Immediately following the 2020 presidential election, candidate Hillary Clinton and other leading Democrats floated the possibility that Donald Trump had illegally colluded with Russia.
This idea got plenty of traction in the mainstream media and many leftist voters clung to the theory for years. However, evidence quickly began to mount that debunked the claims.
And now, one FBI agent might’ve just layed this theory to rest — once and for all.
Special Counsel John Durham has been pursuing a case against Democratic cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussman, who first brought an infamous report of a “Trump/Russia collusion” to the FBI.
TRENDING : Federal Court Drops The Gavel On Biden – Judge Rules In Favor Of Religious Beliefs Temporarily Blocks Mandate
Durham maintains that Sussman fraudulently invented the evidence, specifically to make Trump look bad.
Sussman has been officially charged with hiding his clients from FBI General Counsel James Baker, when he pushed the accusation that the Trump Organization had conspired with Russia’s Alfa-Bank.
But as this case keeps rolling along, it seems less and less likely that any such reports were accurate.
Via Washington Examiner:
An FBI agent involved in analyzing the since-debunked Trump-Russia collusion claims pushed to the bureau by Democratic cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann testified that an analysis rejected claims of a secret back channel to Russia within days.
Scott Hellman is an FBI supervisory special agent that leads a cybercrime investigation team. He said he and another supervisor obtained thumb drives and other info the day after Sussman met with Baker.
At that time, Hellman and his colleague reviewed the communication claims — and rejected them almost immediately.
TRENDING : John Durham Executes His Final Plan On Hillary – He Just Kicked Off The Trial Into Clinton’s Lawyer Michael Sussmann
Sussman’s paper apparently held allegations that there was a “secret communications channel” between Trump’s team and Alfa-Bank. But Hellman says this claim simply didn’t hold any water:
We did not agree with the conclusion … that this represented a secret communication channel.
Whoever had written that paper had jumped to some conclusions that were not supported by the data. The methodology they chose was questionable to me.
Hellman added that there “wasn’t enough data to make the conclusion that there was any communication.”
The “White Paper #1,” provided to the FBI by Sussman, claimed the Trump Organization had been using a “very unusually configured ‘secret’ email server” to communicate with Alfa Bank in Moscow.
But the FBI said the report was based on very questionable data, and Hellman also said it was “suspicious” that this supposed communication began about 3 weeks before the start of the investigation.
Lastly, Hellman said “the motivation of whoever is giving me the information is very important.”
In this case, Trump supporters will undoubtedly focus on the motivation of Sussman and his fellow Democrats, possibly including then-candidate Hillary Clinton. They had all the reason in the world to cast doubt on Trump’s victory.
Since that time, many leftist voters still believe Trump and Russia secretly “colluded” to steal that election.
However, at this point, there just doesn’t appear to much evidence – if any – to support such a wild claim. We’ll have to wait and see what happens with the Durham probe but currently, the situation seems clear.