{"id":1451319,"date":"2022-04-23T08:59:45","date_gmt":"2022-04-23T12:59:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1451319"},"modified":"2022-04-23T08:59:47","modified_gmt":"2022-04-23T12:59:47","slug":"charles-lipson-durham-springs-the-trap-on-hillary-clintons-lawyer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/charles-lipson-durham-springs-the-trap-on-hillary-clintons-lawyer\/","title":{"rendered":"Charles Lipson: Durham Springs the Trap on Hillary Clinton\u2019s Lawyer"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">20<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Fcharles-lipson-durham-springs-the-trap-on-hillary-clintons-lawyer%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1451319&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The month of May won\u2019t be a merry one for Michael Sussmann, one of Hillary Clinton\u2019s top lawyers at her favorite election law firm Perkins Coie, who is facing a criminal charge of lying to the FBI when he passed information to the Bureau\u2019s general counsel, James Baker. Sussman stated explicitly that he was acting as a \u201cgood citizen,\u201d not as a lawyer for Trump\u2019s election opponents.<\/p>\n<p>Wink, wink. Nudge, nudge.<\/p>\n<p>The tip was false. It described a secret, traitorous back-channel connection between candidate Trump and the Kremlin and included some \u201cwhite papers\u201d as \u201cproof.\u201d But that deceit is not part of this criminal charge. Nor is Sussmann\u2019s follow-up meeting with the CIA, where he also claimed to be a \u201cgood citizen\u201d not representing anyone, and passed on the same false information, amplifying it with still more data about a secret Russian phone that was always near Trump. The CIA quickly determined the internet data was bogus and perhaps created by Hillary\u2019s anti-Trump group. It also recognized that crucial data had been omitted to create a false impression and perhaps that some of the data had been made up or spoofed.<\/p>\n<p>But again, Sussmann is not being charged with that, at least not yet. Nor is he being charged with participating in a broader criminal conspiracy. Some filings by Special Counsel John Durham suggest he may be preparing such charges against Clinton\u2019s larger network of hoaxers, but he hasn\u2019t leveled those charges yet. He\u2019s going after Sussmann first.<\/p>\n<p>Although a single count of lying to the FBI might seem like a relatively minor charge, Durham is pursuing it for three important reasons. First, a false statement to the FBI is a felony in its own right, or, rather, it is if the statement \u201cmaterially affected\u201d a federal investigation. Second, Durham seems to have rock-solid evidence. More on that in a minute. Third, if Sussmann goes down, he will have powerful incentives to help Durham nail even bigger players and perhaps help take down the conspiracy in which they jointly participated. After all, Sussmann was close to the epicenter of the Trump-Russia collusion hoax. He must know a lot about how it was planned and executed, who was directly involved, who knew about it, who paid for it, and how it all worked.<\/p>\n<p>Sussmann has that inside information because he not only represented key figures in the scandal, he was a senior figure on the election law team at Perkins Coie, the elite firm representing \u201cHillary for America\u201d and the Democratic National Committee. That practice was headed by the Democrats\u2019 longtime lawyer and consigliere, Marc Elias. (Elias left Perkins Coie last year to start his own firm, just as his old firm began cooperating with Durham. Sussmann left Perkins Coie a little later, after his indictment.)<\/p>\n<p>If Sussmann\u2019s conviction would be a big prize for Durham, Elias would be a far bigger one. Sussmann\u2019s testimony could help with that and supplement the documentation Durham has already assembled on multiple participants in the hoax.<\/p>\n<p>Those larger implications are why the stakes are so high for Sussmann\u2019s upcoming trial. They are also why everyone even marginally connected with the Russia collusion hoax is fighting so tenaciously to hide their emails and text messages from the trial jury. Some claim their emails are not connected to the crime that Sussmann is charged with. Even more important is their claim that the messages are covered by \u201cattorney-client\u201d privilege. But are they? Durham says \u201cno,\u201d and has submitted extensive responses to the judge rebutting those claims. The court will decide after reading the messages privately.<\/p>\n<p>Attorney-client confidentiality is essential to our legal system and deserves strong protection. But courts have ruled that some communications with lawyers are not protected by that privilege. There is no protection, for instance, if you ask an attorney to participate in a crime. (Durham has not alleged that.) There is no protection if you ask an attorney to perform non-legal services, such as buying a political advertisement.<\/p>\n<p>That exception is crucial here because Hillary\u2019s team used Perkins Coie to hire an opposition-research outfit, FusionGPS, which was tasked with finding dirt on Donald Trump (or, some say, to make it up). FusionGPS, in turn, hired former British spy, Christopher Steele, to produce his infamous (and false) dossier on Trump. Oppo-research is not covered by attorney-client privilege, even when a lawyer pays the bills, unless it is directly related to legal services. The Clinton campaign has already been called out on that regarding FusionGPS. The Federal Election Commission fined the campaign for claiming its expenses for opposition research were \u201clegal expenses\u201d since they were funneled through Perkins Coie.<\/p>\n<p>Sussmann, Elias, and others are trying the same ploy for the upcoming trial, claiming work by FusionGPS was somehow related to potential litigation. Pinocchio\u2019s nose grew longer just hearing that silly argument. The owners of FusionGPS wrote a popular book in which they said, quite openly, that they were doing opposition research. They\u2019d been told to find dirt on Trump. They didn\u2019t mention any \u201clegal services.\u201d Elias confirmed that point in congressional hearings. Asked directly if FusionGPS and Christopher Steele were doing legal work for him, he said, \u201cno.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>These vigorous efforts to hide communications tell us something important. They point to hidden evidence that the claimants were involved in a well-planned, well-financed, and multi-pronged effort to create a false narrative that Donald Trump was secretly working with the Kremlin to win the presidency. If the FBI or CIA was willing to launch a full-scale investigation, then the Clinton team would leak that to the media, ideally in the weeks before the 2016 election. The Democrats continued that effort after Trump\u2019s election to hobble his effectiveness in office.<\/p>\n<p>Federal district Judge Christopher Cooper is now examining these private communications to determine if Durham can use them or if they are excluded, either because of attorney-client privilege or because they are irrelevant to the crime Sussmann is charged with.<\/p>\n<p>What\u2019s Sussmann\u2019s defense against the charge he lied? That\u2019s changed. His first stab was \u201cI didn\u2019t lie because I never told Baker I was just a good citizen without a client.\u201d He must have thought, \u201cThere were just two of us in the room, so it\u2019s my word against his.\u201d That strategy collapsed after Baker recovered a text message from Sussmann, sent the day before the meeting, saying specifically that he (Sussmann) had no client and was just coming as a good American to give the FBI valuable information. (Sussmann\u2019s attorney is trying to exclude that message from the trial, saying it was disclosed to them too recently.) Besides the text message, Baker told colleagues, immediately after the meeting, that Sussmann said he wasn\u2019t representing anyone. Moreover, we know Sussmann billed at least one client, Rodney Joffe, for his work on this specific matter and was representing him and others on the Trump collusion gambit.<\/p>\n<p>Joffe is an important figure here. He\u2019s a well-connected computer expert who worked closely with Clinton\u2019s team and expected to be named her administration\u2019s cyber-security czar. Now, he faces significant legal exposure since he had highly secret access to the White House computer network, shared some of that information with cyber experts at Georgia Tech, and allegedly tried to use that data to create the false implication that Trump was electronically connected to key Russian sources, including Alfa Bank. Joffe\u2019s narrative is what Sussmann allegedly passed along to the FBI and later the CIA.<\/p>\n<p>Several of Sussmann\u2019s clients and others associated with Hillary\u2019s campaign have asserted attorney-client privilege to keep their communications out of the trial. But Durham laid a trap around those claims, and it\u2019s a dangerous one for Sussmann. By even claiming that privilege, Joffe, Hillary for America, and others are directly contradicting Sussmann\u2019s crucial position that he wasn\u2019t representing anyone when he met with the FBI and gave them (false) information about Trump-Russia collusion.<\/p>\n<div class=\"banner_small conntent-banner\">\n\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/spectatorworld.com\/subscribe-the-dc-diary\/\"><noscript><\/noscript><img decoding=\"async\" class=\"lazyload wp-image-29949\" src=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/email-newsletter-mob.png\" alt=\"\" \/><\/a>\t\t<\/div>\n<p>Since Sussmann\u2019s \u201cI never said that\u201d defense is likely to fail, he seems to be relying on a backup plan. \u201cOkay, I may have lied but it didn\u2019t really matter.\u201d The legal point here is that it is only a crime to lie to the FBI if the lie is \u201cmaterial,\u201d that is, if it affects an investigation. That means Durham not only has to show Sussmann lied but that his lie really mattered. Durham\u2019s team has already submitted plenty of pre-trial evidence to support their claim, but they will have to convince a jury. Since that jury is in Washington, D.C., a city that voted almost unanimously for Hillary Clinton, there\u2019s always a chance of \u201cjury nullification.\u201d That is, the jury could recognize that a crime was committed but decide to acquit the defendant anyway.<\/p>\n<p>An acquittal would be a huge setback for Durham, a conviction a huge win. In fact, a conviction could very well convince Sussmann and other potential defendants to cooperate with the special counsel. That\u2019s why the upcoming trial for a single count of lying to the FBI is such a big deal. Pulling on that slip-knot could unravel the whole skein of lies.<\/p>\n<p><span id=\"tve_leads_end_content\"><\/span>\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The month of May won\u2019t be a merry one for Michael Sussmann, one of Hillary Clinton\u2019s top lawyers at her favorite election law firm Perkins Coie, who is facing a<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":498,"featured_media":2315279,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1451319","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1451319","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/498"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1451319"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1451319\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2315279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1451319"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1451319"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1451319"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}