Clinton Russiagate witnesses refuse to cooperate with Durham investigation

by WorldTribune Staff, April 19, 2022

At least five contractors/researchers who worked for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign have invoked the Fifth Amendment and refused to cooperate with special counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.

In an April 15 court filing, Durham revealed that he gave immunity to an individual identified only as “Research 2.” He then noted that this was made necessary by the refusal to cooperate by key Clinton associates.

At least five individuals who worked on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign have invoked the Fifth Amendment in the John Durham investigation.

“The only witness currently immunized by the government, Researcher-2, was conferred with that status on July 28, 2021 – over a month prior to the defendant’s Indictment in this matter,” Durham wrote. “And the Government immunized Researcher-2 because, among other reasons, at least five other witnesses who conducted work relating to the Russian Bank-1 allegations invoked (or indicated their intent to invoke) their right against self-incrimination. The Government therefore pursued Researcher-2’s immunity in order to uncover otherwise-unavailable facts underlying the opposition research project that Tech Executive-1 and others carried out in advance of the defendant’s meeting with the FBI.”

The investigation has gained significant momentum in recent weeks:

• Durham defeated an effort by Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann to dismiss the charges against him.
• Durham revealed that claims made by the Clinton campaign were viewed by the CIA as “not technically plausible” and “user created.”
• Durham offered further details on the involvement of Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias and former British spy Christopher Steele in the alleged false claims.

Durham notes in a court filing that both the CIA and FBI were sent on an effective wild goose chase by the Clinton campaign: “Agency-2 concluded in early 2017 that the Russian Bank-1 data and Russian Phone Provider-1 data was not ‘technically plausible,’ did not ‘withstand technical scrutiny,’ ‘contained gaps,’ ‘conflicted with [itself],’ and was ‘user created and not machine/tool generated.’ ”

“This dovetails with the statements of the Clinton associates themselves who were worried about the lack of support for the Russian collusion claims,” law professor Jonathan Turley noted in an April 17 analysis.

Durham also detailed how the false Russian collusion claims related to Alfa Bank involved Clinton General Counsel Elias and ex-British spy Steele. The new requested immunized testimony would come from a Tech executive who allegedly can share information on meetings with Elias and Steele.

“The Alfa Bank hoax and Sussmann’s efforts paralleled the work of his partner Elias at the law firm Perkins Coie in pushing the Steele Dossier in a separate debunked collusion claim,” Turley noted. “The Federal Election Commission recently fined the Clinton Campaign and the DNC for hiding the funding of the dossier as a legal cost by Elias at Perkins Coie.”


About . . . . Intelligence . . . . Membership

You must be logged in to post a comment Login