Judge refuses to allow Clinton tweets alleging Trump colluded with

Judge refuses to allow Clinton tweets alleging Trump colluded with Russia into court

A US District Court judge said Hillary Clinton’s tweets alleging former President Donald Trump was collaborating with Russia will not be admitted into evidence in the trial of her 2016 campaign attorney.

Judge Christopher Cooper on Wednesday denied Special Counsel John Durham’s request to allow the tweets in Michael Sussmann’s upcoming trial for lying to the FBI.

He ruled that Clinton’s tweets would be ruled out as hearsay and that they would be “duplicates of other evidence,” the Washington Examiner reported.

The two tweets date from Oct. 31, 2016, when Clinton highlighted a Slate article exposing the Trump Organization’s alleged communications with Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank, allegations that have since been closely investigated by the FBI with no further action of the authorities led.

“It’s time Trump answered serious questions about his ties with Russia,” Clinton tweeted at the time.

“Computer scientists have apparently discovered a covert server connecting the Trump Organization to a Russia-based bank,” she added in a follow-up tweet.

Prosecutors – led by Special Counsel John Durham – said the source of the article and the allegations against the Trump Organization came from Sussmann.

He is accused of lying to the FBI in September 2016 when he said he was not working for the Clintons when presenting the “alleged data and ‘white papers’ that allegedly provided a ‘covert channel of communication’ between Trump and Alfa Bank demonstrated.

A US District Court judge denied Special Counsel John Durham's request to allow Hillary Clinton's tweets in the trial of her former campaign attorney Michael Sussmann (above).

A US District Court judge denied Special Counsel John Durham’s request to allow Hillary Clinton’s tweets in the trial of her former campaign attorney Michael Sussmann (above).

1651113233 954 Judge refuses to allow Clinton tweets alleging Trump colluded with The two tweets date back to Oct. 31, 2016, when Clinton highlighted a Slate article exposing the Trump Organization's alleged communications with Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank, allegations that have since been closely scrutinized by the FBI

The two tweets date back to Oct. 31, 2016, when Clinton highlighted a Slate article exposing the Trump Organization’s alleged communications with Kremlin-linked Alfa Bank, allegations that have since been closely scrutinized by the FBI

Durham had argued that the tweets should be allowed in court because Clinton allegedly presented them as “truth” and that the tweets “demonstrate the existence of the defendant’s attorney-client relationship with the Clinton campaign, which is relevant to the charges of.” false statements is directly relevant.’

However, Sussmann’s attorneys argued that the tweet was hearsay and irrelevant and would only confuse the jury into believing Clinton was part of an alleged conspiracy.

“The tweet, posted on October 31, 2016, reveals nothing about Mr. Sussmann’s state of mind over a month earlier when he allegedly made the alleged false testimony,” the defense wrote, according to court documents.

“There is a real danger that if the tweet were allowed, the jury would believe that Hillary Clinton herself was part of the special counsel’s unindicted conspiracy and that she had a direct interest or involvement in Mr. Sussmann’s efforts.

“Involving the candidate in this matter herself in this way would be unfair to Mr. Sussmann.”

The defense previously accused Durham of politicizing the trial by alleging Clinton spied on Trump in court filings in February.

Sussmann's attorneys argued that the tweet was hearsay and irrelevant and would only confuse the jury into believing that Clinton (pictured in April) was part of an alleged conspiracy against her then-presidential opponent Donald Trump

Sussmann’s attorneys argued that the tweet was hearsay and irrelevant and would only confuse the jury into believing that Clinton (pictured in April) was part of an alleged conspiracy against her then-presidential opponent Donald Trump

According to Durham’s indictment, he gave the FBI evidence of potential cyber ties between the Trump Organization and Russia’s Alfa Bank Sussmann and lied by saying he wasn’t sharing information about Trump on behalf of a specific client.

The indictment said Sussmann did not provide this information to the FBI as a “good citizen,” but as an attorney representing a US technology executive, Rodney Joffe, and Clinton’s presidential campaign.

Last week, Durham claimed that the alleged relationship with the former president and Russia — which Clinton attorney Michael Sussmann concluded — was “user created.”

“Although the FBI has not reached a final conclusion as to the accuracy of the data or whether it may have been genuine, forged, altered, or fabricated in whole or in part, [the CIA] concluded in early 2017 that the data from Russian Bank 1 and Russian Telephone Provider 1 were not “technically plausible”, “did not stand up to technical examination”, “contained gaps” and “conflicted”. [itself]’ and was ‘user created and not machine/tool ​​generated,’ he wrote in the court documents.

However, Durham said the Special Counsel’s office “did not reach a definitive conclusion in this regard.”

The special counsel said that regardless of whether the information “was actually unreliable or provided a motive” for the lie, all evidence of the steps the intelligence agencies have taken to “investigate these matters is critical to determining materiality.” are meaning”.

He said the evidence would allow the jury to determine whether Sussmann’s alleged lie could have “affected or impaired” government functions.