Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Government Corruption

Democratic lawyer Sussmann doesn't want Steele dossier brought up during Durham trial

2022-04-06

[Washington Examiner] The Democratic cybersecurity lawyer charged by special counsel John Durham with lying to the FBI about working for the Clinton campaign doesn’t want British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s dossier brought up at the trial following indications from the special counsel that it will be.

Michael Sussmann was indicted last year on charges of concealing his clients, Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and "tech executive" Rodney Joffe, from FBI general counsel James Baker when he pushed since-debunked claims of a secret backchannel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa-Bank. He has pleaded not guilty.

Steele created his now-discredited dossier after being hired by opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which was itself hired by Perkins Coie and Marc Elias, the general counsel for Clinton’s campaign.

Durham appears to be building a case that many collusion claims can be sourced back to Democratic operatives or linked to the Clinton campaign.

Sussmann’s lawyers asked a federal judge on Monday to preclude three categories of evidence: the gathering of domain name system data by Joffe and others; the accuracy of that data and conclusions based on it; and "Christopher Steele and information he separately provided to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (including the so-called ’Steele Dossier’)."

The defense team argued: "The single false statement charge brought against Mr. Sussmann surely does not flow from the gathering of data, the accuracy of that data, the accuracy of the conclusions based on that data, or any information Mr. Steele may have provided to the FBI."

The lawyers argued Sussmann did not have "any awareness" that Steele was "separately providing information to the FBI."

"The Special Counsel has not charged a substantive scheme to defraud the government, nor has he charged a conspiracy to defraud the government," Sussmann's lawyers argued. "The manner in which the data was gathered, the objective strength and reliability of that data and/or conclusions drawn from the data, and the information that Christopher Steele separately provided to the FBI all have no bearing on the only crime the Special Counsel chose to charge."

Sussmann’s lawyers said that during a phone conference last month, Durham indicated that "he intends to introduce evidence and argument pertaining to reports and information" that Steele provided to the FBI, adding that Durham "presumably" intends to call Steele as a witness.

Posted by:Besoeker

#8 Wonder if he feels the Epstein tightening around this neck. Can't have this stuff lead back to you know who.

Posted by: Procopius2k 2022-04-06 20:44

#7 If the war halfway around the world comes to your street next week, it will come on a re-entry vehicle, and no paper you read nor political brand you subscribe to will make any difference at all at that point.

Posted by: M. Murcek 2022-04-06 09:34

Not much different than current events in Urkraine. If you were able to follow this kak back to it's origins, I am reasonably certain you'd find yourself at the front gate of Langley.

Vlad and RU intelligence service run things there as well, they're just a bit more transparent.

Posted by: Besoeker 2022-04-06 09:31

#5 #3 is correct

Posted by: 746 2022-04-06 09:22

#4 The Steele dossier should be career poison by now, but nobody is going to lose their job over it. Nor go to jail.

Posted by: M. Murcek 2022-04-06 08:59

#3 Maybe treason should be the charge.

Posted by: JohnQC 2022-04-06 08:58

#2 Sussmann doesn't want the phony Steeledossier brought up during trial?

Wouldn't it be nice if we could just tell the courts what kind of trial we want (sarc)? The Steele dossier is kind of the centerpiece of the case. These people have been practicing lawfare for too long. !0 years ought to be added to any sentence for trying to use such a gimmick.

Posted by: JohnQC 2022-04-06 08:57

#1 Foreign intelligence service involvement would have likely been coordinated by US domestic intelligence services. Of course the US legal team not want the potential involvement of a foreign intelligence service brought into the trial.

Posted by: Besoeker 2022-04-06 00:23

00:00