Posted on 09/20/2021 7:58:58 AM PDT by bitt
Thanks for the ping.
The single charge looks very thin to me.
Durham claims that Sussmann told FBI general counsel James Baker that he - Sussmann - was not acting on the behalf of a client.
Multiple problems with that claim...
(1) Besides James Baker, there is no witness to that statement, no audio, no documents, and no contemporaneous notes.
(2) After the meeting, Baker immediately called the FBI Assistant Director of Counterintelligence. The Assistant Director did take hand written notes. One of those notes explicitly says that Sussmann "Represents DNC, Clinton Foundation, etc."
(3) More than a year after this meeting, Sussmann, under oath, told a Congressional committee that was acting on behalf of a client.
(4) There are several different ways to interpret what Sussmann meant if he did tell Baker that he - Sussmann - was NOT acting on behalf of a client.
(5) Also, FBI General Counsel James Baker would be in serious trouble if he - Baker - did NOT ask Sussman if Sussman was working on behalf of a client. If Baker did fail to ask Sussmann, then Baker has as much motive to lie as Sussman does.
In any event, the indictment is a very important historical document that explains what happened at the birth of the Trump Russia Hoax.
I think you fairly lay out a problem about how quickly and thoroughly the fact of not representing anyone was logged. It could be the basis of a defense. Baker did relay it pretty quickly, which can be confirmed. Remember Coney writing his Trump memo in the car? Anyhow, the rest of the indictment is pretty strong. I think Sussman is going dowm
bmp for lrt
Found guilty, by a Washington D.C. jury, and a Deep State prosecutor?
In the 2020 election, Trump lost Washington D.C. 95%-5%.
If Durham has more charges his pocket, yes I think Sussman goes down leading guilty. Even With this one charge, how does Suusman explain his actions without taking the witness stand? He then had to prove the Gov witness lied. It’s a risky defense.
Yawn
SQUIRREL
This idiot is being thrown under the bus by the Biden DOJ because he is even dumber than Joe.
Same here. I think this is an indictment intended to fail. It's not likely that even if the case were to go to a jury, a D.C. jury would convict a Democrat lawyer who worked for Hillary.
Once this case fails, then the Biden administration can put paid to the whole Durham investigation.
Easy - by quoting the notes of the Assistant Director of Counterintelligence...
James Baker, the witness, told the A.D. that Sussmann "Represents the DNC, Clinton Foundation, etc."
If Sussmann said anything at all to Baker, it was "the DNC and the Clintons did not tell me to give you this evidence. I am giving you this evidence about Russia-Trump on my own behalf."
And why not? As an attorney, Sussmann is an officer of the court.
He has sworn - under penalty of losing his license to practice law - to report unlawful conduct to the court.
What crime does Durham claim took place - that the DNC and the Clintons were paying Sussmann to lie about the Russia-Trump evidence?
If the FBI had discovered a Russia related crime committed by Trump, there would be no basis for any charge against Sussmann.
The reverse is also true - the DOJ and FBI have been humiliated because there was no crime by Trump.
Instead of taking responsibility for their own incompetence, the DOJ and FBI are lashing out at Sussman for allegedly misleading them in some undefined way.
Lack of activity teachers even our “guests “ that’s such political tactics are not that big of a deal.
Sadly I’ve seen more interest on free republic in which type of oil to use on seasoning pans.
Sad sad times
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.