Former US attorney Speaks Out About Sussmann Verdict: ‘It’s a scary time’

Former U.S. attorney Brett Tolman is speaking out after a Washington, D.C., jury found former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann not guilty.

On Tuesday, the jury found Sussmann not guilty of making a false statement to the FBI in September of 2016 when he claimed that he was not working on behalf of any client while bringing information to the federal agency alleging a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and the Russian financial institution Alfa Bank.

During an interview on Fox News’ “Jesse Watters Primetime” on Tuesday, Tolman said that the jury’s verdict shows that politics has “crept into” the judiciary system.

“There is not a single district court in this country other than Washington, D.C., where this would have happened,” Tolman said.

“You have a 95% conviction rate across this country except in Washington, D.C.,” he continued. “So when you highlight that there are two-tier justice systems in this country, especially when you see Washington, D.C., take care of its own. It’s offensive, and we should be upset by it.”

“Fifteen years ago, it didn’t matter who appointed you as a judge,” Tolman added. “But we have seen politics now in the Department of Justice and the FBI, and it’s crept into the judiciary.”

“It’s a scary time because if we lose the judiciary, you lose the ability to have a check on one of the most powerful organizations in this country, and that’s the Department of Justice,” he concluded.

There are many questions surrounding whether or not this case was tried fairly, especially considering the makeup of the jury. One juror was the parent of a child who was on the same high school sports team as Sussmann’s child. Several members of the jury pool were Clinton donors, though it is unclear if they were ultimately picked for the final jury selection.

Fox News reported that one juror was a federal government employee who admitted to the judge that they donated to Democrats in 2016. Another juror was a government employee who told the judge they “strongly” dislike former President Trump. Both claimed to the judge that they could be impartial for the trial.