Michael Sussmann’s lawyers have built a case around the FBI knowing that Sussmann was representing clients when fed bogus information about President Trump and Alpha Bank. That has now been blown sky-high as former FBI lawyer, James Baker testified that Sussmann said he wasn’t representing any client. Baker did that one better by producing an email from Sussmann:
“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. Thanks.”
Of course, the alleged Trump/Alpha bank connection was a complete hoax put together by the Hillary campaign. Ditto for the Steele Dossier which has been sufficiently debunked as disinformation. But, its effects lasted for years until the Mueller Report cleared him and his campaign staff.
The devastating disinformation campaign, which included the fairy tale that Trump was a spy and had a special secret server that connected him directly to the Kremlin also turned out to be totally false, which was another Hillary fabrication.
Liar for hire, Mark Elias said that prominent people in the Hillary campaign were well aware of the opposition research being conducted by Fusion GPS, including John Podesta, Robbie Mook, campaign manager, policy director Jake Sullivan, and communications official Jennifer Palmieri.
It resulted in a story in Slate that Hillary Clinton and her campaign apparatchik, Jake Sullivan (now Joe Biden’s national security adviser — feel better yet?), used to tout the disinformation on Twitter.
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 31, 2016
— @bratNvet ***AmericanExceptionalism*** MAGA (@bratNvet) May 19, 2022
In court on Wednesday and Thursday, Baker said he “was not out to get Michael” but that Sussmann claimed no client was behind the Alfa-Bank disinfo, a claim represented in a subsequent meeting with “Bill Priestap, who was the assistant director of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division, and Trisha Anderson, the FBI’s deputy general counsel, right after his Sussmann meeting.” Both wrote down that there was no connection to a client in their meeting notes.
The key in the case is whether the FBI’s treatment of the dirt on Trump would have been different if they’d known it was from the Hillary Clinton campaign. Baker said, “It affected my thinking about the urgency of this matter.” The Washington Examiner reported that Baker said the FBI was already investigating Trump-Russia connections, so this matter was “very concerning” and “of great urgency.”
The materiality of the lie regarding the FBI response is the essence of Durham’s case against Sussmann.
We’ll see if the jury noticed.