Former President Trump stated that the revelations from the trial and acquittal of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann make him “want to fight even harder,” warning that “if we don’t win, our country is ruined.”
Michael Sussman, the campaign lawyer for Democrat Hillary Clinton, was found not guilty of lying to the FBI in the first trial of special counsel John Durham’s investigation on Wednesday. Before making its decision, the federal jury in Washington, DC deliberated for six hours over two days.
“They didn’t do anything about it”
When the former President was asked if the verdict would have any kind of influence on future political plans including the campaign for the 2024 presidential elections, Donald Trump replied saying, “If anything, it makes me want to fight even harder.”
“If we don’t win, our country is ruined,” Trump said. “We have bad borders, bad elections, and a court system not functioning properly.” He added, “Our country is being systematically destroyed.”
“They spied on my campaign. They got caught. If a Republican would have done that, and the obvious steps forward, it would be a virtual death penalty,” Trump said in an interview on Wednesday.
“They had blinders on—they were only looking in one direction,” Trump said. “No matter how far they turned and saw all of these crimes, they wouldn’t go there.” He added, “Mueller and everybody else knew what was going on, and they didn’t do anything about it. This was totally illegal. What they did was treason, and it also put our country in a lot of danger with Russia,” Trump stated further.
As for Clinton, said, the former president, “She should be ashamed of herself.”
Trump also lashed out expressing his frustration over the verdict on his social media platform Truth Social in a post, and calling the justice system “corrupt”.
“Our Legal System is CORRUPT, our Judges (and Justices!) are highly partisan, compromised or just plain scared, our Borders are OPEN, our Elections are Rigged, Inflation is RAMPANT, gas prices and food costs are ‘through the roof,’ our Military ‘Leadership’ is Woke, our Country is going to HELL, and Michael Sussmann is not guilty.”– wrote the former president in the post.
John Durham followed up Trump’s response with a rather curt statement, saying that even though he was disappointed with the outcome, he respected the lawmakers’ decision.
“While we are disappointed in the outcome, we respect the jury’s decision and thank them for their service. I also want to recognize and thank the investigators and the prosecution team for their dedicated efforts in seeking truth and justice in this case.” -read the statement by Durham.
“I’m shocked the DC Clinton donor jury let Clinton’s lawyer off…HAHAHA just kidding, absolutely no one is shocked,” tweeted the former president’s son Donald Trump Jr. “Hunter Biden off next then Paul Pelosi etc. We all know how this goes by now…Only people not tied to the establishment DC swamp ever face accountability.” -he wrote further.
Jury seems biased, in favour of Clinton
Sussmann reported to the FBI in September 2016 that there was a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank. Durham claimed Sussmann lied to then-FBI General Counsel James Baker when he claimed he was bringing the allegations as a concerned citizen.
Durham claimed Sussmann was acting in his capacity as a lawyer for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, citing billing records that show Sussmann repeatedly charged the campaign for his work on compiling the information linking Trump to the Kremlin-linked bank.
Key allegations that linked Trump to Russia during the 2016 election and into his presidency, leading to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, originated with people connected to Clinton and her presidential campaign, with former officials now questioning why Mueller’s team of seasoned prosecutors didn’t report those connections as part of their years-long investigation.
Legal experts said the verdict did not surprise them and that Durham was already behind the eight ball due to pre-trial rulings by Judge Christopher Cooper and potential jury bias.
Cooper overruled prosecutors’ objections to seating a prospective juror who had donated to Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign during jury selection, noting that the prospective juror had “expressed a high degree of confidence” in his ability to be impartial.
“The Durham prosecutors were facing extremely adverse conditions in this trial,” says professor Johnathan Turley of George Washington University Law School. “Judge Cooper imposed strict limits on the scope of the evidence and possible examinations that prevented the prosecution from showing the origins of this information and the broader role of the Clinton campaign.” -he added.
“The jury composition was also challenging,” Turley added. “In a city that voted over 90% for Clinton, this was a nightmare jury pool. The judge also rejected requests to bar a couple jurors who raised legitimate concerns over their objectivity for the prosecution.” “However, the prosecution faced a virtual obstacle course of adverse rulings and other challenges,” he reiterated.
Former federal prosecutor James Trusty expressed reservations about the jury, noting that three of the panellists had previously voted for Clinton and donated to her campaign.
The trial lasted for two weeks, including jury deliberations that took more than a day.
According to The Freedom Times, the jury concluded that “Special Counsel John Durham’s team had not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Sussmann’s statement was a lie.”
According to Fox News, the jury also decided that Durham’s team failed to prove that Sussmann was working for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign or had a contract with technology executive Rodney Joffe when he brought flash drives and a “white paper” to the Justice Department officials, alleging a Trump-Russia connection.
