I just read the indictment, and holy shit.
To start, Sussman is billing the Hillary campaign as he's taking these meetings, coordinating the production and dissemination of false constructed narratives, and working on behalf of not only the campaign, but for this "Tech Executive-1" who runs and manages 3 different "Internet Companies" as it pertains to this indictment.
The "Internet Company-1" handles massive amounts of data, much of it is traffic, which is then sent to the two other companies for analysis, business strategy, etc. "Tech Exec-1" produces a LIST of 20 Trump insiders, family members, etc with their names, addresses, birthdays, email accounts, domains, the works - and instructs the data analytics folks to dig DEEEEP for anything they can find, so that a "VIP" can be very pleased if they get some juicy details.
A researcher sees a domain "mail.trump-mail.com" has a dns/traffic request to a .ru or "Russian Bank" company, and they instruct the researchers to dig. The researchers not only claim that it looks like a red herring, but that any technical person would tear the claims apart, as they can't even prove it if it was a spoofed request or not. They tell the "Tech Exec-1" that it wouldn't hold up to any level of scrutiny, and that they have blinders on. Everyone agrees.
Sussman and the "Tech Exec-1" start working on a "White Paper" in secret, outlining a "plausible" scenario, void of any technical links and present the paper back to the researchers and ask they to just give it a glance and take their DNS researcher hats off for a second... Does this white paper look plausible? The researchers commend the "Tech Exec-1" for putting together a plausible paper, and compliment him for steering clear of the hurdles that would raise concerns...
Sussman starts working with media outlets to prep stories, just before going to the FBI (and later a second agency, unnamed) to present the white paper on behalf of NO client, just a concerned citizen.
This indictment nails Sussman for lying about doing this on behalf of his client(s), ALTHOUGH, it's likely MUCH more damaging than we can even imagine - the LIBEL and SLANDER laws alone against a corporation (Trump Organization) are far reaching, there was MILLIONS in damages, lost contracts, etc. This is like a tee'd up case, and I don't think they're done yet!
What "Tech Exec-1" likely did is blatantly illegal too - even if it's on the libel/slander train. BUT WOW - Is this the "Big G" tech company? Their CEO was on the campaign trail for Hillary... I wouldn't be surprised.