The judge presiding over the false statements case against Michael Sussmann shot down the defendant’s motion to dismiss special counsel John Durham’s indictment, denying the Democratic cybersecurity lawyer’s effort to avoid trial next month.
Sussmann was indicted last September for allegedly concealing his clients (Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and “Tech Executive-1,” known to be former Neustar executive Rodney Joffe) from FBI General Counsel James Baker when he pushed since-debunked claims of a secret back channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank.
He has argued he did not lie to the FBI when passing along Trump-Russia collusion claims, and even if he did, the lie was “immaterial.” Durham argues that he has proof that the lie was absolutely material under U.S. Code § 1001. Judge Christopher Cooper said Wednesday this was an issue generally decided by a jury and that it should be dealt with at trial.
The judge said, “Sussmann’s sole argument for dismissal is that, even taking the allegations in the indictment as true, his purported misrepresentation to Baker was immaterial.”
Sussmann’s lawyers said in February he “voluntarily” met with the FBI in September 2016 “to pass along information that raised national security concerns.” They argued there was no allegation by Durham that the tip was false and contended Sussmann was instead “charged with making a false statement about an entirely ancillary matter.”
“Mr. Sussmann did not make any false statement to the FBI,” Sussmann’s defense team claimed. “But in any event, the false statement alleged in the indictment is immaterial as a matter of law. Furthermore, allowing this case to go forward would risk criminalizing ordinary conduct, raise First Amendment concerns, dissuade honest citizens from coming forward with tips, and chill the advocacy of lawyers who interact with the government.”
SUSSMANN DOESN’T WANT STEELE DOSSIER BROUGHT UP AT TRIAL
Durham released a potential smoking gun in the case against Sussmann earlier this month, publishing documents showing the Democratic cybersecurity lawyer messaged the FBI general counsel the night before their meeting that he was not working on behalf of any client when, in fact, he was working for the Clinton campaign.
Sussmann has pleaded not guilty and called upon the judge to dismiss the case against him, even relying in part on legal analysis by fired FBI agent Peter Strzok.
Durham’s indictment against Sussmann made it clear the special counsel believes the defendant lied purposely, saying he “did willfully and knowingly make a materially false, fictitious, and fraudulent statement or representation” to Baker.
In February, Durham said if Sussmann had told the truth, it could have affected how the FBI chose to proceed, noting that “the source and origins of the information” matter to the FBI.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The special counsel revealed in February that he has evidence Sussmann’s other client, Joffe, “exploited” domain name system internet traffic at Trump Tower, Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and the Executive Office of the President. The judge also shot down Sussmann’s efforts to strike these revelations last month.
Durham said Joffe “exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data” and tasked researchers to mine internet data to establish “an inference” and “narrative” tying Trump to Russia. Durham said Joffe indicated he was doing this to please certain “VIPs” on the Clinton campaign.
The Clinton campaign touted the Alfa Bank claims in the closing days of the 2016 election, but special counsel Robert Mueller, the FBI, and a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee investigation did not uncover evidence of its veracity.
