[ad_1]
Cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann in Washington, May 16.
Photo:
Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated Press
In “John Durham Goes to Court” (Potomac Watch, May 13), Kimberley Strassel writes that “it doesn’t much matter” if a judge’s rulings help Mr. Durham convict Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann. “Mr. Durham has already accomplished his far bigger goal with this narrow indictment,” she adds. “He’s put every sleazy collusion player in the hot seat, with ramifications beyond the courtroom.”
Since when does the Justice Department indict people to further bigger political goals outside the courtroom? Should the many investigations being led by Democrats indict
Donald Trump
and others to achieve a “far bigger goal”? Perhaps to protect the nation from someone who has rejected the legal processes by which elections are decided?
The Federal Bureau of Investigation continued investigating the unusual computer communications between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank for more than six months. Given that Mr. Sussmann was the Democratic National Committee’s cybersecurity attorney, and that the FBI was investigating the hacking of the DNC, the FBI officials will likely admit to knowing whom Mr. Sussmann represented. Mr. Sussmann’s lack of candor therefore is unlikely to be found “material” to the investigation the FBI pursued. In that case, Mr. Sussmann shouldn’t be found guilty of lying to the FBI.
Frank Hobbs
Fairfax, Va.
Copyright ©2022 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
[ad_2]
Source link
