(06-01-2022, 03:42 PM)mikesez Wrote: I saw a pundit saying that lying to the FBI is only criminal if the lie is "material" and Sussman's lawyers argued that the FBI would have investigated the case the same way if they knew Sussman worked for Clinton, therefore the lie was immaterial. I don't believe that. The lie was material.

That's what they are claiming to try and get out of the fact that the jury didn't follow the instructions given to them.


Here's the other side to this:
If he wasn't guilty, then that means the FBI knew he was working for Clinton and knew it wasn't the truth. We also have a bunch of people on record saying everyone knew it was fake and knew it was from Clinton. They now can't change stories when they are charged later.

If the plan was to go after the big fish, him being guilty gives them an out to say he did it on his own. If he is not guilty, then that shows a larger conspiracy and RICO case can happen.


Now I won't believe the swamp will be charged and cleaned out until it actually happens but it is a believable way to get there.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

---