Explained: Evidence That Shows Clinton Allies Spied On Trump

New information from the Durham report shows that the Clinton campaign acquired non-public data about Trump and manipulated it to serve its political agenda.

The New Evidence

Background: The Trump-Russia collusion hoax, now thoroughly disproven, was used by legacy media and politicians to discredit Donald Trump’s presidency. In efforts to uncover the true origins of the hoax, then-Attorney General William Barr launched an investigation in 2019, led by Special Counsel John Durham.

Recent findings from Durham: Durham reported that tech executive Rodney Joffe worked with Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman to spy on the Trump administration with the goal of fabricating a Russia-collusion narrative.

The Clinton lawyer: Sussman, who represented the Clinton campaign and Joffe, provided the FBI with a now-discredited tip linking former President Donald Trump to Russia.

  • During that meeting, Sussman failed to conceal his conflict of interest—working for then-candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign—and was ultimately indicted for it in 2021.

The tech executive: Joffe had a contract to maintain dedicated servers for the Executive Office of the President. He enlisted cyber researchers to use the proprietary and possibly classified data from his contract for political purposes.

Durham suggests spying: Durham says that Joffe tasked the researchers to establish a “narrative” that tied Trump to Russia. Durham also claims that the evidence was manipulated to seem conducive to collusion.

  • Those researchers targeted Trump Tower, Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and the Executive Office of the President.

Big picture: Clinton allies were building a collusion narrative with confidential data they obtained illegally.

  • Is this spying? Espionage or spying can be defined as “the act of obtaining secret or confidential information.”

If Hillary Clinton had won the presidency in 2016, these details would have never come to light.

The Legacy Media Covers It Up

NYT suggests the story shouldn’t be covered: The outlet stated that the story was complicated and required “significant mental energy” to understand. Because of that, they contemplated if it was even worth reporting.

  • It did not mention that Durham himself suggested that the researchers were tasked to develop a politically charged narrative.

AP defends researchers: The Associated Press claims that the researchers were not “spying” on Trump, just working at the request of federal officials to investigate Russian malware attacks. The article relied on testimony from a lawyer representing one of the researchers.

  • It also did not mention that Durham himself suggested that the researchers were tasked to develop a politically charged narrative.

Insider contradicts itself: In its recent explainer, Insider rationalized that the filing isn’t espionage but that the Clinton lawyer did obtain non-public data from the White House and Trump’s services (the definition of espionage).

Big picture: As evidence against the Clinton campaign grows, the legacy media continues to cover for the democratic party.

Update 4/2022

Now: New information from the CIA shows that the information provided to intelligence by Clinton allies to prove collusion was not “technically plausible.” In other words, the data wasn’t just skewed—it was probably completely fake information.


or to participate.