The big revelation in the Sussmann trial -- John Durham's second, and most high-profile, prosecution -- is that Hillary Clinton herself authorized the leak of the campaign's Alfa Bank conspiracy theory to the media. The theory claimed Trump was colluding with Russia via the bank. It was based on data that the campaign had mined via Sussmann -- though they had no reason to know it was credible. They hoped the FBI, or the media, would be able to authenticate it.
The leak, which apparently resulted in stories at Slate and the New York Times, was aimed at creating an "October surprise" against Trump, who was trailing badly in the polls at the time Sussmann, Marc Elias, Jake Sullivan, and others came up with the scheme -- though by the time the story hit the media, Hillary had suffered an "October surprise" of her own, with James Comey announcing that he was reopening the investigation into her email server.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/fbi-russia-election-donald-trump.html
The question is: why did Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who led a two-year investigation into the broader "Russia collusion" conspiracy theory, fail to find evidence of Hillary Clinton's role? Why didn't Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz find it, and why did he conclude that while political bias may have played a role later, the start of the inquiry was basically fine?
The revelation of this fact alone justifies the establishment of the Special Counsel. Clearly the DOJ -- not Mueller, with a team of partisan prosecutors; not the IG, appointed by Barack Obama; and not the rank-and-file agents, who included people like anti-Trump crusader Peter Strzok -- was incapable of handling this entire issue. Without Durham, we would not know that Hillary Clinton was personally responsible for one of the most pernicious lies in American history -- one the American media eagerly peddled to the public.
This is my first broadcast from the new office and studio in Washington, DC, where I'll be for a couple of years my neighborhood back in L.A. cleans up -- and as we follow the Trump administration from a little closer up than usual.
Topics:
And more!
Special guests:
Tune in: 7-10 p.m. ET, 4-7 p.m. PT
Call: 866-957-2874
This week’s portion tells the grand story of the prophet who tried to curse people of Israel and instead ended up blessing them.
I am reminded that these portions continue to be relevant anew, as this particular reading lent the title for Israel’s recent 12 Day War against Iran, “Operation Rising Lion.”
This week's portion includes the commandment of the red heifer -- one of the classic "irrational" commandments whose fulfillment is an expression of faith. It also includes the regrettable episode in which Moses strikes the rock.
I referred to this story in a wedding speech last night. Why was Moses punished for striking the rock in Numbers, when he struck the rock without incident in Exodus -- both for the purpose of providing water to the people?
The answer is that in the interim, the Jewish people had received the Torah, which is like the marriage contract between the people of Israel and God. In a marriage, you do not resolve things by breaking boundaries, but through love.
The additional reading, from Judges Chapter 11, is the story of Jephthah (Yiftach), a man whom the leaders spurn, but to whom they must turn to save the nation. The parallels to our present political circumstances are striking.
Shabbat Shalom and Happy Fourth of July!
...