A trial against former Clinton lawyer, Michael Sussman is moving ahead. He is being charged with lying to the FBI, during the 2016 Election.
The case involves an alleged attempt by Sussmann, his law firm, and the Clinton campaign to falsely smear Trump. And Durham has the evidence to expose this scheme.
Yet the judge in charge of this trial just hamstrung the prosecutors, by rejecting evidence.
TRENDING : New Press Secretary’s Closet Swings Open – Evidence Of Trump Georgia Disinformation History Hits Jean-Pierre
A judge ruled on Saturday that Special Counsel John Durham’s office must limit evidence and testimony used in the trial of Democratic party lawyer Michael Sussmann to show a “joint venture” involving Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, Democratic operatives, a private investigation firm and several technology researchers…
If the judge had granted the request, it would have allowed prosecutors to introduce more emails and information, including those sent between Sussmann, the Clinton campaign, Perkins Coie partner Marc Elias, tech executive Rodney Joffe, and other tech researchers to show that they allegedly worked in concert to gather and spread the data about the since-debunked Alfa Bank ties, according to Politico.
How odd. The judge overseeing this trial against Sussmann is refusing evidence connecting him with a large scheme by Clinton and her lawyers.
TRENDING : Supreme Court Home Protesters Could Be In Deep Trouble – Bill Barr Confirms Federal Law Could Send Picketers To Prison
Instead, the judge only wants what little evidence is needed to prove Sussman lied to the FBI.
This is somewhat odd, right? Why wouldn’t the judge want all relevant evidence to come to light in this trial?
Unless, of course, this judge is doing this out of consideration for Clinton and her allies?
We can’t be sure. But limiting evidence that implicates Clinton and other people would prevent more damning details against her from coming to light.
There is no reason for the judge to stop that unless he wanted to protect Clinton and those who worked with her.
Is this yet another example of the Clintons enjoying special privilege? Time and again, we see that there is one set of rules for us and another for this crime family.
Clintons have long skirted the consequences of their actions. Even when dirt comes to the surface, something happens that conveniently protects them.