The Clinton Mafia, it appears, is unbeatable in court.
A jury acquitted Michael Sussmann, a button man for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign up to his neck in the Russia Collusion Hoax, of lying to the FBI. Sussmann was acquitted despite documentary evidence that he did lie when he told the agency that he was not working for Clinton’s campaign when he peddled dirt on Trump to the bureau’s general counsel.
Last week, Clinton’s own campaign chief testified that the failed presidential candidate OK’d the hoax.
As well, several jurors were clearly biased, and the judge in the case is a longtime Democrat operative. He just happens to be married to an attorney who represents a key figure involved in the attempt to destroy Donald Trump.
All in all, the acquittal isn’t a good look for American justice. Not that it would matter to the Clinton Crime Family and its orbiting associates.
The Lie
The crux of Special Counsel John Durham’s case was Sussmann’s obviously false statement to FBI chief lawyer James Baker.
“After a two week trial, and more than a day of deliberations, the jury found that Special Counsel John Durham’s team had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Sussmann’s statement was a lie, and that he was, in fact, working on behalf of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and technology executive Rodney Joffe when he brought two thumb drives and a white paper alleging a Trump-Russia connection,” as Fox News put it.
Durham’s smoking gun was a text message to Baker:
I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss. Do you have availibilty [sic] 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. [Emphasis added.]
Sussmann’s billing records to the campaign belied that written statement.
As Fox reported, “Durham’s team presented billing records dated beginning on July 29, 2016, and through October 2016, revealing Sussmann repeatedly billed the Clinton campaign for work on the Alfa Bank opposition research against Trump.”
Strangely, the jury didn’t believe the evidence. Perhaps that because some jurors were slightly biased, as Fox reported:
The jury included one federal government employee who told the judge they donated to Democrats in 2016 and another government employee who told the judge they “strongly” dislike former President Trump. Both of those jurors told the judge they could be impartial throughout the trial.
Sussmann tried to convince the FBI that then-GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump was linked to a Russian bank and used Russian cellphones near the White House. And that was just part of what Durham called a “conspiracy” to wreck Trump. The effort also included the hoked-up Steele Dossier.
Baker testified that the claims were false.
The Judge
Another source of concern as the trial began were the deep Democrat ties of Judge Christopher Cooper.
“In additional to having been ‘professional acquaintances’ with the defendant, US District Judge Christopher ‘Casey’ Cooper, an Obama appointee (who was on Obama’s transition team), is married to lawyer Amy Jeffress who’s representing key ‘Russiagate’ figure Lisa Page in her lawsuit against the FBI,” Zero Hedge observed.
Page was in cahoots with disgraced FBI man Peter Strzok to smear Trump and push the collusion hoax.
To his credit, Cooper disclosed to both sides that he knew Sussmann when they worked at the Department of Justice in the 1990s.
“I worked in the ’90s at the deputy attorney general’s office two years following law school,” Cooper told the attorneys, the Washington Examiner reported. “Mr. Sussmann also worked at the building at the same time in the criminal division. We did not work together or socialize, but I think it’s fair to say we were professional acquaintances.”
Continued Cooper:
I don’t believe that this creates a conflict, but my regular practice is to disclose these sorts of relationships with lawyers or with parties on the record. And I would advise you that I would be happy to entertain a motion if either side believes there is a conflict on that basis or any other.
Though the jury acquitted Sussmann, the trial did prove, again, one thing: Clinton and her hit squad conceived and executed a hoax that was, in the end, a seditious attempt to destroy Trump’s presidency.
