Bank to be Admitted as Evidence in Sussmann Trial
An Obama judge will not allow Hillary Clinton’s tweet claiming Trump colluded with Russia to be admitted as evidence in Michael Sussmann’s trial.
As previously reported, Special Prosecutor John Durham wanted to use Hillary Clinton’s tweet accusing Trump of having a secret line of communication with Russian Alfa Bank as evidence in Michael Sussmann’s trial next month.
Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann’s motion to dismiss Durham’s case was denied by a federal judge a couple weeks ago.
Sussmann was indicted last September for lying to the FBI.
According to the indictment, Sussmann falsely told James Baker he wasn’t doing work “for any client” when he asked for a meeting with the FBI where he presented bogus evidence the Trump Tower was secretly communicating with Kremlin-tied Alfa Bank.
Hillary Clinton fired off a tweet claiming Trump Tower was secretly communicating with Russian Alfa Bank.
The defamatory tweet is still on Twitter.
US District Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee on Wednesday denied Durham’s request to use Hillary Clinton’s tweet in Sussmann’s trial.
The Washington Examiner reported:
Hillary Clinton’s tweet touting Trump-Russia collusion claims will not be allowed as evidence in the trial against Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann despite efforts by special counsel John Durham
On Wednesday, Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee, denied Durham’s efforts to bring the tweet up at trial, saying “the court will exclude that as hearsay” and that “it’s likely duplicative of other evidence” related to demonstrating the attorney-client relationship.
Durham had told the federal court earlier this month that he wanted the October 2016 tweet from the Clinton campaign promoting the Alfa-Bank claims to be admitted as evidence at the May trial.
The special counsel argued the tweet is not inadmissible hearsay “because it is not being offered for its truth” — emphasizing that the prosecutors actually believe its claims were false. Durham said he instead wanted to present the tweet to “show the existence of the defendant’s attorney-client relationship with the Clinton Campaign, which is directly relevant to the false statement charge.”