Judge in Sussmann Trial Limits Evidence about Alleged Clinton Campaign ‘Joint Venture’
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
A judge ruled on Saturday that Special Counsel John Durham’s office must limit evidence and testimony used in the trial of Democratic party lawyer Michael Sussmann to show a “joint venture” involving Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, Democratic operatives, a private investigation firm and several technology researchers.
Sussmann has been charged with making a false statement to a federal agent during a September 2016 meeting with the FBI. The Perkins Coie lawyer allegedly failed to disclose his clients, including Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign, to the FBI when he offered information in 2016 that he claimed demonstrated a secret channel between the Trump Organization and Kremlin-allied Alfa Bank. The claim has since been debunked.
During the meeting, Sussmann allegedly falsely claimed that he was not at the meeting on behalf of any client. Perkins Coie represented the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee at the time.
Prosecutors asked U.S. District Court Judge Christopher Cooper to rule ahead of the trial, which is set to begin later this month, that Sussmann was “acting in concert toward a common goal” with the pro-Clinton operatives, researchers and others.
If the judge had granted the request, it would have allowed prosecutors to introduce more emails and information, including those sent between Sussmann, the Clinton campaign, Perkins Coie partner Marc Elias, tech executive Rodney Joffe, and other tech researchers to show that they allegedly worked in concert to gather and spread the data about the since-debunked Alfa Bank ties, according to Politico.
Instead, Cooper wrote in a 24-page order that allowing prosecutors to include evidence of the political conspiracy would essentially be a “time-consuming and largely unnecessary mini-trial,” given that Sussmann is not charged with conspiracy.
“The Court will exercise its discretion not to engage in the kind of extensive evidentiary analysis that would be required to find that such a joint venture existed, and who may have joined it,” Cooper wrote. “While the Special Counsel has proffered some evidence of a collective effort to disseminate the purported link between Trump and Alfa Bank to the press and others, the contours of this venture and its participants are not entirely obvious.”
Allowing prosecutors to present evidence trying to link Sussmann to the conspiracy, when he is not charged with conspiracy, would “essentially amount to a second trial on a non-crime,” the judge wrote.
While Sussmann’s lawyers have argued that he reached out to the FBI after learning from Joffe about a potential connection between Trump and Alfa Bank and that bringing it to the attention of the FBI was a matter of national security, Durham instead challenges that Sussman was working for the Clinton campaign’s political gain.
