Hillaryous: Hillary Clinton lawyer found not guilty of lying to the FBI by a jury that includes three Clinton donors

06/03/2022 / By Mary Villareal

Hillary Clinton’s lawyer, Michael Sussmann, has been found not guilty of lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) after an 11-day trial.

With only a few hours of deliberating, the jury found Sussmann not guilty of making a false statement to the FBI in September 2016, when he said that he was not working on behalf of any client when he brought information alleging covert communications between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank.

After a two-week trial and over a day of deliberations, the jury found that Special Counsel John Durham’s team, which sued Sussmann on these grounds, had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the former Clinton lawyer’s statement was a lie.

It also did not prove that Sussmann was, in fact, working on behalf of Clinton’s presidential campaign with technology executive Rodney Joffe, who brought two thumb drives and a white paper, alleging a Trump-Russia connection.

“You have to ask yourself, when is America going to wake up and say enough is enough? When are you going to be fed up with the complete corruption going on in Washington DC?” Ann Vandersteel asked her viewers on the May 31 episode of “Steel Truth.”

The judge in charge of the case, Christopher Cooper, was an Obama-era appointed federal judge who allowed Hillary Clinton and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s donors into the jury pool for the Sussmann trial.

Cooper also happens to be married to Amy Jeffries, who happens to be Lisa Page’s lawyer. Page is a former FBI lawyer who is a frequent target of President Donald Trump after she was found criticizing him in text messages during his candidacy in 2016. The final blow is Merrick Garland, the attorney-general who officiated the marriage of Cooper and Jeffries.

Cooper also denied a request by the prosecutors to remove another juror because her daughter and the defendant’s daughter were on the same crew team, which means that there is a lot of conflict of interest in these matters.

In the end, Sussmann was facing a jury that consisted of three Clinton donors, an Ocasio-Cortez donor and a woman whose daughter is on the same sports team as the defendant’s daughter. With the exception of randomly selected people at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters, there is no way that anyone could come up with a worse jury. (Related: Sussmann trial exposes Dems’ scandal-industrial process.)

Sussmann’s work with Clinton campaign resulted in a charge of making false statements to the FBI

Durham’s team presented billing records beginning July 29, 2016, and through October 2016, revealing that Sussmann has repeatedly billed the Clinton campaign for work on the Alfa Bank opposition research opposite Trump.

Sussmann, however, was charged with one count of making a false statement to the FBI during his meeting with then-General Counsel James Baker on September 19, 2016, for which he maintained that he had been falsely accused. (Related: Finally: Absolute proof that the FBI launched a bogus operation against Trump’s 2016 campaign using longtime deep state assets.)

“I told the truth to the FBI, and the jury clearly recognized this in their unanimous verdict today,” he said following the verdict. He then thanked the members of the jury for their careful, thoughtful service.

“Despite being falsely accused I believe that Justice ultimately prevailed in my case. As you can imagine this has been a difficult year for my family and me. But right now we are grateful for the love and support of so many during this ordeal,” he said.

Durham, on the other hand, issued a terse statement expressing his disappointment in the outcome, although he maintained that they respect the jury’s decision in the matter.

“I also want to recognize and thank the investigators and the prosecution team for their dedicated efforts in seeking truth and justice in this case.”

The FBI was allegedly already investigating connections between the Trump campaign and the Russians before they received the information from Sussmann. After receiving the data, the FBI went on to investigate whether or not there was a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and the Alfa Bank, but found that there was “nothing there.”

Several former and current FBI officials and agents also testified that the bureau was “unable to substantiate any allegations in the white paper.”

Baker, who served as the FBI general counsel and left the bureau in 2018, took the stand and testified that the FBI’s investigation did not reveal such communications.

“We concluded there was no substance. We couldn’t confirm it. We could not confirm there was a surreptitious communications channel,” he said.

Vandersteel, however, does not agree with the verdict. “Our judges and justices are highly partisan, compromised or just plain scared,” she said.

Watch the video below to know more about the Clinton campaign and the Michael Sussmann case.

Watch “Steel Truth” with Ann Vandersteel from 9:30 to 10:30 p.m. on weeknights at Brighteon.TV.