Alec Baldwin shooting victim was wife of Latham & Watkins lawyer. - Latham Lawyers are defending Perkins Coie's Michael Sussmann in potential prosecution for lying to the FBI.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

[–] • 0 pt

Attorneys for Perkins Coie partner Michael Sussman on Wednesday decried any forthcoming prosecution of their client as “baseless, unprecedented, and an unwarranted deviation” of Justice Department principles, after the New York Times reported that Sussmann is facing a potential indictment from special counsel John Durham.

The Times reported Wednesday that Durham has told the Justice Department that he will ask a grand jury to indict Sussmann for making a false statement to the FBI. Sussmann is a cybersecurity lawyer and former federal prosecutor.

Sussmann’s lawyers, Sean Berkowitz and Michael Bosworth of Latham & Watkins, said in a statement that their client “is a highly respected national security and cyber security lawyer, who served the U.S. Department of Justice during Democratic and Republican administrations alike.” The statement was first reported by the Times.

“Mr. Sussmann has committed no crime. Any prosecution here would be baseless, unprecedented, and an unwarranted deviation from the apolitical and principled way in which the Department of Justice is supposed to do its work,” the attorneys said. “We are confident that if Mr. Sussmann is charged, he will prevail at trial and vindicate his good name.”

The Times reported that Durham’s investigation focused on a September 2016 meeting Sussmann had with FBI lawyer James Baker, in which Sussmann reportedly provided information from cybersecurity researchers. That data, those researchers said, may be evidence of covert communications between computer servers for the Trump Organization and the Kremlin-tied Alfa Bank, according to the Times.

The FBI did not take up the matter, according to the newspaper, and it was not mentioned in Special Counsel Robert Mueller III’s report.

According to the Times report, Baker told investigators that Sussmann said he wasn’t at the 2016 meeting on behalf of any particular client, while Sussmann told congressional investigators that he was representing an unnamed cybersecurity expert. It’s that discrepancy, as well as Sussmann reportedly billing some of his work on the Alfa matter to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, that caught the attention of the Durham probe, according to the Times.

The Times reported that Sussmann’s lawyers told the Justice Department that Sussmann billed the hours to the Clinton campaign to show internally he was doing work, despite not charging the expert for his legal representation. The Clinton campaign, whose general counsel was then-Perkins partner Marc Elias, paid a retainer which meant no additional fees were paid for the efforts on the Alfa issue, Sussmann’s attorneys reportedly told federal investigators. Elias left the firm last month.

Then-Attorney General William Barr in 2019 appointed Durham to examine the origins of the FBI investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including any ties to the Trump campaign. Barr named Durham a special counsel in 2020, meaning his role would remain during the Biden administration.

Only one criminal charge has emerged from the probe so far. Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer, last year pleaded guilty to falsifying a document that was used to renew court-authorized surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. A federal judge in January sentenced Clinesmith to a year of probation.

Former President Donald Trump and his allies have repeatedly claimed that the 2016 FBI investigation was politically motivated and a “witch hunt.” More than two years after Durham’s appointment, no public charges or findings have emerged from his investigation to support those claims.

Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz in a 2019 report criticized the FBI’s use of FISA warrants in the investigation, but did not find that the probe was politically motivated.

The reported targeting of Sussmann by Durham is sure to fuel more conservative criticism of Perkins Coie, a go-to law firm for Democrats. While still at the firm, Elias hired Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research against Trump, resulting in the notorious “Steele dossier” which included unverified allegations about Trump.

Sussmann and Elias, as well as Perkins Coie, were targeted by Page—the former Trump campaign adviser—in a civil lawsuit last year, with Page alleging he was defamed by the dossier. A federal judge dismissed the case over a lack of jurisdiction, a ruling that was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Latham & Watkins attorneys also represented the firm and its partners in that litigation.

Attorneys for Perkins Coie partner Michael Sussman on Wednesday decried any forthcoming prosecution of their client as “baseless, unprecedented, and an unwarranted deviation” of Justice Department principles, after the New York Times reported that Sussmann is facing a potential indictment from special counsel John Durham. The Times reported Wednesday that Durham has told the Justice Department that he will ask a grand jury to indict Sussmann for making a false statement to the FBI. Sussmann is a cybersecurity lawyer and former federal prosecutor. Sussmann’s lawyers, Sean Berkowitz and Michael Bosworth of Latham & Watkins, said in a statement that their client “is a highly respected national security and cyber security lawyer, who served the U.S. Department of Justice during Democratic and Republican administrations alike.” The statement was first reported by the Times. “Mr. Sussmann has committed no crime. Any prosecution here would be baseless, unprecedented, and an unwarranted deviation from the apolitical and principled way in which the Department of Justice is supposed to do its work,” the attorneys said. “We are confident that if Mr. Sussmann is charged, he will prevail at trial and vindicate his good name.” The Times reported that Durham’s investigation focused on a September 2016 meeting Sussmann had with FBI lawyer James Baker, in which Sussmann reportedly provided information from cybersecurity researchers. That data, those researchers said, may be evidence of covert communications between computer servers for the Trump Organization and the Kremlin-tied Alfa Bank, according to the Times. The FBI did not take up the matter, according to the newspaper, and it was not mentioned in Special Counsel Robert Mueller III’s report. According to the Times report, Baker told investigators that Sussmann said he wasn’t at the 2016 meeting on behalf of any particular client, while Sussmann told congressional investigators that he was representing an unnamed cybersecurity expert. It’s that discrepancy, as well as Sussmann reportedly billing some of his work on the Alfa matter to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, that caught the attention of the Durham probe, according to the Times. The Times reported that Sussmann’s lawyers told the Justice Department that Sussmann billed the hours to the Clinton campaign to show internally he was doing work, despite not charging the expert for his legal representation. The Clinton campaign, whose general counsel was then-Perkins partner Marc Elias, paid a retainer which meant no additional fees were paid for the efforts on the Alfa issue, Sussmann’s attorneys reportedly told federal investigators. Elias left the firm last month. Then-Attorney General William Barr in 2019 appointed Durham to examine the origins of the FBI investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, including any ties to the Trump campaign. Barr named Durham a special counsel in 2020, meaning his role would remain during the Biden administration. Only one criminal charge has emerged from the probe so far. Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer, last year pleaded guilty to falsifying a document that was used to renew court-authorized surveillance of former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. A federal judge in January sentenced Clinesmith to a year of probation. Former President Donald Trump and his allies have repeatedly claimed that the 2016 FBI investigation was politically motivated and a “witch hunt.” More than two years after Durham’s appointment, no public charges or findings have emerged from his investigation to support those claims. Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz in a 2019 report criticized the FBI’s use of FISA warrants in the investigation, but did not find that the probe was politically motivated. The reported targeting of Sussmann by Durham is sure to fuel more conservative criticism of Perkins Coie, a go-to law firm for Democrats. While still at the firm, Elias hired Fusion GPS to conduct opposition research against Trump, resulting in the notorious “Steele dossier” which included unverified allegations about Trump. Sussmann and Elias, as well as Perkins Coie, were targeted by Page—the former Trump campaign adviser—in a civil lawsuit last year, with Page alleging he was defamed by the dossier. A federal judge dismissed the case over a lack of jurisdiction, a ruling that was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Latham & Watkins attorneys also represented the firm and its partners in that litigation.

parent
link

(post is archived)

You can claim this sub in /s/subrequest