The defense is claiming that Sussman's lying was immaterial and he should get off. Durham is justifying why the lying is material. If Sussman hadn't lied, Durham supposes that the (an honest) FBI would have asked many awkward questions, which would have kept RussiaGate from ever getting off the ground.
And Durham will bring witnesses that explain just why the lying is indeed material.
The FISA warrants would likely never have been authorized had the FISA court not been lied to by the FBI, who allegedly relied on false information provided by Sussman, and others. No FISA warrant, no Operation Crossfire Hurricane, no spygate. There is record of the FISA court rejecting warrants prior to Sussman providing false information. Durham is simply stating the case that Sussmans lies did in fact influence the events that started spygate, and is therefore material to the investigation.
Sussman is trying to convince the court that his lies were no biggie by basically saying- "yeah, I lied, but my lies didn't matter, so I should be removed from Durhams spygate investigation." It's just a desperate attempt to avoid what's going to happen to him.
I don't read it that way at all.
The defense is claiming that Sussman's lying was immaterial and he should get off. Durham is justifying why the lying is material. If Sussman hadn't lied, Durham supposes that the (an honest) FBI would have asked many awkward questions, which would have kept RussiaGate from ever getting off the ground.
And Durham will bring witnesses that explain just why the lying is indeed material.
Of course you dont. Only a shill would read it that way.
The FISA warrants would likely never have been authorized had the FISA court not been lied to by the FBI, who allegedly relied on false information provided by Sussman, and others. No FISA warrant, no Operation Crossfire Hurricane, no spygate. There is record of the FISA court rejecting warrants prior to Sussman providing false information. Durham is simply stating the case that Sussmans lies did in fact influence the events that started spygate, and is therefore material to the investigation.
Sussman is trying to convince the court that his lies were no biggie by basically saying- "yeah, I lied, but my lies didn't matter, so I should be removed from Durhams spygate investigation." It's just a desperate attempt to avoid what's going to happen to him.
No it is not the gist of Durhams rebuttal, shill. It is pure speculation on the part of John Solomon.