual,
EA☠
The subhead reads: "The available evidence calls into question the FBI's explanation for how its Trump-Russia conspiracy probe began. John Durham has already previewed that he will challenge it." Maybe he will; maybe he won't. Let us see.
Nice piece!
Whether a Trump supporter, Trump loather, or Trump indifferent-er, the Durham Report findings ought to make it obvious that we have seriously to challenge the "1930s Redux" narrative that has been pumped out obsessively across our political discourses. It's so obfuscating of where constitutionally dangerous developments truly come from. If this thought interests readers here, do check out this little article in The TransAtlantic.
"Enough With the 1930s Analogies! The Durham Report is in, and it's Sober Reading" – https://thetransatlantic.substack.com/p/durham-report-trump-russia-nazis-history?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Left out: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/john-durham-michael-sussman-trial-donald-trump/
CBS news claims: "Witnesses called on Tuesday testified that Sussmann, who pleaded not guilty to the single count brought against him, was not involved in the collection or evaluation of the Alfa Bank data." This isn't true is it? Who testified to that? If they say someone said it, they should say who it is. Why isn't it even reported why they don't say who it was? If only.
Great article
Damn this is good shit