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
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
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.
Carla · 61-69, F
@Confined flynn lied to the fbi, admitted to it, was convicted of it, then was pardoned by the last guy.
What kind of president does that set?
Ironhand · 51-55, M
@Carla Flynn plead guilty because the FBI brass threatened to indict his son. Go read the original 302s where the agents state unequivocally that they believed Flynn did not lie.
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
Carla · 61-69, F
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.