Durham alleges that Sussmann was representing the Clinton campaign when he approached the FBI with evidence of Trump-Russia collusion.
Monday marks the beginning of attorney Michael Sussmann’s trial for making false statements to his old employer, the FBI, as an attorney at the Washington, D.C.–based Perkins Coie law firm.
The charges were brought by Special Counsel John Durham as part of his investigation into the origins of the sprawling special-counsel probe into alleged links between former president Donald Trump’s campaign and the Russian Federation. Durham was tapped to lead the investigation by then-attorney general William Barr in 2019.
Durham alleges that in 2016, Sussmann told FBI General Counsel James Baker, a former Justice Department colleague of Sussmann’s, that he was coming to him with evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia as a concerned citizen, and not on behalf of any client. In fact, Sussmann was billing the Hillary Clinton campaign, and collaborating with another client, tech executive Rodney Joffe, for his work at the time, according to Durham’s earlier filings.
Sussmann was provided with what was purportedly evidence of a nefarious connection between Trump and the Russians – in the form of what was supposed to be communications between an email domain believed to be associated with the Trump Organization and servers at Russia’s Alfa Bank – by Joffe, who is believed to have been angling for a position in a potential Clinton administration. Sussmann passed that information on to Baker and, according to Durham’s indictment of the attorney, “coordinated with representatives and agents of the Clinton Campaign.”
The alleged connection between Trump and Alfa Bank was first reported on by Franklin Foer at Slate, who wrote that it should be viewed in the context of a larger, “suggestive body of evidence” of Trump-Russia collusion just nine days before the 2016 election.
Jake Sullivan, then an employee of the Clinton campaign and now the Biden administration’s national security adviser, issued a statement on behalf of the campaign – promoted by Clinton herself – that speculated that “this line of communication may help explain Trump’s bizarre adoration of Vladimir Putin and endorsement of so many pro-Kremlin positions.”
“We can only assume that federal authorities will now explore this direct connection between Trump and Russia,” added Sullivan.
In announcing his indictment of Sussmann, Durham noted that “the FBI ultimately determined that there was insufficient evidence to support the allegations of a secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and the Russia-based bank.” A motion of Durham’s indicates that the CIA even believed that the communications might have been fabricated to sully Trump.
Durham has revealed that he is in possession of text messages between Sussmann and Baker in which Sussmann misrepresents his relationship to the Clinton campaign. The damning message reads: “Jim — it’s Michael Sussmann. I have something time-sensitive (and sensitive) I need to discuss. Do you have availibilty [sic] for a short meeting tomorrow? I’m coming on my own — not on behalf of a client or company — want to help the Bureau. Thanks”.
Time logs from Perkins Coie, also obtained by Durham, show that the Clinton campaign was paying Perkins Coie for Sussmann’s efforts. The logs also suggest that Sussmann was billing the campaign during his meetings with Joffe, who was working as an executive at the cybersecurity firm Neustar when he came to Sussmann with alleged evidence of Trump-Russia collusion in the form of server activity.
In order to secure a guilty verdict, Durham will need to prove that Sussmann was not only lying about coming to the FBI as a private citizen, but that that lie was “material” or that it would make a difference in how investigators went about their work.
Durham has alleged that Sussmann lied about his affiliation with the Clinton campaign not only over text, but during his September 19 meeting with Baker, in which he turned over the evidence of an alleged relationship between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank. Typically, when a citizen comes to the FBI with a complaint, they’re interviewed by two agents, one of whom takes notes, But becase Baker and Sussmann had a longstanding relationship, they had a casual meeting that was not recorded for posterity.
Many of the most gripping questions around the trial surround its potential witnesses.
It is unclear what role Baker, who has a longstanding relationship with Sussmann, will play, for example. The linchpin of the prosecution, Baker said in 2019 testimony to the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, touted by Sussmann’s defense, that “he [Sussmann] had some amount of information, physical evidence, printed out, and also a thumb drive or two, that he said related to strange interactions that some number of people that were his clients, who were, he described as I recall it, sort of cyber-security experts.”
It’s also unclear whether Christopher Steele, the author of the discredited Trump-Russia dossier included on the government’s witness list, will testify. Steele met with Sussmann and included further probes into the Trump-Alfa Bank connection in his dossier, which was ultimately used by the Department of Justice to acquire a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrant to surveil Trump foreign-policy adviser Carter Page.
Steele’s appearance at the trial could indicate that federal district court judge Christopher Cooper will allow Durham the latitude to explore a broader conspiracy of collusion between the Clinton campaign, its vendors, and elements of the Department of Justice.
Cooper has so far indicated that he will do what he can to keep the trial focused on Sussmann, ruling that emails between the Clinton campaign, Sussmann, and Fusion GPS – the opposition research firm associated with Christopher Steele – as well as tweets from Clinton and Sullivan, were inadmissible in the trial.
The trial begins with jury selection on Monday.