2 Intriguing Points About Durham’s Allegations

Two intriguing points about the Durham allegations

By: Andrea Widburg

There are few people who have followed the Russia collusion hoax as closely as Dan Bongino. That’s why I made sure to listen to his podcast the Monday after the story broke regarding John Durham’s allegations about the Hillary campaign spying on Trump Tower, Trump’s apartment, and the White House. Sure enough, Bongino had a couple of interesting points to make. Also, I’ll share with you my predictions about what’s going to happen on the Hillary side of things.

When I wrote about the Durham motion to investigate potential conflicts of interest between Michael Sussmann and his attorney, the law firm of Latham & Watkins, I focused on the core point, which was that Hillary’s campaign, acting through the Perkins Coie law firm, spied on Trump. Bongino, though, had a few more subtle points to make. You can watch his video here, of course, but here are the two main takeaways:

First, I missed something very important in Durham’s motion. Here’s what Durham wrote at paragraph 5: “The Government’s evidence at trial will also establish that among the Internet data Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited was domain name system (DNS) Internet traffic pertaining to …”

What Bongino caught is that Durham wrote “among the Internet data … was domain name system … Internet traffic.” That strongly implies that DNS information, which simply means sites accessed, isn’t the only information involved. It’s possible that Durham can show that there rae other internet data that the Hillary camp exploited, things such as emails or shared documents.

Second, Bongino thinks the real bombshell in this is that Durham is warning Sussmann that Latham & Watkins is a very dangerous law firm to have representing him. The reason is that one of the top Latham & Watkins attorneys is a gal named Kathryn Ruemmler or, as Bongino calls her, “The Fixer.” He points out that Ruemmler has her finger in every single corrupt pie baked during the Obama administration.

Kathryn Ruemmler hugging Obama following a Supreme Court victory (Public Domain)

Before moving to Latham & Watkins, Ruemmler was Obama’s White House counsel and ran interference for him. But before that, she worked on the Enron case with Andrew Weissmann, the man who really ran the Mueller “investigation.”

After leaving the White House, Ruemmler represented George Nader, a convicted pedophile who set up meetings between Trump people and representatives of the United Arab Emirates. He eventually pleaded guilty to having helped the UAE put millions of dollars illegally into Hillary’s 2016 presidential campaign. Ruemmler also represented Susan Rice. Rice was the one who sent a memo to self on her last day in the White House assuring posterity that, when the Obama administration was spying on people, it was doing everything “by the book.”

Bongino believes that both Obama and, probably, Biden knew about the spying. Ruemmler’s job, as always, will be to keep Obama clean. As a power partner at Latham & Watkins, she can be expected to force the “Sacrifice of Sussmann,” if need be.

Here are are a few more Latham & Watkins tidbits that Bongino didn’t mention. Someone else who’s a partner there is Liz Cheney’s husband. That same linked article points out that Latham & Watkins gets a lot of business from “Chinese entities and countries whose human rights abuses and authoritarian rule have troubled the U.S. for years[.]” The article details the Chinese companies, along with their connections to the CCP and the corrupt countries the firm represents. Cheney’s husband, if he is only an average partner at Latham & Watkins, brings home $4.5 million annually for his work.

Finally, what about Hillary? This Daily Mail article says the press is starting to ask her questions about spying on Trump, but she’s not answering. When last we heard from Hillary, she was making noises about running again in 2024, a surprisingly reasonable thing to do, considering that no one wants Biden or Kamala or, although he wishes it were otherwise, Pete Buttigieg.

However, with the Durham revelations, my guess is that the Democrats will offer Hillary up as a sacrificial lamb for the party. She’ll be asked to take responsibility with the promise that she’ll get no prison time. Instead, she’ll just retire from the public eye, having taken one for the party and protected both the Sainted Barack Obama and the current White House occupant.

The problem with this theory is that it’s hard to see Hillary going down quietly. There’s a meme circulating that quotes Hillary saying that if she goes down, she’ll take everyone else down with her. In fact, she never said that, but it’s just the kind of thing she’d do.

What I’m reminded of when I look at the potential fight between Hillary and Obama over culpability is the divorce of a power couple I knew. They were very, very rich, and if they’d cut the marital estate in half, each of them would still have been very, very rich. However, by the time of the divorce, they hated each other. Therefore, each was willing to risk having exposed horrible secrets about him- or herself if it meant he or she could publicize horrible secrets about the other. You can read about the divorce here.

Incidentally, I see the same possibility that mutually assured destruction will fail in Chris Cuomo’s $60-million suit against CNN (which really means against Jeff Zucker). They should keep silent because each has filthy dirty laundry, but the urge to destroy the other may override self-preservation.


This article (Two intriguing points about the Durham allegations) is republished here on TLB under “Fair Use” (see the TLB disclaimer below article) with attribution to the articles author Andrea Widburg and americanthinker.com.

TLB recommends that you visit the American Thinker for more great articles and info.


Read More Durham Probe Related Articles


Read more articles by Andrea Widburg


Click on the image below to visit & join site:



Stay tuned to …


The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)


Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.


Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.