James Baker: Wouldn't have met if he had known Sussman was working for Clinton

Moderators: Gamle-ged, Boadicea

User avatar
Charlie Mike
Posts: 14649
Joined: May 8th, 2021, 6:14 am
Has thanked: 1018 times
Been thanked: 2699 times

James Baker: Wouldn't have met if he had known Sussman was working for Clinton

Unread post by Charlie Mike »

As a matter of law, a lie must “matter,” or in legalese be “material,” for it to constitute a Section 1001 offense. To be material, the lie must be “capable of influencing a decision” of the government actor. While Sussmann’s legal team has told the jury that Sussmann’s alleged statement did not matter even if false, in his testimony yesterday, Baker explained several ways in which the lie “influenced a decision” of the FBI.

First, Baker testified that he would not have taken the private meeting with Sussmann if he knew Sussmann was working on behalf of the Clinton team. Next, Baker explained he had “vouched” for Sussmann, telling top FBI counterintelligence agents that Sussmann was a serious lawyer “who could understand the importance and validity of the information,” based on his belief that Sussmann was acting as a concerned citizen. The former FBI general counsel further explained that because Sussmann had brought the information to him supposedly on his own behalf, he treated Sussmann as a sensitive confidential human source and protected his identity from other agents investigating the data.
https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/20/re ... inal-case/

So, by protecting Sussman's identity, no one would be in a position to say, "Hey, wait a minute! Isn't that the guy working for Clinton?"
Post Reply