Hillary Clinton posted a tweet almost five-and-a-half years ago and now it is coming back to haunt her in the worst way possible.
During that time when the tweet was posted, then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had made an unsubstantiated allegation against her then-opponent, Donald Trump.
The Gazette reported that this one tweet many years ago could actually become potential evidence in a trial with one of Clinton’s lawyers.
Back in September 2016, after repeated false accusations to the FBI general counsel of an improper relationship between the Trump Organization and Russia, lawyer Michael Sussman was indicted; its alleged that he concealed having worked for the Clinton campaign.
Now, this has begun to become very problematic since it makes sense for a Clinton campaign staffer to have interest in any kind of information that would potentially cause harm to her opponent. So rather than admitting this conflict of interest, Sussman had allegedly chosen to conceal this information from the FBI.
The Gazette reported that Sussman has pleaded not guilty to the crime and is expected to stand trial in May.
And now Durham has asked the federal court to allow this 2016 tweet from Clinton to be admitted as evidence in the trial wherein Clinton pushed the same debunked claims that Sussman had taken to the FBI as tweeted.
Clinton wrote:
“It’s time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia.”
A screenshot attached to the tweet accused the Trump Organization of having a “secret server to communicate with Russian Alfa Bank.”
It’s time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia. https://t.co/D8oSmyVAR4 pic.twitter.com/07dRyEmPjX
— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 31, 2016
Western Journal detailed more of the report:
The accusation about a connection between the Trump Organization and Alfa-Bank has been debunked in investigations by the FBI, CIA, special counsel Robert Mueller, the Senate Intelligence Committee, and Durham.
Durham said his goal in presenting the tweet as evidence would be to “show the existence of the defendant’s attorney-client relationship with the Clinton Campaign, which is directly relevant to the false statement charge.”
Durham argued the tweet should not be considered inadmissible hearsay because “it is not being offered for its truth.” Sussman’s lawyers disputed that reasoning.
Durham said his goal in presenting the tweet as evidence would be to “show the existence of the defendant’s attorney-client relationship with the Clinton Campaign, which is directly relevant to the false statement charge.”
Durham argued the tweet should not be considered inadmissible hearsay because “it is not being offered for its truth.” Sussman’s lawyers disputed that reasoning.
He believes that Clinton’s tweet, along with other evidence to be presented at the trial, will prove Sussman and other Clinton agents were “assembling and disseminating the [Alfa-Bank] allegations and other derogatory information about Trump and his associates to the media and the U.S. government,” which he says constitutes a joint venture.
Sussman’s trial could very well implicate other Clinton agents beyond himself. It remains to be seen who will face consequences.
Sources: WesternJournal, The Gazette
