f b, i actually had a meeting with the f. b i almost 4 years ago to the date, september 19th, 2016. it was a meeting between susman general counsel or special counsel john durham, and the f. b. i general counsel james baker. now, in that meeting, susman told baker that he had suspicions about an alleged secret communications between the trump campaign and russia. those suspicions later found out to be entirely false. now the indictment says that the lie was material because it misled the f. b. i about the political nature of sussman work. now, while the special council on the f b i r r a board with assessments, indictment, you do have his lawyers that deny any wrong doing. mr. susan has committed no crime that the prosecution here would be baseless, unprecedented, and an unwarranted deviation from the a political and principled way in which the department of justice is supposed to do its work. very confident that if mister susan is charged, he will prevail at trial and vindicate his good name. now, a very interesting note here you did have the now president joe biden justice department. they actually allowed this

f. b i almost 4 years ago to the date, september 19th, 2016. it was a meeting between susman general counsel or special counsel john durham, and the f. b. i general counsel james baker. now, in that meeting, susman told baker that he had suspicions about an alleged secret communications between the trump campaign and russia. those suspicions later found out to be entirely false. sussman lied about the capacity in which he was providing the allegations to the f. b. i susman stated falsely that he was not doing his work on the aforementioned allegations for any client which led the f. b. i general counsel to understand that sussman was acting as a good citizen, merely passing along information, not as a paid advocate or political operative, but in fact, sussman acted on behalf of specific clients, namely a u. s. technology industry executive, a u. s. internet company and the hillary clinton presidential campaign. now the indictment says that the ally was material because it misled the f. b. i about the political nature of sussman work. now while the special council and the f b,

statement by sussman he was told to the f b, i actually had a meeting with the f b i almost 4 years ago to the date, september 19th, 2016. it was a meeting between susman general counsel or special counsel john durham. and the f . b, i general counsel james baker. now, in that meeting, susman told baker that he had suspicions about an alleged secret communications between the trump campaign and russia. those suspicions later found out to be entirely false. sussman lied about the capacity in which he was providing the allegations to the f. b. i. sussman stated falsely that he was not doing his work on the aforementioned allegations for any client which led the f. b. i general counsel to understand that sussman was acting as a good citizen, merely passing along information, not as a paid advocate or political operative. but in fact, sussman acted on behalf of specific clients, namely a u. s. technology industry executive, a u. s. internet company and the hillary clinton presidential campaign. now the indictment says that the ally was material because it misled the f. b, i about the political nature of sussman work. now while the special counsel and the f