The lawyer appointed by Trump is reportedly trying to prosecute Michael Sussman, a lawyer with a Democratic relationship.

Trump’s special advocate, appointed to investigate the administration’s relations with Russia, has revealed his intention to ask a grand jury to prosecute a Democratic cybersecurity lawyer for making false statements to the FBI.

Former federal prosecutor Michael Sussman, 57, who currently works as a partner at law firm Perkins Koy, represented the Democratic National Committee when Russia hacked the server in 2016.

Special Advocate John Durham indicted the lawyer in September 2016 when he first raised suspicions with the FBI about Trump’s dealings with Russia, asking who Sasman’s client was. He said he was trying.

According to people familiar with the matter, the prosecution centered on Sasman’s meeting in Russia that year with chief FBI attorney James Baker on September 19, 2016. As reported by The New York Times, they spoke on condition of anonymity.

At the conference, Sasman reportedly believed cybersecurity could be evidence of hash-hash communication between the Trump organization’s computer server and Alphabank, a Russian financial institution linked to the Kremlin. Provided FBI data and researcher analysis.

The charge centers on a meeting in Russia on September 19, 2016 by Sussmann (pictured) with James A Baker, the FBI's Chief Lawyer of the Year.  At the conference, Sasman reportedly believed cybersecurity could be proof of hash-hash communication between the Trump Organization's computer server and Alphabank, a Russian financial institution linked to the Kremlin.  Provided FBI data and researcher analysis

Special Counsel John Durham (left) democratically asked who Sussman’s client was when he first raised suspicions with the FBI about Trump’s dealings with Russia in September 2016. The lawyer in cybersecurity Michael Sussman (right) told the Justice Department he was trying to prosecute him.

The Times reported that the FBI concluded that there was no benefit to the researchers’ concerns. Special Advocate Robert S. Mueller III, who advanced Durham, completely ignored the issue in his final report.

Investigators are now investigating whether Sasman was secretly working for the Clinton campaign, but he has denied the accusation, according to the Times.

Durham had a deadline this weekend to reveal the charge and open an investigation due to a five-year statute of limitations in such cases.

Perkins Koy’s Sasman division is separate from the company‘s political law group, which represents the Democratic and Hillary Clinton campaigns, as reported by The Times.

However, lawsuits are not guaranteed, and in rare cases, a grand jury may dismiss a claim like Durham.

However, as the Times reports, Latham & Watkins’ Sasman attorneys Sean Berkowitz and Michael Bosworth expected their clients to be prosecuted and make false claims. Also denied.

“Sir. Sasman did not commit any crime,” they said.

Berkowitz and Bosworth claimed the client represented a cybersecurity expert who mentioned the FBI and did not attend the meeting with Baker as it had nothing to do with the Clinton campaign.

The lawyer added, “Any prosecution is an unfounded, unprecedented and unwarranted deviation from the non-political and principled way the judiciary is supposed to do its job.

“We are confident that if Mr. Sasman is prosecuted, he will win the case and prove his good reputation.”

Former President Donald Trump has long accused Democrats and Perkins Koy of trying to uncover unwarranted suspicions about Trump's dealings with Russia.  Trump supporters are also known to suspect Perkins Koi

Former President Donald Trump has long accused Democrats and Perkins Koy of trying to uncover unwarranted suspicions about Trump’s dealings with Russia. Trump supporters are also known to suspect Perkins Koi

Sasman’s attorney told the Justice Department that he and cybersecurity researchers first held the 2016 meeting because he believed the New York Times was trying to publish an article about Alfa Bank data .

As reported by The Times, Sussmann wanted to pay attention to the FBI before the newspaper published the story, but he didn’t. However, the Times published an article six weeks later referring to Alpha Bank.

According to the Times, the prosecution of a former prosecutor will receive significant political attention. Durham uses a grand jury to examine Sasman’s data from Alfa Bank.

He reportedly looked for evidence that the numbers were wrong or distorted, but to date there was no official sign that the data had been created.

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland has the power to dismiss Durham, but a spokesperson said he was not. Garland and his spokesperson declined to respond to the Times’ request for comment.

The only contradiction Durham has found so far is that Baker appears to have told investigators that he remembers Sasman did not hold meetings on behalf of his clients.

Later, during preparatory testimony in 2017, Sasman testified in another way and, as reported by The Times, held a meeting on behalf of an unidentified client who was an expert in cybersecurity and a assisted in data analysis. He said he asked.

Durham subsequently suspiciously obtained an internal billing file from Perkins Koy. This shows that Sasman recorded some time while working on the Alfa Bank issue and charged time for Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Oddly, according to the Times, those working hours did not include time spent meeting Baker.

However, Sussmann’s attorney argued that the billing record was misleading because the client had not billed cybersecurity experts for work on the Alfa Bank issue. According to the Times, he just had to show internally that he was working on something.

The Times also said Marc Elias, a partner of Perkins Koy, who was legal advisor to the Clinton campaign, left the company last month without responding to inquiries.

Elias reportedly spoke to Sasman of Alfa Bank. The Elias and Clinton campaigns pay monthly Perkins Koy holders, claiming that the time Sasman recorded did not incur additional charges.

When Durham stuck with an attempt to prosecute Sasman in October 2020, The Times reported that cybersecurity researchers who initially raised concerns about Sasman hired a lawyer, Stephen Tyrrell.

Tyrrell told The Times his client believed Sasman had represented him in a meeting with Baker. The lawyer did not disclose the identity of the client for fear of harassment.

“My client is an apolitical cybersecurity expert with a history of public services who felt compelled to share sensitive law enforcement information provided by Domain Name System (DNS) experts. Tyrrell told The Times.

He added, “He sought legal advice from Michael Sussman, who advised him on unrelated matters, and Sussman shared this information with the FBI on his behalf.

“He didn’t know that Mr. Sasman’s law firm had something to do with the Clinton campaign and was doing just the right thing.”

Former President Donald Trump has long accused Democrats and Perkins Koy of trying to uncover unwarranted suspicions about Trump’s dealings with Russia.

Trump supporters are notorious for Perkins Koy’s suspicions, especially when Elias asked a research firm to investigate Trump-Russia relations on behalf of the Democratic Party.

In recent months, the Durham team has suggested the theory that the Clinton campaign used Perkinskoy to submit unreliable information about Russia and Trump to the FBI to undermine the 2016 campaign, according to the Times. I have a more skeptical opinion.

The lawyer appointed by Trump is reportedly trying to prosecute Michael Sussman, a lawyer with a Democratic relationship.

Source link The lawyer appointed by Trump would try to prosecute Michael Sussman, a lawyer with a Democratic connection.


Source link

About the author