Michael Sussmann’s attorneys have asked the court to “strike” the “factual background” part of Durham’s filing, claiming it would “taint the jury pool.” Sussmann, an ex-lawyer in charge of Clinton’s campaign, was a part of the scheme trying to link Trump with Russia, according to Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation.
On Feb. 11, Durham revealed the potential conflicts of interest linked to Sussmann’s representation, who has been accused of lying to a federal agent. Sussmann has entered a not-guilty plea. Sussmann’s lawyers stated that the Special Counsel had done more than simply file brief noting potential conflicts of interest. The attorney claimed that allegations were meant to inflate media attention, politicize the case and taint the jury pool, per report.
Sussmann, according to Durham’s accusation, spoke to FBI agent James Baker in September 2016 and claimed she was not working for any client. Following that, he held a meeting in which he presented false data about channels linking Trump to Russia. Durham’s Feb. 11 filing, on the other hand, claimed that attorneys for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign hired a company to infiltrate servers at Trump Tower 2016 in order to establish an “inference” and “narrative” to prove the Trump-Russia links to federal government agencies.
According to the “Factual Background” section of Durham’s filing, Sussmann presented at least two clients in September 2016, including an internet company that later infiltrated the servers and a technology executive known as Tech Executive 1. Sussmann and the Tech Executive interacted with another law partner who worked as a General Counsel for the Hillary Clinton campaign, according to the filing. Marc Elias, a former partner at the legal firm Perkins Coie, is said to be the lawyer in question, according to sources.
Durham noted that lookups began as early as 2014, years before Trump took office, according to data collected by Tech Executive-1, which he described as another truth that the claims disregarded.
