No, Russia wasn’t working on destabilizing the west, no, Russia is a friend of the US. Sure Durham, you’re an idiot. There was so much Russian collusion going on that it staggers the imagination. Yet, you conclude, without any convictions on your end that Russia was blameless for everything and the FBI shouldn’t have investigated them at all. What a tool you are Durham.

Story below:

Special counsel says “extremely troublesome” failures appear to stem from bias

Special counsel John Durham has issued a long-awaited report that sharply criticizes the FBI for investigating the 2016 Trump campaign based on “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence”— a conclusion that may fuel rather than end partisan debate about politicization within the Justice Department and FBI.

Durham was tapped in 2019 by President Donald Trump’s attorney general, William P. Barr, to re-examine how government agents hunted for possible links between the Trump campaign and Russian efforts to interfere in the presidential election. The very appointment of an investigator to re-investigate the investigators led to significant criticism from current and former law enforcement officials.

The report, coming almost four years to the day since Durham’s assignment began, will likely be derided by Democrats as the end of a partisan boondoggle. Republicans will have to wrestle with a much-touted investigation that has cost taxpayers more than $6.5 million and didn’t send a single person to jail, even though Trump once predicted that Durham would uncover the “crime of the century.”

Much of the FBI conduct described by the Durham report was previously known and had been denounced in a 2019 report by the Justice Department’s inspector general, which did not find “documentary or testimonial evidence of intentional misconduct.”

Durham goes further in his criticism, however, arguing that the FBI rushed to investigate Trump in a case known as Crossfire Hurricane, even as it proceeded cautiously on allegations related to then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. In particular, the report notes that while the FBI warned Clinton’s team when agents learned of a possible evidence by a foreign actor to garner influence with her, agents moved quickly to investigate the Trump campaign without giving them a similar defensive briefing.

The FBI’s handling of key aspects of the case was “seriously deficient,” Durham wrote. He concluded that the bureau abdicated its responsibility to the public, causing the agency “severe reputational harm.” That failure could have been prevented, Durham said, if FBI employees hadn’t embraced “seriously flawed information” and instead followed their “own principles regarding objectivity and integrity.”

As examples of confirmation bias by the FBI, Durham cites: the FBI decision to go forward with the probe despite “a complete lack of information from the Intelligence Community that corroborated the hypothesis upon which the Crossfire Hurricane investigation was predicated”; agents ignoring information that exonerated key suspects in the case; and the FBI being unable to corroborate “a single substantive allegation” in a dossier of Trump allegations compiled by British former spy Christopher Steele.

Durham’s appointment as special counsel was unusual, in that Barr essentially tasked him with investigating the investigators assigned to work for a prior special counsel: Robert S. Mueller III. His probe produced paltry results in court. Two people he charged with crimes were found not guilty, while a former FBI lawyer pleaded guilty to altering an email used to help a colleague prepare a court application for surveillance of a Trump adviser.

After the second acquittal last year, Democrats and some lawyers urged the Justice Department to shut down Durham’s office as a waste of taxpayer money and time.

The report issued Monday said Durham and his team conducted more than 48o interviews, reviewed more than 1 million documents, executed seven search warrants and, with a grand jury, served more than 190 subpoenas.

It ended with a short recommendation for the FBI: Create a position for an FBI agent or lawyer to provide oversight of politically sensitive investigations. That person would be tasked with challenging every step of such investigations, including whether officials appropriately adhered to the rules governing applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which handles matters of national security.

In the wake of the criticism of the investigation from the inspector general, Director Christopher A. Wray implemented a host of reforms and policy changes at the agency, which has been at the center of fierce political debates since the 2016 election.

The senior FBI officials who ran the Crossfire Hurricane investigation left the agency years ago. But they have long said the bureau had a duty to investigate the allegations against the Trump campaign.

Durham sent his report to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Friday, and Garland sent it to top members of the Senate and House judiciary committees on Monday afternoon, a Justice Department official said. The report contains no classified information, and Garland told lawmakers he released the report with no “additions, redactions, or other modifications.”

In a statement responding to the report, the FBI said the conduct in 2016 and 2017 that Durham examined “was the reason that current FBI leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time. Had those reforms been in place in 2016, the missteps identified in the report could have been prevented. This report reinforces the importance of ensuring the FBI continues to do its work with the rigor, objectivity, and professionalism the American people deserve and rightly expect.”

A longtime federal prosecutor who was U.S. attorney in Connecticut during the Trump administration, Durham had previously taken on politically sensitive investigations in Washington — including cases involving the CIA and the FBI. But the special counsel appointment was his highest profile and most politically charged undertaking.

Durham’s report comes against a backdrop of two failed prosecutions. Igor Danchenko — a private researcher who was a primary source for a dossier of allegations about Trump’s alleged ties to Russia — was acquitted in October of lying to the FBI about where he got his information. Durham personally argued much of the government’s case in that trial, in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

Last year, a jury in D.C. federal court acquitted cybersecurity lawyer Michael Sussmann, who Durham also had charged with lying to the FBI. A former FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, was sentenced to one year of probation after admitting in a 2020 plea deal with Durham that he had altered a government email used to justify secret surveillance of a former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page.

The report means Durham’s time as a special counsel is coming to an end, while two other special counsels continue: one to investigate Trump and people close to him for classified documents found at his home, as well as events leading up to the Jan. 6, 2021 riot at the U.S. Capitol, and another to investigate President Biden and people close to him for classified documents found at his home and office.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.