DougBH
187
I was indeed talking about sentencing. Are you claiming that you get to set up the guidelines? Since I never claimed that Flynn wasn’t guilty of perjury, there is nothing else I could, have been talking about.
When I said Flynn did nothing wrong I was talking about nothing wrong in talking to Russian diplomats before taking office, not nothing wrong in lying about it. Seriously, that is very obiously what I meant from the context. You are just being argumentative for the fun of it, aren’t you?
And my point is, according to the law, Sussmann did nothing wrong by bringing evidence to the FBI’s attention.
Just like Flynn, the only crime he committed was lying.
Why were you talking about sentencing?
It is very clear that no one else is.
a report from a gen counsel of the fbi to his superiors is not “hearsay”
he attempted to deceive the fbi
DougBH
192
Once Flynn was brought into this, the conversation covered indictment, trial (if any) , sentencing and pardoning. It was no longer about just Sussman, the story had been moved.
And if it is just about guilt or not, then yes, perjury is perjury.
But if you insist on brining Flynn into it I am going to point out differences…as I have done.
Don’t claim hypocrisy when it comes to Flynn and then say we can’t talk about the differences in motivation and intent between the two cases.
DougBH
194
And?.
Flynn had to be pardoned.
Maybe Biden can pardon Sussman.
it in fact would, as he provided knowingly false information to the fbi.
See, the steele Dossier was paid for by democrats. Russian collusion was fake news that almost all leftist fell for. And they fell for it for years,and some still are fake news believers.
However nothing will happen to this guy and actually, this is just part of Hillary being installed 2024, just like the new monica movie,and her appearance on CBS.
it is a crime to bring knowingly false information to the fbi, so yes, he did.
1 Like
Jezcoe
199
Sussmann isn’t being charged with that.
What evidence do you have that the information he provided to the FBI was false?
More importantly, what evidence do you have that he knew the evidence was false?
incorrect
“The indictment accuses Michael Sussmann of hiding that he was working with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign during a September 2016 conversation he had with the FBI’s general counsel…”
yet. or maybe because there’s a deal in place.
read the indictment. there is no doubt whatsoever that he did provide knowingly false information to the fbi. there are also issues of misuse of public funds and it would appear hatch act and campaign finance problems.
his own emails. read the indictment. they knew the bank story was false from the git go.
The only false information the indictment alleges that he provided to the FBI was whether or not he was representing a client.
There is nothing to suggest that the documentation he provided to the FBI regarding internet traffic was false - let alone that Sussmann knew it was false at the time.
you need to give the money back. you’re terrible at law.
read their emails, they knew the story was false. they hid information, failed to divulge information they had that would show it to be false, and lied, lied, lied throughout the whole scheme.
1 Like
I read the indictment. It doesn’t say what you seem to think it does.
It is not against the law to withhold information from the FBI, or to hide information. As for lies - they’re not illegal either, unless they’re made to the FBI. What other false statement (other than the allegations regarding his clients) did Sussmann make to the FBI? There’s nothing else in the indictment.
Jezcoe
207
I have my doubts that there is a deal in place.
I also have my doubts that there will be superceding indictments.
Sussmann may have lied. It is highly probable.
I don’t see from this indictment how they have the weight of evidence to make the case.
Jezcoe
208
The charge is that Sussmann lied about not working for a client.
That his testimony to Congress was in conflict with his Sept 2016 meeting with Baker.
That is it.
1 Like
