Quote:
Originally Posted by JustRalph
|
It’s a weak case in any event. According to the indictment Sussmann told the FBI he was not acting on behalf of any client.He did not tell the FBI he was not working for the Clinton campaign. He had to know how easy it would be to prove that he was.
The question is what was his purpose in going to the FBI? He was in possession of some evidence, substantial but not conclusive of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. And while it is true that such would be helpful to the Clinton campaign, the more important fact is that it was blatantly illegal if true.
What would be the benefit of Sussman keeping his relationship with the Clinton campaign secret. How would revealing it effect what he told the FBI. Does anyone believe the FBI would not have investigated these allegations just because they came from someone associated with the Clinton campaign.
The indictment claims Sussman told the FBI he was not representing a client during his interview with the General Counsel, but it gives no details.
There has to be a transcript which will surely come out during the trial.
John Durham is a Republican appointed United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut by Donald Trump. He was appointed Special Counsel by William Barr.
He has been unable to find any misconduct related to the origins of the Russia investigation. So he came up with this half baked indictment to stay on Trump’s good side.
@
