WASHINGTON — A Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer accused of lying to the FBI during the Trump-Russia investigation is asking a judge to block evidence or testimony related to a dossier of uncorroborated indictments compiled by a former British spy from his upcoming trial.
Michael Sussmann’s lawyers said prosecutors from special counsel John Durham’s team told them last month that they planned to present testimony related to the so-called “Steele dossier,” a collection of Democratic-funded investigations put together by former British operative Christopher Steele that purported to link Donald Trump to Russia The dossier contains unproven and discredited claims, but the FBI relied on it in part because agents requested secret surveillance warrants during the Russia investigation.
Sussmann’s attorneys argued in a Monday night filing that the Steele dossier is irrelevant to the case against their client, and that testimony about it at a trial scheduled for next month would be inflammatory and damaging.
“Any minimal materiality would be substantially outweighed by the risk of confusion, delay, waste, and unfair bias to require this evidence to be excluded,” Sussmann’s attorneys wrote, telling U.S. District Judge Christopher “Casey” Cooper that the Durham team should not be allowed to turn the trial “into a circus full of sideshows that will only fuel partisan fervor.”
The motion is one of several filed by prosecutors and defense attorneys to shape the scope of evidence for a trial that is expected to be closely watched and politically charged. By trying to prevent testimony related to the dossier, Sussmann’s attorneys are seeking to prevent discussion before the jury about one of the most incendiary and divisive aspects of the entire Russia investigation.
Trump supporters have long viewed the dossier as evidence that the investigation was generally flawed, and having it prominently featured in the trial of a former Clinton ally could boost their case that the investigation was politically motivated. Still, despite the attention paid to the dossier, the material was not what triggered the Trump-Russia investigation.
Sussmann is accused of lying to the FBI during a September 2016 meeting in which he conveyed cybersecurity investigators’ concerns about a possible covert back channel of digital communications between the Trump Organization and Russia-based Alfa Bank.
Prosecutors say Sussmann misled then-FBI General Counsel James Baker by saying he was not submitting the Alfa Bank allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client, when in fact he was there on behalf of the Clinton campaign and an executive. of technology with whom he had been working.
The Durham team alleged Monday night that the meeting was not the only time Sussmann made such a representation.
Prosecutors said he texted Baker the night before the meeting, requesting a brief conversation about a sensitive topic and saying, “I’m here on my own, not on behalf of a client or company, I want to help the Bureau.” . ”
Sussmann’s attorneys have strongly denied that he was lying, saying that even if he had misled the FBI, he had nothing to do with the investigation or the bureau’s decision to investigate concerns about Alfa Bank. The FBI investigated the possible existence of a secret communications channel, but concluded that there was no basis for the claims.
In their own filing, the Durham team made clear their interest in Steele and his file, suggesting they may be referencing at trial a meeting in the summer of 2016 in which Steele said Sussmann told him about the allegations. of Alpha Bank. Sussmann has told Congress that the purpose of the meeting was for him to “vet” Steele for the Clinton campaign, the motion says.
Another point of contention concerns contemporaneous notes taken by two FBI officials with whom Baker spoke after his meeting with Sussmann. Both officials, William Priestap and Trisha Anderson, included in their notes variations of Baker’s recollection that Sussmann said that he had not been acting on behalf of any particular client.
Sussmann’s attorneys asked a judge to exclude those trial notes, calling them a “triple hearsay” since neither Priestap nor Anderson were at the meeting and Baker did not record or take notes on their conversation with Sussmann. The Durham team is asking the judge to allow them to use the notes at trial, saying they will bolster Baker’s testimony.
Prosecutors are also seeking permission from a judge to allow them to use as evidence an Oct. 31, 2016, tweet from the Clinton campaign that advanced suspicions of Alfa Bank.
Durham, a former federal prosecutor in Connecticut, was appointed in 2019 by then-Attorney General William Barr to investigate government misconduct during the investigation into Russian election interference in 2016 and possible ties to the Trump presidential campaign.
Sussmann is one of three people charged so far. The other two are Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI attorney who pleaded guilty to altering an email and received probation, and Igor Danchenko, a Russian analyst and Steele insider who was charged in November with lying to the FBI during an interview. of 2017.
____
Follow Eric Tucker at http://www.twitter/com/etuckerAP
Reference-www.wral.com