The Russiagate trials will see their first hearing next month…
Michael Sussmann filed a motion to dismiss his case in February, but a federal judge recently shot down that motion; Sussmann will be headed to court on May 16th 2022.
Several damning text messages allegedly sent by Sussmann were recently revealed by Durham, and I have to wonder: will he turn on his former boss?
Will we see Hillary Clinton also dragged into court through developments relating to Sussmann’s trial and the ongoing investigation?
Here are the relevant details:
Michael Sussmann’s motion to dimiss has been denied.
They’re going to trial on May 16, absent a plea deal or other developments (continuance, etc).
Full doc: https://t.co/TBgYOT9OEe pic.twitter.com/XlFHqx3kSm
— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) April 13, 2022
Of course I was in court when the denial of Sussmann’s Motion to Dismiss dropped. Amazed it took the court so long to write this very perfunctory order, but as I said would happen, it was denied. Key moving forward is this and jury instruction battle: pic.twitter.com/ckMoFHZBcf
— Margot Cleveland (@ProfMJCleveland) April 13, 2022
Fox News explains:
Cooper detailed Durham’s indictment, which alleges that Sussmann told then-FBI General Counsel James Baker in September 2016, less than two months before the 2016 presidential election, that he was not doing work “for any client” when he requested and held a meeting in which he presented “purported data and ‘white papers’ that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel” between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank, which has ties to the Kremlin.
BREAKING: Judge Christopher Cooper has Denied Michael Sussmann’s motion to dismiss the indictment in the Durham Probe. pic.twitter.com/MU7801ficZ
— Benny (@bennyjohnson) April 13, 2022
Very significant loss by Sussmann, allowing Durham to proceed to trial in the matter of the fake #christopherSteele dossier. https://t.co/FyXTLSWlWL
— Justin Mahwikizi (@mahwikizi) April 13, 2022
Conservative Brief goes on:
Sussmann’s legal team filed a motion demanding that the court remove portions of the Feb. 11 filing that included the “Factual Background” section by claiming that it would “taint” a jury.
“I’m not going to strike anything from the record,” noted U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Christopher Cooper during a status hearing. “Whatever effect the filing has had has already passed.”
