Shipwreckedcrew knows a lot about law, and this is what he has to say about Durham’s indictment of Sussman. He finds it very unusual:

Typically, a “false statement” indictment will consist of a brief description of how the federal investigators came to ask the question, the answer given by the defendant which is alleged to be false, and what a truthful answer would have been. …

That is all one needs for a single count indictment charging a defendant with a violation of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1001. That paragraph tells the defendant the date and location of the offense and the specifics of the offense conduct.

Paragraphs 1 through 44 were not necessary to charge Sussmann. That makes what Durham returned a “speaking indictment.” It discloses information in a public document that would not otherwise be known if the indictment set forth only facts needed to meet the requirements of due process.

A “false statement” charge does not require a litany of factual allegations regarding the conduct and statements of the defendant and numerous third parties over the course of weeks or months leading up to the making of the false statement. In over 30 years of practice as both a federal prosecutor and a defense attorney specializing in federal cases, I’ve never before seen anything remotely resembling the Sussmann indictment in a single count “false statement” case.

John Durham is far too serious of a career prosecutor, with a very long and established record of meticulous investigation and preparation, to have rolled out an indictment in this fashion if he was intending to wrap up the remainder of his work with a report to the Attorney General….

Trying to understand the new information in the indictment against the backdrop of what was uncovered about the original story in 2016 and 2016 — and then cross-referencing the timeline and actors against what is now known about Crossfire Hurricane and the Mueller Special Counsel Investigation — is a task worthy of a book.

He thinks this indictment took so long because there was a fight over getting the billing records from Perkins Coie, which were central evidence against Sussman.

First, as part of this fight, I believe it’s highly likely that Durham suggested to the Perkins Coie law firm that the firm itself might be — or is/was — a “target” of the investigation. Sussmann and “Campaign Attorney-1” — presumably Marc Elias based on the description — were doing legal work for firm clients as part of their employment when that legal work crossed the boundary into criminal conduct as alleged with regard to Sussmann at least.

Any corporation can be subject to criminal liability for crimes committed by managers or employees performing work within the course and scope of their employment. One way a corporation can seek to avoid criminal liability is to cooperate completely in the government’s investigation into the suspected criminal conduct of the employees.

Or perhaps it was the DNC, Clinton Campaign, and/or Tech Executive-1 who fought the disclosure, rather than the Perkins Coie law firm.

Why were the Durham investigation’s actions on this kept so quiet till now? “Disputes over the production of documents to a federal grand jury — and I was involved in just such a matter earlier this year — take place behind closed doors.” Of course, that doesn’t explain why it wasn’t leaked – although I suppose it wasn’t in the left’s interests to have it leaked, so even if it was leaked I would guess the MSM would be inclined to sit on it.

More on what it all might mean (accent on the “might”):

…[T]he most likely justification for ordering production of the records to Durham was the “crime-fraud” exception to the Attorney-Client privilege.

Simply stated, the exception applies when the communications or records at issue involve a future crime or fraud under consideration or a crime or fraud that is currently underway and continuing.

A crime by the client, that is, not the firm. And the clients here were the DNC, the Clinton campaign, and/or Tech Executive 1. Shipwreckedcrew thinks these fights for disclosure took place in a district court other than DC, for various reasons.

I still am very skeptical that this will lead to anything further. And I think that, whatever happens, Biden will probably pardon everyone. But it’s still quite fascinating. I have to say that I wasn’t even expecting this much from Durham at this point, so who knows?