The Sussman single, low level charge was and is an interesting opening gambit. Yes, we will have to endure fake news on how this blows the Durham investigation up. But they will never admit this trial was used to introduce the reality of the conspiracy into an official record. And, the distinct possibility this charge and trial was more about that, than wanting/needing a conviction.
Had he been convicted the FBI would be having a party. It would have given them plausible deniability. The conspiracy would be resting squarely on Hillary’s and the DNC’s shoulders. His acquittal implies the opposite, they knew who he represented and chose to engage in the conspiracy.
Interestingly, even if Sussman did not lie to the FBI, he still participated in a conspiracy to influence the 2016 Presidential election. Will he be charged with that in the future? Or, has he possibly already cut a deal on the more serious charges?
Thanks to u/MeanOMan for opening my mind to this perspective!
As always, only time will tell.
It’s not clear to me how Hillary and the DNC would have been exonerated by a Sussman conviction. He was accused of lying to the FBI about why he was bringing the information to them. His lie was that it was not on behalf of his clients when, in fact, it was.
Durham’s team showed us that Sussman’s clients knew the Russia hoax materials were false. They knew he peddled the information to the FBI and CIA. He billed them for that service and even the thumb drives with the phony information. Neither his acquittal nor a conviction changes those facts, so neither could exonerate them.
But the FBI could have been. A conviction would have meant the FBI was duped into this investigation by Sussman. His acquittal means the jury believed the FBI knew he was he was there on behalf of his clients and wanted an excuse to participate in the conspiracy.
Sussman’s trial and acquittal helped build the case the conspiracy started with Hillary and the DNC then extended into the FBI, and possibly beyond.
Great stuff man
We could argue all day about the role nullification versus materiality played in the verdict. And you may well be right.
But does the verdict change the fact that this trial demonstrated the FBI knew the allegations were false and pursued an investigation anyway?
Does it change the fact that this trial demonstrated that Hillary and the DNC knew they were pushing disinformation?
And that this trial demonstrated there was a far ranging conspiracy to falsely make it appear Candidate Trump was a Russian Operative?
You are totally right, it does not change that fact. Even when a guilty verdict would have benefited a branch of the DS, the judicial system is so tainted it could not convict a deep stater.
So Durham has skillfully shown their was a conspiracy. But does it accomplish anything if he can’t get a fair trial in a DC court? Surely he knows that, but does he have a strategy to deal with it remains to be seen.