THREAD: 1. Why Sussman is guilty as charged.
The popular leftist narrative goes "who cares what Sussman told Baker? Everyone knew he was working for the Clinton campaign." It's flawed because it's asking the wrong question.
The popular leftist narrative goes "who cares what Sussman told Baker? Everyone knew he was working for the Clinton campaign." It's flawed because it's asking the wrong question.
https://mobile.twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1531347898906071044
2. The right question is "would Baker have passed on Sussman's data to investigators had Sussman informed him he was there representing the Clinton campaign?" The answer is no. In fact Baker said he wouldn't have even taken the meeting.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AGoudsward/status/1527356805457727491
3. "Baker insisted he had a clear memory that, at the 2016 meeting, Sussmann claimed he was not bringing the allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client.
“I’m 100 percent confident that he said that in the meeting,” he said.
washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
“I’m 100 percent confident that he said that in the meeting,” he said.
washingtonpost.com/national-secur…
4. The key point overlooked by most: Sussman didn't lie just to give himself cover. He lied so BAKER would have cover to hand the data over to Cyber Division. In fact the lie was necessary BECAUSE "everyone knew" Sussman was working for the Clinton campaign. Including Sussman.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
