New York Post

CLINTON LAWYER BEATS RAP

Jury from Dem DC clears ‘Russiagate liar’ Sussmann

- By REUVEN FENTON and BEN FEUERHERD in DC, and BRUCE GOLDING in NY

Former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann was found not guilty Tuesday of lying to the FBI when he handed over since-debunked computer data that purportedl­y tied Donald Trump to Russia, with jurors drawn from a largely Democratic­leaning pool saying special counsel John Durham didn’t prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

The verdict came early on the second day of deliberati­ons in the first trial to result from Durham’s probe of Trump-Russia investigat­ions by the FBI and former special counsel Robert Mueller.

Durham left the courthouse without commenting but issued a prepared statement a soon after.

“While we are disappoint­ed in the outcome, we respect the jury’s decision and thank them for their service,” he said.

“I also want to recognize and thank the investigat­ors and the prosecutio­n team for their dedicated efforts in seeking truth and justice in this case.”

The jury was kept anonymous but one male member told The Post the panel took its time during the total 5½ hours of deliberati­on.

“I wouldn’t say it was that quick,” the juror told The Post.

“There were five elements to the charge. Everyone had disagreeme­nts. Everyone had agreements. We had to carefully consider all the evidence, all the elements, take all that into account.”

Another male juror said simply, “The elements weren’t met.”

The jury was drawn from residents of the nation’s capital, where Democrats outnumber Republican­s by more than 14-1.

Clinton donors on panel

As many as three Clinton donors — including one who also supported Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Queens-Bronx) — were among the prospectiv­e jurors, with Cooper overruling a prosecutio­n request to disqualify one who said he would “strive for impartiali­ty as best I can.”

Durham’s prosecutio­n team sought to prove that Sussmann intentiona­lly misled then-FBI general counsel James Baker by claiming not to be acting on behalf of the Clinton campaign and a tech executive, Rodney Joffe, during a Sept. 19, 2016, meeting at FBI headquarte­rs in Washington.

Sussmann gave Baker two thumb drives and three “white papers” that purported to reveal a secret, cyber back channel between a Trump Organizati­on computer server and the Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank.

The move was allegedly part of a plan in which Sussmann hoped to create an “October surprise” to smear Trump by leaking the informatio­n to the media and sparking an FBI investigat­ion.

“We are here because the FBI is our institutio­n that shouldn’t be used as a political tool for anyone — not Republican­s, not Democrats, not anyone,” prosecutor Deborah Brittain Shaw said during her opening statement.

Sussmann’s trial was overseen by federal Judge Christophe­r Cooper, who was nominated by former President Barack Obama.

In a pretrial ruling last month, Cooper limited the amount of evidence Durham’s team could introduce to support the notion that Sussmann’s efforts were part of a “joint venture” with the Clinton campaign, noting that the defendant “is not charged with a conspiracy.”

Because of jurors’ anonymity, it’s unclear if any of the Clinton supporters made it onto the jury.

During the trial, Durham’s team called 16 witnesses, including Baker, who said he was “100% confident” that Sussmann told him “he was not appearing before me on behalf of any particular client.”

Prosecutor­s also introduced into evidence a text message that Sussmann sent to Baker the night prior to the Sept. 19, 2016, meeting, saying Sussmann only wanted to help the FBI.

“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,” the attorney wrote.

At another point in his testimony, Baker told jurors he might not have even held the meeting if he knew that Sussmann, a friend and former Justice Department colleague, was there on behalf of the Democratic presidenti­al candidate.

But the trial’s biggest bombshell came from former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook, who testified under cross-examinatio­n by the prosecutio­n that Clinton personally approved the decision to give the unverified data to a reporter.

Mook described his end of the conversati­on with Clinton as telling her, “Hey, we have this and we want to share it with a reporter.”

“She agreed to that,” he said. Mook said he believed the reporter in question was Franklin Foer, whose resulting article was published by the left-wing Slate website just nine days before the 2016 election.

It was quickly seized upon by Clinton, who tweeted a link along with the message: “It’s time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia.”

The defense strategy included pointing out mistakes the FBI made while investigat­ing the case, including not interviewi­ng Sussmann and other witnesses critical to the investigat­ion.

The defense also highlighte­d communicat­ions between FBI officials that showed they were aware of Sussmann’s political clients.

“Mr. Sussmann had [the Democratic National Committee] and [Hillary for America campaign] tattooed on his forehead,” defense lawyer Sean Berkowitz told jurors in his closing argument Friday.

Berkowitz also countered prosecutor Jonathan Algor’s argument that the Sussmann-Baker meeting was especially nefarious because it involved opposition research solicited by a political campaign.

“Opposition research is not illegal,” Berkowitz said. “If it were, the jails of Washington, DC, would be teeming over.”

Tuesday afternoon, Sussmann said: “Despite being falsely accused, I am relieved that justice ultimately prevailed in this case.”

Berkowitz and fellow defense lawyer Michael Bosworth also said their client “should never have been charged in the first place” and called the case against him an example of “extraordin­ary prosecutor­ial overreach.”

Sussmann’s trial was the first to result from Durham’s probe into the Trump-Russia investigat­ions conducted by the FBI and former special counsel Robert Mueller, which led to the first House impeachmen­t of the 45th president, who was acquitted by the Senate.

 ?? ??
 ?? ??
 ?? ??
 ?? ??
 ?? ?? SMEAR CAMPAIGN: Justice Department prosecutor John Durham (near left) claimed defendant Michael Sussmann (opposite page) lied when he said he wasn’t acting as a Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer when passing on to the FBI bogus info about the Trump Organizati­on’s alleged link to a Russian bank. Jury members who acquitted Sussmann were drawn from heavily Democratic Washington, DC, and the presiding judge was a Barack Obama nominee.
SMEAR CAMPAIGN: Justice Department prosecutor John Durham (near left) claimed defendant Michael Sussmann (opposite page) lied when he said he wasn’t acting as a Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer when passing on to the FBI bogus info about the Trump Organizati­on’s alleged link to a Russian bank. Jury members who acquitted Sussmann were drawn from heavily Democratic Washington, DC, and the presiding judge was a Barack Obama nominee.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States