[Yo-Yo]

Mz. Cleveland never addresses the elephant in the room that she highlighted:

the case “hinges on the testimony of a single witness: the former FBI general counsel, Jim Baker.” “This concession,” as Wittes’ frames it, “appears on page 18 of the indictment, which describes the Sept. 19, 2016, meeting between Sussmann and Baker at FBI Headquarters where the supposed lie happened,” and “notably includes the fact that ‘[n]o one else attended the meeting.’”

Without Baker's testimony, there is no conviction.

[lepton]

Without Baker’s testimony, there is no conviction.

---

Actually she seems to have missed that Sussman had another meeting with another FBI agent and made the same presentation of not being there representing anyone. That’s in there too.