It begins. And will be updated as courtroom events unfold (in chronological order).

Check back throughout the day for continuous updates!

Opening statements will begin shortly after Judge Christopher Cooper convenes the trial about 9 a.m. Sussmann and his defense team arrived at 8 a.m. Special Prosecutor John #Durham and his cadre of federal lawyers arrived about 8:30 a.m., so all should be set for 9 a.m. start.

Deliberations begin Tuesday morning at the E. Barnett Prettyman U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., in Michael #Sussmann‘s trial for allegedly lying to the FBI about the #Trump Organization’s purported ties to a Russian Bank.

Opening statements are limited to 20 minutes. Bets are being laid in the media center. Most are putting their money on at least 20 minutes.

Among those set to testify Tuesday are former Perkins Cove attorney and #Clinton Campaign General Counsel Marc Elias and FBI Special Agent David Martin, who leads the agency’s Cyber Technical Analysis Unit Chief.

Unresolved evidentiary issues are being discussed before Judge Cooper. Prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis said FBI agent Marin’s testimony will be restricted to “what DNS data is and what a person can conclude from that data alone.”

Cooper has ruled that Martin and FBI Supervisory Special Agent Scott Hellman can only discuss technical matters in an explanatory way and cannot discuss whether the data was concocted or “spoofed.”

Lengthy discussion regarding the infamous #SteeleDossier …former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele cannot be compelled to testify so the dossier will enter the case tangentially in testimony from several witnesses, including #FusionGPS employee Laura Seago.

There will actually be 16 jurors seated during the trial with four not knowing that they are alternates and will not be “in the room” when the case goes to the jury for a verdict.

Brittain Shaw delivers prosecution’s opening statement. The government’s goal is to prove #Sussmann lied to FBI General Counsel Jim Baker when he provided documents as a “concerned citizen” when he was representing the #Clinton campaign and “internet executive” Roland Joffe

Shaw: The evidence will show that #Sussman and others were hoping to create an “October surprise” by “using and manipulating the FBI.”

Shaw: The case involves “a look, a leap, and a lie.” The look was meeting with Steele to look into what he had, the leap was reaching out to friendly media outlets to publish the allegations, and when that didn’t happen, Sussmann went to the FBI.

Shaw: “This is a case about privilege … the evidence will show the defendant lied for political aim. “The FBI should never be used as a political pawn.”

Defense attorney Michael Bosworth said “Michael Sussmann did not lie to the FBI” but was actually legitimately concerned, as a “cyber defense attorney,” in the rumors and allegations regarding Trump and a Russian bank “owned by an associate of Vladimir Putin.”

Bosworth: The defense will ask for questions: One, “What did Michael Sussmann actually say to the FBI?” Two, “Is what he said false?” Three, “Did he intend to say something false?” Four, “Did it matter?”

Opening statement over/under pool goes to those who bet on opening comments exceeding 20 minutes. Not sure if there were any bets on opening preambles going under 20. Court in recess until 11 am.

Defense will argue that #Sussmann was well-known, respected by FBI/CIA as a “cyber defense lawyer” and that he had nothing to gain on behalf of his clients by conveying the data to Baker, who had worked with him for years at the DOJ.

FBI Special Agent David Martin is first up. He is chief of the agency’s cyber technical analysis unit. He will explain what DNS (Domain Name Server) data means, but cannot stray into the validity of the DNS data Sussmann gave Baker in September 2016.

Martin is explaining what he does as a cyber technical analysis expert — Cooper just asked him to slow down. He came with a PowerPoint presentation. Heads are nodding, eyelids drooping. Interesting term: Recursor resolver.

Martin says the Domain Name System (DNS) “works kind of the same way, a bit more complex, as a phone book.” DNS includes the numerical IP addresses that computers use to talk to each other. Otherwise, the court and jury get a primer in computer science 101.

Defense begins cross-examination of Martin, who never specifically addressed anything related to the DNS data Sussmann gave the FBI in September 2016 and then to the CIA in February 2017. Sound of a new voice got a lot of slumping head-nodders to snap to for a moment there.

Martin leaves the stand. Bosworth on cross-examination mostly asked about the FBI’s capacity to use search warrants and other legal authority to determine what servers are communicating with each other.

FBI Supervisory Special Agent Scott Hellman is now up. He is being asked to explain what cybercrime is and what intellectual property rights crime is. Prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis is asking the questions.

Hellman said it took him and another agent less than a day to ascertain the data and “white papers” on two thumb drives Sussmann gave Baker did not support the Trump-Alfa Bank “secret connection” allegation.

Court has adjourned until 2 pm after a morning of technical testimony from FBI agents David Martin and Scott Hellman. The gist of Hellman’s testimony is the data Sussmann provided was flawed and the “narrative” that came with it — white papers with conclusions — had no merit.

Scheduled to testify this afternoon is Marc Elias, #Sussmann‘s fellow Perkins Coie attorney who was the #Clinton campaign’s general counsel. Court should convene around 2 pm.

Cooper is back, court in session. Berkowitz to cross-examine FBI Special Agent Scott Hellman, who said this morning that he and another agent determined the data and conclusions provided by Sussmann to Baker was bogus within a day of receiving the thumb drives.

Hellman told DeFilippis and Berkowitz that he was “frustrated” that Baker would not tell him the source of the data other than it was from “a sensitive source.” Berkowitz: “You thought it was weird” that Baker would not reveal the source? Hellman: “Yes.”

Hellman said when he got the thumb drives and ‘white papers,’ he examined them to see if there was “any hacking” involved before doing a technical review to “compare it with the narrative” in the ‘white paper.’

Hellman said, “We did not agree with the conclusions, that the data (showed) a secret connection” between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank. “Whoever had written that paper had just come to conclusions not supported by the technical data.”

“Two,” Hellman continued, “the methodology they chose was questionable” and “three, just overall, it just didn’t make sense to us. Why would a presidential candidate put their own name on a supposedly secret domain name?

Berkowitz is citing internal FBI chat messages that call the white paper “the DNC paper” and one agent actually naming Sussmann as the source despite Hellman maintaining he had no idea where Baker got the data.

Lengthy discussions with Hellman over 2016 friction in the FBI between its cyber and counterintelligence divisions. Counterintelligence wanted cyber division merged within it. “There were many differences of opinion” within the agency about such a merger.

Hellman is off the stand — so far, the witness most extensively examined by prosecutors and defense. Following brief break, trial resumes at 4 p.m. #SussmanTrial

The gist, at least from the defense, is while the FBI’s cyber experts deemed the data not worthy of a probe — and some within the agency division seemed to know the source — the counterintelligence division on its launched decided it was worthy of investigation. #SussmanTrial

Cooper is back, court in session. Berkowitz to cross-examine FBI Special Agent Scott Hellman, who said this morning that he and another agent determined the data and conclusions provided by Sussmann to Baker was bogus within a day of receiving the thumb drives.

Hellman was extensively queried by prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis about the chain-of-custody for the two thumb drives and hard copy paper that Baker gave him on Sept. 20, the day after Sussmann gave it to Baker.

Hellman told DeFilippis and Berkowitz that he was “frustrated” that Baker would not tell him the source of the data other than it was from “a sensitive source.” Berkowitz: “You thought it was weird” that Baker would not reveal the source? Hellman: “Yes.”

Hellman said, “We did not agree with the conclusions, that the data (showed) a secret connection” between the Trump Organization and Alfa Bank. “Whoever had written that paper had just come to conclusions not supported by the technical data.”

Berkowitz is citing internal FBI chat messages that call the white paper “the DNC paper” and one agent actually naming Sussmann as the source despite Hellman maintaining he had no idea where Baker got the data.

Steve DeJong, of Neustar Security Services, is the next witness. Rodney Joffe was senior vice president of the company, which had the DNS contract with the President’s Office in 2016.

DeJong said the email had a list of domain names to do a “script” analysis on. “The first domain was http://Trump-email.com,” he said. “The word Alfa appears in many of them.” It’s not unusual to get such requests, but it was unusual for political campaigns. #SussmannTrial

Prosecutors submitted emails from Joffe to DeJong through July 2017 requesting analysis of domain name traffic related to Trump’s businesses and campaign. DeJong said he never thought much about it. “Not my business. I have a day job,” he said. #SussmannTrial

DeJong said in August-September 2016, Joffe “asked me, as a favor” to look through DNS data logs — the company collects 1.5 billion “DNS tractions” a day — to find queries for names in political campaigns. In retrospect, it was mostly around the Trump campaign.”

On Aug 20, 2016, DeJong said he received an email from Antonakakis with a list of domain names and IP addresses. “When you’re getting an encrypted email with Rodney CC’d in the middle of the night, you know something is up,” Antonakakis said. #SussmannTrial

DeJong said he was also doing things for Joffe like gathering data on “DNS traffic between utility companies during a hurricane.” Sussmann, to his knowledge, was not “in any way involved” in collecting or analyzing the data. He had never heard of Sussmann before. #SussmannTrial

The day concludes with DeJong’s testimony which mostly focused on email exchanges between him and Joffe, Neustar’s Chief Technical Officer, and Georgia Tech researcher Manos Antonakakis, who worked occasionally with the company on “certain projects.”

On tap to testify Wednesday: Clinton campaign attorney Debbie Fine, FusionGPS technician Laura Seago, Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias, former DNC employee Tom McMahon, and former FBI general Counsel James Baker

Berkowitz asked if former Clinton campaign strategist Robby Mook could testify Friday, not next week, so he can leave Saturday for a 10-day vacation in Spain. Prosecutors objected because “popping in a witness” could confuse jury. Cooper said he’d think it over. #SussmannTrial