Update
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Michael Sussmann, Clinton campaign lawyer, found not guilty of lying to FBI

Clinton 2016 campaign lawyer acquitted of lying to the FBI

Michael Sussmann, a cybersecurity lawyer who represented the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign in 2016, walks towards the waiting members of the media outside the federal courthouse in Washington, Tuesday, May 31, 2022. Sussmann was acquitted Tuesday of lying to the FBI when he pushed information meant to cast suspicions on Donald Trump and Russia in the run-up to the 2016 election. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)
WASHINGTON (AP) — A lawyer for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign was acquitted Tuesday of lying to the FBI when he pushed information meant to cast suspicions on Donald Trump and Russia in the run-up to the 2016 election.

The case against Michael Sussmann was the first courtroom test of special counsel John Durham since his appointment three years ago to search for government misconduct during the investigation into potential ties between Russia and Trump’s 2016 campaign. The verdict represents a setback for Durham’s work, especially since Trump supporters had looked to the probe to expose what they contend was egregious bias by law enforcement officials who investigated the former president and his campaign.

The jury deliberated on Friday afternoon and Tuesday morning before reaching its verdict.

Speaking to reporters outside the courthouse after the verdict was delivered, Sussmann said he “told the truth to the FBI, and the jury clearly recognized that with their unanimous verdict today.”

He added: “Despite being falsely accused, I am relieved that justice ultimately prevailed in this case.”

In a separate statement, Durham said that though he and his team were disappointed in the outcome, they respected the jury’s decision. He thanked the investigators and prosecutors on his team for their dedicated efforts in seeking truth and justice in this case.”

The trial focused on whether Sussmann, a cybersecurity attorney and former federal prosecutor, concealed from the FBI that he was representing Clinton’s campaign when he presented computer data that he said showed a possible secret backchannel between Russia-based Alfa Bank and Trump’s business company, the Trump Organization. The FBI investigated but quickly determined that there was no suspicious contact.

The bureau’s then-general counsel and the government’s star witness, James Baker, testified that he was “100% confident” that Sussmann had told him that he was not representing any client during the meeting. Prosecutors say he was actually acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and another client, and that he hid that information so as to make it seem more credible and to boost the chances of getting the FBI to investigate.

Lawyers for Sussmann deny that he lied, saying that it was impossible to know with certainty what he told Baker since they were the only participants in the meeting and neither of them took notes.

They argued that if Sussmann said he wasn’t acting on the Clinton campaign’s behalf that that was technically accurate since he didn’t ask the FBI to take any particular action. And they said that even if he did make a false statement, it was ultimately irrelevant since the FBI was already investigating Russia and the Trump campaign and would have looked into the Alfa Bank data no matter the source.

During the two-week trial, jurors heard from current and former FBI officials who described efforts to assess the data’s legitimacy as well as former Clinton campaign aides.

The original Trump-Russia investigation, overseen for two years by former special counsel Robert Mueller, found multiple efforts by Russia to interfere on the Trump campaign’s behalf but did not establish that the two sides had worked together to sway the election.

After Mueller’s work was done, then-Attorney General William Barr named a new Justice Department prosecutor, then-Connecticut U.S. Attorney Durham, to examine whether anyone from the FBI or other agencies violated the law as the government opened its investigation into Russian election interference and the Trump campaign.

Durham has remained at work into the Biden administration. He has brought three cases so far, though the one against Sussmann is the only to have reached trial. A former FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, was given probation after pleading guilty in 2020 to altering an email related to the surveillance of an ex-Trump campaign aide, and a Russian analyst who contributed to a dossier of Democratic-funded research into ties between Russia and Trump awaits trial on charges of lying to the FBI about his sources of information.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-hillary-clinton-john-durham-presidential-elections-59158f83bd6a9159b420f2b04848b77f
TexChik · F
Of course with Hilary supporters allowed on the jury , what other outcome could there be?
Ironhand · 51-55, M
@Spunkylama The man was on trial for lying to the FBI on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, it's completely appropriate to ask potential jurors their political leanings. Not only were there Clinton supporters on the jury, but donors to the campaign, whose funds may have actually been used to pay Sussmann. That alone should have excluded them from serving.
TexChik · F
@Spunkylama it was proven 3 jurors were Hillary supporters and the judge allowed them in the jury anyway
Budwick · 70-79, M
@Spunkylama You have asked and answered your own question.
4meAndyou · F
Since Sussman claimed that he was not acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign, I wonder why his records show that he billed Hillary Clinton for those hours during which he met with the FBI? 🤔🤔🤔
Oh okay so this was a set up. Hillary got away yet again!
This victory for the right was stolen much like the 2020 election.

@Ironhand But that was never found, either. And the GOP looked.
@Spunkylama
There was no proof of electron fraud.
The mountain evidence is taller than Everest. If the polls shut down with Biden showing a commanding lead, and then Trump miraculously wins a couple of days later...the collectivist trantrum from the libs would make your 2016 meltdown look like a walk in the park. Barr never investigated, so how could he possibly know? Who at OAN did an investigation? Yet the AZ and WI audits showed us plenty of evidence. True The Vote has shown proof as seen in 2000 Mules. Now, because of 2000 mules, there have been arrests and perps who've pled guilty. Now CNN and MSNBC are admitting that the inpenetrable Dominion machines were, in fact, vulnerable to being hacked. It's just a matter of time.
TexChik · F
@BizSuitStacy yep. It will all come out
Hey Republicans, I'm sure you'll get her next time!
Budwick · 70-79, M
@Spunkylama She has become such an albatross, the dems might want to......
go away.
@Spunkylama LOL!!!

BTW, when I was temporarily logged out, I noticed @BizSuitStacy claiming that Durham was going to drop a pile of new indictments. Since @BizSuitStacy blocks me, could someone be kind enough to inform him/her/it that due to the 5 year federal statute of limitations, there is very little 2016 election era activity for Durham to charge. While Durham was "reelin' in the years and stowin' away the time" for the last 36 months, he seems to have missed the statute deadline.
Not a huge surprise as many predicted there would be issues with the jury. But during the trial, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook confirmed Hillary approved the release of Trump-Alfa Bank allegations, knowing it was bogus. That might turn out to be more important than getting Sussmann.
4meAndyou · F
@BizSuitStacy Wouldn't THAT be nice. I hope he is living in a safe house somewhere.
Budwick · 70-79, M
This jury was pretty dispositioned to have a not guilty verdict. And here we are again, another black eye for the justice system!

The jury was stacked with Hillary and AOC donors.

Judge Cooper also denied a request by prosecutors to remove a juror from the panel because her daughter and Sussmann’s daughter are on the same crew team.

Chris Cooper, the Obama-appointed judge also had numerous conflicts of interest.

The justice system is corrupt. As is the FBI and CIA, DOJ, the president and more than half of the legislators in DC.

Vote for Conservative republicans in the mid term.
So then what's next for the Durham investigation? James Comey?

Ooops, bit of a problem with investigating Comey. The Constitution promises a "speedy and public trial" and that works out to a 5 year statute of limitations for filing federal charges. Trump fired Comey on May 9th, 2017. That's just over 5 years ago. So Durham can't charge Comey, or anybody else, with anything that happened over 5 years ago.

The Durham investigation has lasted over 36 months so far, has ZERO convictions, and seems to have fiddled away critical time. The statute of limitations leaves very little for Durham to continue to investigate.

By comparison, the Mueller investigation lasted only 22 months, and produced EIGHT felony convictions in that period, as well as hundreds of pages of reports of how Russia worked to help Trump win the 2016 election, and the many contacts between the Trump campaign and Kremlin agents.
Seems some nerves hit
@bijouxbroussard But but we had the positive self diagnosis letter from trump's proctologist!
@Spunkylama True.
Budwick · 70-79, M
@Spunkylama
What I find funny is that hate when the left attempts this with Trump but yet are all in to lock Hillary up for any reason at all.

Yeah, so funny.
The difference is that Hillary is guilty of any number of heinous crimes including treason and sedition.

While Trump is guilty of exposing the left wing agenda and mean tweets.
Confined · 56-60, M
This may set president that lying to the FBI is ok. Every person brought to trial could simply say hey Sussmann lied and was let off, so I should be also.
Ironhand · 51-55, M
@Carla And you understand how pleas work right? The government basically gives you a statement to sign as part of the plea deal. Again, I direct you back to the FBI agents 302s where the said Flynn was truthful when questioned until Peter Strozk got a hold of them.
Carla · 61-69, F
@Ironhand he had conversations with russians and said he did not. He lied. I dont know what else he was or was not telling the truth about, but of this, he lied. He admitted he lied. Lying to the fbi is a crime.
In order to be pardoned for a crime, the criminal must have been found guilty of a crime.
So now you can go into how our entire justice and judicial system is corrupt.
But only when that notion suits your narrative.
Ironhand · 51-55, M
@Carla He had discussions with the Russian National Security advisor after the election. That's common for an incoming administration. The FBI agents who questioned Flynn literally put in their 302 forms (FBI form 302 is used to document an interview) that they did not feel that Flynn was being deceptive during their questioning. It wasn't until Peter Strozk illegally altered those 302s that Flynn was charged and plead out. That didn't come out until after Flynn's court date. That wjat those hearings were about and why Strozk was fired from the FBI.
Heartlander · 80-89, M
Intersting. Though I was expecting a hung jury at best.

A guilty verdict wouldd have pointed a finger directly at HRC and there are probably 100 million Americans who would either lie or fall on sword to prevent that.

Fairness, honesty and Justice are too much to expect when passing judgment on politicians and their worker-bees.
@Heartlander I had no love for Mrs. Clinton but the level of rhetoric from you... smh
Sussmann may not have been found guilty but Hillary Clinton was certainly proved guilty of deliberate fabrication of the Dossier.. and the smear campaign against Trump..
She now needs to be criminally investigated for her involvement in this deception that cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars..
User avatar
level 1
FolkLoki
·
1 hr. ago
George Soros did nothing wrong
This is so fucking funny. QAnon adherents have been hanging all their hopes on Durham, and have been fixated on Sussman as being the first domino to fall.

The fact that they couldn’t even get a conviction on a muh process crime is endlessly funny.
RedBaron · M
Why do you feel the need to regurgitate the news?
This comment is hidden. Show Comment

 
Post Comment