{"id":1494122,"date":"2022-05-27T08:01:41","date_gmt":"2022-05-27T12:01:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1494122"},"modified":"2022-05-27T08:01:57","modified_gmt":"2022-05-27T12:01:57","slug":"why-the-jury-should-convict-michael-sussmann-of-lying-to-the-fbi-but-probably-wont","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/why-the-jury-should-convict-michael-sussmann-of-lying-to-the-fbi-but-probably-wont\/","title":{"rendered":"Why The Jury Should Convict Michael Sussmann Of Lying To The FBI, But Probably Won\u2019t"},"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\">30<\/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%2Fwhy-the-jury-should-convict-michael-sussmann-of-lying-to-the-fbi-but-probably-wont%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=1494122&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--><div><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/Michael-Sussmann-1200x675-1.jpeg\" class=\"ff-og-image-inserted\" alt=\"image\" \/><\/div>\n<p>Closing arguments will begin later this morning in Special Counsel John Durham\u2019s false statement case against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann, after Sussmann made a last-minute decision on Thursday not to testify in his own defense. The evidence prosecutors elicited from witnesses over the last two weeks provides overwhelming proof of Sussmann\u2019s guilt and destroys the many defense theories Sussmann\u2019s legal team floated throughout the trial, yet a conviction of a fellow D.C.-swamp dweller may be unattainable.<\/p>\n<p>Last fall, the special counsel indicted Sussmann on one count of making a false statement in violation of Section 1001 of the federal criminal code. The special counsel alleged Sussmann lied to then-FBI General Counsel James Baker during a September 19, 2016 at which Sussmann presented Baker with data and whitepapers that supposedly showed the existence of a secret communications network between the Russian-based Alfa Bank and the Trump organization. According to the indictment, Sussmann was acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and tech executive Rodney Joffe when he met with Baker, but falsely told his friend that he was coming on his own behalf to help the FBI.<\/p>\n<p>Before adjourning for the day on Thursday, presiding Judge Christopher Cooper provided instructions to the jury. Jurors will use those to decide whether to convict or acquit Sussmann following deliberations, which will begin either Friday afternoon or Tuesday following the long Memorial Day weekend.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt\u201d five facts, Judge Cooper explained, namely that (1) \u201con September 19, 2016, the defendant made a statement or representation;\u201d (2) \u201cthe statement or representation was false, fictitious or fraudulent;\u201d (3) \u201cthat this statement or representation was material;\u201d (4) \u201cthe false, fictitious or fraudulent statement was made knowingly and willfully;\u201d and (5) \u201cthe statement or representation was made in a matter within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the government of the United States.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The government previously requested the court take \u201cjudicial notice\u201d of the fact that the FBI is within the executive branch of the government, meaning the fact is conclusively established for the jury. While the parties disagree about what Sussmann said to Baker, Sussmann clearly \u201cmade <strong><em>a<\/em> <\/strong>statement or representation\u201d to the then-general counsel of the FBI, leaving jurors to focus on the other three elements.<\/p>\n<h2>Overwhelming Evidence to Convict<\/h2>\n<p>During today\u2019s closing arguments, the government will remind the jury of the detailed evidence prosecutors presented over the course of the trial, including through nearly 20 witnesses. That evidence overwhelmingly established the three remaining facts prosecutors must prove.<\/p>\n<p>First, the prosecution must prove Sussmann denied acting on behalf of any particular client when he met with Baker. Here, the government will stress Baker\u2019s testimony. That had the former general counsel telling the jury he was \u201c100% percent confident\u201d Sussmann said during their September 19, 2016 meeting that he was not representing a client. \u201cMy memory on this point, sitting here today, is clear,\u201d Baker\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.politico.com\/news\/2022\/05\/19\/james-baker-fbi-michael-sussmann-00033963\">told<\/a>\u00a0the jury.<\/p>\n<p>While the defense took issue with Baker\u2019s memory, those efforts should fail for two reasons. First, Baker\u2019s testimony made clear that he was a <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2022\/05\/20\/reluctant-witness-devastates-defense-claims-in-special-counsel-criminal-case\/\">reluctant witness<\/a>, not out to get Sussmann and feeling responsible for dragging his friend \u201cinto a maelstrom.\u201d Second, prosecutors presented evidence that Sussmann texted Baker the night before their September 19, 2016 meeting, writing, \u201cI\u2019m coming on my own \u2013 not on behalf of a client or company. [W]ant to help the Bureau.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Given Sussmann denied representing a client the night before the meeting, a reasonable jury would find Baker\u2019s testimony that he was \u201c100 percent confident\u201d Sussmann repeated the claim at the start of their meeting conclusive.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to that evidence, the jury also heard from two of Baker\u2019s colleagues in the FBI who testified that the notes they took shortly after Baker met with Sussmann indicated Sussmann had told Baker he was not working on behalf of any client.<\/p>\n<h2>Even More Evidence He Lied<\/h2>\n<p>The evidence also overwhelmingly established that Sussmann\u2019s claim that he was not working on behalf of any client was \u201cfalse.\u201d Specifically, the government <a href=\"https:\/\/www.politico.com\/news\/2022\/05\/18\/marc-elias-clinton-campaign-sussmann-00033404\">elicited<\/a>\u00a0testimony from Sussmann\u2019s former Perkins and Coie partner, Marc Elias, who served as the lead lawyer for the Clinton campaign, that Elias had hired the investigative firm Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research against Trump. Elias also told jurors he learned of the supposed Alfa Bank-Trump secret communication channel from Sussmann.<\/p>\n<p>Elias also provided a detailed explanation of how law firm billing records work. Prosecutors admitted records showing Sussmann reported time spent on the Alfa Bank project to the Clinton campaign, and specifically billed the Clinton campaign for a project he worked on on September 19, 2016, the same day he met with Baker.<\/p>\n<p>Elias had previously testified that he believed Sussmann\u2019s only work on behalf of the Clinton campaign concerned Alfa Bank. Then on Wednesday, the government presented evidence Sussmann charged the Clinton campaign for the thumb drives used to transfer the Alfa Bank data to the FBI, providing pretty conclusive proof of the government\u2019s assertion Sussmann was representing the Clinton campaign.<\/p>\n<p>Other evidence supports the government\u2019s argument that Sussmann was also acting on behalf of Joffe when he met with Baker. For instance, Fusion GPS\u2019s Laura Seago testified that she first heard of the Alfa Bank theory at a meeting with Elias which Sussmann and his client Joffe also attended.<\/p>\n<h2>Also Lots of Evidence This Affected the FBI<\/h2>\n<p>The special counsel likewise provided substantial evidence related to the second factor, \u201cmateriality.\u201d Here, the jury was instructed that Sussmann\u2019s lie must have been \u201cmaterial,\u201d meaning the statement \u201chas a natural tendency to influence, or is capable of influencing, a discrete decision of the decision-making body to which it is addressed.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>In this case, the government presented testimony of several federal agents showing how Sussmann\u2019s lie altered their decisions, with Baker <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2022\/05\/20\/reluctant-witness-devastates-defense-claims-in-special-counsel-criminal-case\/\">testifying<\/a> \u201che would not have\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/AGoudsward\/status\/1527356805457727491\">taken<\/a>\u00a0the private meeting with Sussmann if he knew Sussmann was working on behalf of the Clinton team.\u201d Baker also\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/AGoudsward\/status\/1527288660416032777\">told<\/a>\u00a0the jury he had \u201cvouched for\u201d Sussmann and treated him as a sensitive confidential human source, protecting his identity from other agents because he believed Sussmann had come to the FBI on his own.<\/p>\n<p>Other agents also testified that they hit roadblock in determining the source for the Alfa Bank data and that in assessing the data, knowing whether it came from someone with \u201ca political affiliation or motivation\u201d would affect the initial steps of an investigation.<\/p>\n<h2>Evidence Sussmann Lied On Purpose<\/h2>\n<p>Finally, the government must establish Sussmann held the required \u201cmens rea\u201d or \u201cguilty mind.\u201d Section 1001, which criminalizes false statements, requires a defendant make the false statement \u201cintentionally\u201d or \u201cknowingly.\u201d Circumstantial evidence can establish a defendant\u2019s state of mind and the evidence admitted at trial. That includes Sussmann\u2019s congressional testimony including his acknowledgment that he was acting on behalf of a tech expert. All this provides overwhelming evidence that Sussmann\u2019s lie was intentional.<\/p>\n<p>In an attempt to counter this overwhelming evidence, during Sussmann\u2019s closing argument his attorneys will likely hammer inconsistencies in statements Baker previously made concerning what Sussmann said during their September 19, 2016 meeting. Sussmann\u2019s lawyers are also likely to highlight testimony they presented that the Clinton campaign did not want Sussmann to take the evidence to the FBI, including testimony from Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook. The government, however, countered that evidence with testimony establishing that Perkins and Coie attorneys and Fusion GPS held great discretion to act on behalf of the Clinton campaign.<\/p>\n<p>The defense is also certain to highlight trial evidence showing the FBI\u2019s national security concerns about Trump\u2019s connection with Russia, as well as testimony touting Joffe\u2019s reputation as a tech expert, to argue Sussmann held serious concerns about the data. But the special counsel will quickly counter that Sussmann\u2019s concerns do not excuse him for lying to the FBI. Finally, Sussmann\u2019s legal team will likely stress the testimony of character witnesses who spoke of Sussmann\u2019s stellar reputation.<\/p>\n<h2>Why an Acquittal Is Likely Despite the Evidence<\/h2>\n<p>While there can be no certainty in predicting the jury\u2019s eventual verdict, an acquittal seems likely\u2014even with the overwhelming evidence of Sussmann\u2019s guilt detailed. Baker\u2019s trial testimony provided the clearest foreshadowing of this outcome when he told <a href=\"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/2022\/05\/20\/reluctant-witness-devastates-defense-claims-in-special-counsel-criminal-case\/\">prosecutors<\/a>, \u201cI\u2019m not out to get Michael. This is not my investigation. This is your investigation. If you ask me a question, I answer it. You asked me to look for something, I go look for it.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Bill Priestap, who served as the assistant director of the Counterintelligence Division for the FBI in 2016, displayed an even more grudging demeanor in testifying on behalf of the special counsel. When questioned by prosecutors whether it was \u201cimportant\u201d for Sussmann \u201cto fully disclose his ties to the Clinton campaign,\u201d Priestap <a href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtontimes.com\/news\/2022\/may\/23\/fbi-official-struggles-recall-key-details-sussmann\/\">said<\/a> it \u201cwould have been part of several factors,\u201d telling the government attorney, \u201cI\u2019m struggling on your use of the word \u2018important.\u2019 It\u2019s a motivation that is relevant, but not the only factor.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>If Baker, the man to whom Sussmann lied, adopts such a disinterested approach to justice, and Priestap, an assistant director at the FBI, shows disdain for the special counsel\u2019s case, surely a jury of Sussmann\u2019s peers will too.<\/p>\n<p>The men and women of the jury live and work in D.C., with men and women like Sussmann, and Baker, and Priestap. Their kids go to school together\u2014literally in the case of one juror\u2014and they likely can envision a friend or neighbor in Sussmann\u2019s position.<\/p>\n<p>While Sussmann\u2019s lie was \u201cmaterial\u201d in the legal sense, jurors seem likely to shrug the lie off as harmless, mentally parroting the woman several jurors acknowledged donated money to when she ran for president in 2016: \u201cWhat difference at this point does it make?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I may be wrong. But I don\u2019t think so.<\/p>\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator\" \/>\n<p>\n  Margot Cleveland is The Federalist&#8217;s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. <\/p>\n<p>Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize\u2014the law school\u2019s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. <\/p>\n<p>As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Closing arguments will begin later this morning in Special Counsel John Durham\u2019s false statement case against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann, after Sussmann made a last-minute decision on<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":499,"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-1494122","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\/1494122","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\/499"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1494122"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1494122\/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=1494122"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1494122"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1494122"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}