The Washington Examiner reports that Jason Chaffetz, the former House Republican who represented Utah, believes that Special Counsel John Durham has discovered an “incestuous relationship” during his investigation of the Russian Collusion Hoax. 

This comes after Durham’s latest court filing in his case against Attorney Michael Sussmann, who stands accused of lying to the FBI when he met with agents in 2016 to present evidence of a link between Donald Trump and the Russia-linked Alfa Bank.

During that meeting, Sussmann claimed that he was not working on behalf of anyone when Durham says that he has evidence that Sussmann, at the time, was working both for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign as well as for technology executive Rodney Joffe.

Sussmann has pled not guilty, and he even tried to get the case dismissed, although the judge denied his motion. Now, a fight is going on over what evidence ought to be admissible at the trial that is scheduled to begin next month.

The “incestuous relationship”

Chaffetz recently discussed Durham’s latest court filing while guest-hosting the Fox News Channel’s Sunday Morning Features. 

“The allegation here is that Michael Sussmann got in with a meeting with the general counsel there at the Federal Bureau of Investigation by representing that he wasn’t representing anybody,” Chaffetz said.

He continued:

But there’s other documentation and flow of money and logs and whatnot. That’s why this is a case that is important, because these people had this incestuous relationship to be able to actually go in and access things that other people that are on the receiving end of these — of these types of prosecutions don’t get to do.

The latest

In Durham’s latest court filing, which was made on Friday, he stated that the CIA had determined that the link between Trump and Russia provided by Sussmann was “not technically plausible” and “user created.” Durham, though, said that his investigation “has not reached a definitive conclusion in this regard.”

In the court filing, Durham is responding to objections made by Sussmann’s legal team about what evidence ought to be allowed at trial. Durham is arguing that this sort of information is necessary to prove his case, whereas Sussmann is arguing that it is not.

One important question that will be decided in the near future is whether this case will actually go to trial or not.

Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) opined that he’s “not sure that the Clinton campaign folks or the Democratic Party want to see this go to trial and air their dirty laundry even further.”

Another important question is whether Durham is closing in on an even bigger fish, such as Clinton herself.