Hillary’s Lawyer Michael Sussmann ACQUITTED In Shocking Blow To Durham Investigation

Written by K. Walker on May 31, 2022

Become a Clash Insider!

Don’t let Big Tech pre-chew your news. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we’ll keep you in the loop.

DC jury gives a DC verdict in favor of Democrats. Why should we be surprised?

Former Perkins Coie attorney, Michael Sussmann was indicted on a charge of making a false statement to the FBI for telling FBI General Counsel James Baker that he was not representing a client when he brought allegations that there was a “backchannel” between the Trump Organization and Russian-based Alfa-Bank just weeks before the 2016 election.

Sussmann was actually working for both Neustar executive Rodney Joffe and Hillary’s campaign at the time. Evidence presented in the trial suggests that Sussmann even billed Hillary’s campaign for the thumb drives that he handed over to the FBI to push the Trump/Alfa-Bank disinformation.

Prosecutors pointed to a text message that Sussmann sent to Baker on September 18, 2016, that read, “Jim — it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss. Do you have availability for a short meeting tomorrow? I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau.”

The next day, Baker met with Sussmann where he pushed the Trump/Alfa-Bank conspiracy theory. Baker testified in court that he was “100% confident” Sussmann told him in the meeting he was not there on behalf of a client.

But that apparently wasn’t enough to get a conviction.

Democratic lawyer Michael Sussmann was found not guilty Tuesday on the false statements charge of concealing his representation of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign from the FBI when he pushed since-debunked Trump-Russia claims to the bureau in 2016.

The verdict is a significant loss for John Durham’s investigation, with the special counsel losing the first case that he has brought to trial.

“While we are disappointed in the outcome, we respect the jury’s decision and thank them for their service,” Durham said in a statement. “I also want to recognize and thank the investigators and the prosecution team for their dedicated efforts in seeking truth and justice in this case.”

Sussmann gave a very brief statement to the media before getting in a black van without taking questions.

“I told the truth to the FBI, and the jury clearly recognized that with their unanimous verdict today,” Sussmann said outside the courthouse. “I’m grateful to the members of the jury for their careful, thoughtful service. Despite being falsely accused, I believe that justice ultimately prevailed in my case.”
Source: Washington Examiner

The evidence presented in the case was damning to Sussmann, Team Hillary, and the FBI.

Republicans were pretty disgusted with the result — especially after what happened with Trump’s allies, General Michael Flynn and Roger Stone.

The Washington Examiner article also notes that Durham didn’t request the recusal of Judge Christopher Cooper who presided over the Sussmann case despite some possible conflicts of interest.

Christopher Cooper, the U.S. district court judge who presided over the Sussmann case, has said he was “professional acquaintances” at the Justice Department with Sussmann in the 1990s. The judge’s wife has represented former FBI lawyer Lisa Page since at least 2018. Page was having an affair with and exchanging anti-Trump texts with since-fired FBI agent Peter Strzok during the 2016 election…

…Cooper was appointed by President Barack Obama following unanimous Senate confirmation. He and his wife were married in 1999, and Merrick Garland, now the attorney general, officiated their wedding.

The judge limited some of the evidence that Durham was able to present at trial, including related to the inaccuracy of the Alfa-Bank data pushed by Sussmann, as well as the fact that Joffe had been cut off as a confidential human source for the FBI in 2021 amid the special counsel investigation.

Source: Washington Examiner

The jury’s forewoman spoke to reporters after the decision.

According to the Washington Times, she said, “I don’t think it should have been prosecuted. There are bigger things that affect the nation than a possible lie to the FBI.”

Yeah? Tell that to General Flynn.

“It was the government’s job to prove it, and they succeeded in some ways and not in others,” she continued. “We broke it down, and it did not pan out in the government’s favor.”

The Washington Post quotes her saying, “Politics were not a factor. … We felt really comfortable being able to share what we thought. We had concise notes, and we were able to address the questions together.”

She contended that the government “could have spent our time more wisely” and WaPo said that the other jurors “pretty much saw it the same way.”

The $32 million 2-year Mueller investigation was based on the premise that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia that was peddled by the Hillary campaign to distract from her email scandal.

It seems the residents of DC take care of their swamp creatures because you absolutely know that if this had been an attorney working for a Republican campaign, they’d have gone after them.

We see the same difference in treatment of the January 6 rioters and BLM and Antifa rioters.

It seems pretty clear that there’s a two-tier justice system in the United States.


ClashDaily's Associate Editor since August 2016. Self-described political junkie, anti-Third Wave Feminist, and a nightmare to the 'intersectional' crowd. Mrs. Walker has taken a stand against 'white privilege' education in public schools. She's also an amateur Playwright, former Drama teacher, and staunch defender of the Oxford comma. Follow her humble musings on Twitter: @TheMrsKnowItAll and on Gettr @KarenWalker