May 17, 2023 - 7:15pm
Early this week, Special Counsel John Durham released his much-anticipated report on the years-long investigation into alleged collusion between Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Russian Government. Slated to be another major milestone in the affair now known as Russiagate, the moment has been met — at least in the media — with a muted response.
“After Years of Political Hype, the Durham Inquiry Failed to Deliver,” the New York Times declared in its headline. The Associated Press, while more even-handed, took a similar approach, noting that the inquiry merely supplied “fodder to Trump supporters” while, at the same time, offering proof that it was no more than a “politically motivated farce”.
Behind the media’s highly calibrated equivocation is the core tension at the heart of the inquiry. When former attorney general Bill Barr stipulated “a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel”, he gave the most narrow aspect of the inquiry greater weight than its broadest and gravest. The dying-fall headline of the report blotted out its explosive contents — to everyone’s benefit, save the American public.
In this context, the resulting lack of a successful criminal prosecution led the inquiry to be declared, on its own narrowly defined terms, a “failure”. But the meat of the report provides a breathtaking look into how the FBI, along with parts of the Intelligence Community, not only violated but ran roughshod over well-established norms. As the report states:
This is the most powerful law enforcement agency on earth investigating an elected president on the thinnest of pretexts — and failing to maintain even basic standards of rigour, neutrality and investigatory scepticism. Such is the nature of the Durham report that selecting almost any section at random produces bombshell observations.
By far the most alarming revelation of the report is buried on page 81. There, Durham explains the full significance of what he calls the Clinton Plan. As early as 2016, the CIA was in possession of intelligence that Hillary Clinton’s team “had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against [Trump] by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee.”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThe problem is there’s already ample evidence (e.g., the Twitter files) to prove the politicization of government and law enforcement agencies, and collusion between those politicized agencies and the msm, mostly in the cause of left wing politics.
The evidence is there. The case has been made beyond a reasonable doubt. The Durham report is merely cumulative evidence.
And still the American population, as a whole, are as supine as stunned sheep. There is no political backlash. Why would the left, and their corporate backers, change their tactics?
Yes, stunned sheep is true. I literally saw a guy arguing on a thread about this topic state, “Just because they were lying about it doesn’t mean it’s not true.” The amount of cognitive dissonance some people on the left must be living with is mind boggling.
This
At this point, FBI should be dismantled, its leadership charged for treason, and people who has any role in these cases should be in jail. Forever.
Anyhting less is “letting the dems get away with it”.
Yet doing that means “risk of civil war”. So it wil not happen.
During the Watergate case, a free country prevailed as Republican leaders AND voters did not accept a spooky maneuver by one of their leaders. Yet Democrat and their leaders are fully OK with banana republic tactics as long as the guy is ont their side
RIP american democracy
Yes, stunned sheep is true. I literally saw a guy arguing on a thread about this topic state, “Just because they were lying about it doesn’t mean it’s not true.” The amount of cognitive dissonance some people on the left must be living with is mind boggling.
This
At this point, FBI should be dismantled, its leadership charged for treason, and people who has any role in these cases should be in jail. Forever.
Anyhting less is “letting the dems get away with it”.
Yet doing that means “risk of civil war”. So it wil not happen.
During the Watergate case, a free country prevailed as Republican leaders AND voters did not accept a spooky maneuver by one of their leaders. Yet Democrat and their leaders are fully OK with banana republic tactics as long as the guy is ont their side
RIP american democracy
The problem is there’s already ample evidence (e.g., the Twitter files) to prove the politicization of government and law enforcement agencies, and collusion between those politicized agencies and the msm, mostly in the cause of left wing politics.
The evidence is there. The case has been made beyond a reasonable doubt. The Durham report is merely cumulative evidence.
And still the American population, as a whole, are as supine as stunned sheep. There is no political backlash. Why would the left, and their corporate backers, change their tactics?
From what I understand, any official potentially prosecuted in this investigation, would have to go through a Washington court. What are the odds of a conviction? It’s probably not worth the effort.
Anyone not blinded by the regime media and the Democrats, or anyone who doesn’t have TDS, knows what’s happening. We knew it before this report. We know it now.
So true. Leftist talking heads point to the Sussman and Danchenko acquittals as proof of Durham’s incorrectness when in fact the acquittals were due to the facts that a) the defense successfully showed the lies of these 2 individuals were not “material” as FBI higher ups were always aware of the lies and b) it is impossible to form a DC area jury without including hard-core Democrat partisans
I think it voted 95% Democrat. Wonder if that’s a problem?
I think it voted 95% Democrat. Wonder if that’s a problem?
So true. Leftist talking heads point to the Sussman and Danchenko acquittals as proof of Durham’s incorrectness when in fact the acquittals were due to the facts that a) the defense successfully showed the lies of these 2 individuals were not “material” as FBI higher ups were always aware of the lies and b) it is impossible to form a DC area jury without including hard-core Democrat partisans
From what I understand, any official potentially prosecuted in this investigation, would have to go through a Washington court. What are the odds of a conviction? It’s probably not worth the effort.
Anyone not blinded by the regime media and the Democrats, or anyone who doesn’t have TDS, knows what’s happening. We knew it before this report. We know it now.
I found this shocking and still the story is largely buried.
I found this shocking and still the story is largely buried.
The report isn’t the end.
Now there will be
* numerous House hearings on the matter, complete with subpoenas of various officials, threats, and Contempt of Congress citations which will be forwarded to DOJ in 2025 (where they will die). The DOJ’s inaction in response to said citations will be used as proof that Biden is corrupt, and as raw meat for Trump’s campaign.
* a movement in the House to defund the FBI, NSA, CIA, IRS (because political hay), etc., certainly as part of budget negotiations.
* depending on the results of the 2024 Federal elections, massive retasking of agencies to pursue and destroy individuals involved in this scandal.
The report isn’t the end.
Now there will be
* numerous House hearings on the matter, complete with subpoenas of various officials, threats, and Contempt of Congress citations which will be forwarded to DOJ in 2025 (where they will die). The DOJ’s inaction in response to said citations will be used as proof that Biden is corrupt, and as raw meat for Trump’s campaign.
* a movement in the House to defund the FBI, NSA, CIA, IRS (because political hay), etc., certainly as part of budget negotiations.
* depending on the results of the 2024 Federal elections, massive retasking of agencies to pursue and destroy individuals involved in this scandal.
They did election manipulation so well they did it again in 2020…
They did election manipulation so well they did it again in 2020…
Like the Horowitz Report, Durham couldn’t find breaches of law to indict anyone on. Only breaches of professional standards, which might lead to disciplinary action. However, the worst players have already left the scene, And lack of neutrality is so endemic in the Swamp, that it hardly serves as a complaint…it’s more a diagnosis.
Like the Horowitz Report, Durham couldn’t find breaches of law to indict anyone on. Only breaches of professional standards, which might lead to disciplinary action. However, the worst players have already left the scene, And lack of neutrality is so endemic in the Swamp, that it hardly serves as a complaint…it’s more a diagnosis.
OK who now say the 2020 election was not rigged?
OK who now say the 2020 election was not rigged?
Meanwhile, it is becoming clearer every day that the sitting US president and his family have been in the pay of the Chinese Communist Party all along. Something hardly discussed in the legacy press.
Meanwhile, it is becoming clearer every day that the sitting US president and his family have been in the pay of the Chinese Communist Party all along. Something hardly discussed in the legacy press.
Trump could not even find Russia on a map…
Trump could not even find Russia on a map…
This report does have to be taken seriously. It seems to be the first time that a serious person not suffering from TIS (Trump Infatuation Syndrome) has this kind of criticism of the Russiagate story. At the very least it reminds us that both sides in US politics make extensive use of dirty tricks. And the Russiagate investigation may well have been done badly and with bias.
The TIS side does have a big problem, though. It is accepted fact that Russian intelligence *did* hack Democratic emails, and *did* publish the results, and therefore that the Russia *did* actively work to distort the democratic election and make Trump president. (If you do not agree, just tell us: Who hacked and published those emails?). And Trump openly welcomed them and encouraged them to continue. Surely this warranted an investigation? Or is accepting help from the FSB one of those normal all-American things that every US politician has the right to do undisturbed?
Vote me down – if you do not have any arguments.
Indeed, the investigation known as Russiagate did yield fruit, lots of it. Some of the original evidence used to kick it off was flawed. This is troubling as others have said – personally I doubt the FBI, CIA and NSA has a left wing bias – much more likely the other way. There is an issue here but let’s remember that the initial evidence for an investigating a possible crime is just a starting point and if it proves there is no crime then it ends. The not very good evidence did lead to something.
Russia tried to hack Republican e-mail servers but couldn’t.
Congress determined Russia’s goal was to sow doubt and confusion among voters before the 2016 election. They were not found to have favored one side or the other.
Trump’s welcoming and encouragement consisted of a quip at a rally where he said he’d like to know what other information Russia had found on Secretary Clinton. There was no campaign/Russia coordination of even communication.
Durham’s report also describes several instances where DOJ declined to investigate Clinton campaign irregularities despite their having corroborated evidence of them, while every investigation it launched of the Trump campaign had no such evidence.
“Congress determined“. Have you got a link? Before I would trust that finding I would like to know how many Democrats agreed with it.
As for the quip, you cannot as a presidential candidate go around sayng that you want to put your oppponent in jail (‘Lock her up!’), that you welcome foreign inteligence agency help in beating your opponents, that you won but the election was stolen from you, or that your supporters should go to the Capitol and fight – and then say afterwards that it does not matter because you did not really mean it.
Did you read the Durham Report? It honestly does not sound like it. Hard to quibble with pages of documented facts. Documented facts are not mere partisan jibber jabber. Dismissing it as such shows your own unwillingness to consider beyond your partisan viewpoint.
Have you heard President BIden’s recent address at Howard University? Or his frequent description of opponents as enemies of democracy? At least this president is not adverse to incendiary language.
It was also distressing to read that Jim Comey, during an MSNBC interview, lamented that he would have to talk about a candidate for president engaging in water sports with a prostitute when he knew before the interview that the story was false.
Did you read the Durham Report? It honestly does not sound like it. Hard to quibble with pages of documented facts. Documented facts are not mere partisan jibber jabber. Dismissing it as such shows your own unwillingness to consider beyond your partisan viewpoint.
Have you heard President BIden’s recent address at Howard University? Or his frequent description of opponents as enemies of democracy? At least this president is not adverse to incendiary language.
It was also distressing to read that Jim Comey, during an MSNBC interview, lamented that he would have to talk about a candidate for president engaging in water sports with a prostitute when he knew before the interview that the story was false.
“Congress determined“. Have you got a link? Before I would trust that finding I would like to know how many Democrats agreed with it.
As for the quip, you cannot as a presidential candidate go around sayng that you want to put your oppponent in jail (‘Lock her up!’), that you welcome foreign inteligence agency help in beating your opponents, that you won but the election was stolen from you, or that your supporters should go to the Capitol and fight – and then say afterwards that it does not matter because you did not really mean it.
How do we know it was Russia and not China or North Korea or even Israel since Trump was more to their liking?
Main difference from foreign actors is that part of the state apparatus was engaged in investigation of one presidential candidate for the benefit of another while knowing that the basis of the investigation is dossier commissioned by Trump opponents.
This strikes me as more sinister than action of foreign countries.
Indeed, the investigation known as Russiagate did yield fruit, lots of it. Some of the original evidence used to kick it off was flawed. This is troubling as others have said – personally I doubt the FBI, CIA and NSA has a left wing bias – much more likely the other way. There is an issue here but let’s remember that the initial evidence for an investigating a possible crime is just a starting point and if it proves there is no crime then it ends. The not very good evidence did lead to something.
Russia tried to hack Republican e-mail servers but couldn’t.
Congress determined Russia’s goal was to sow doubt and confusion among voters before the 2016 election. They were not found to have favored one side or the other.
Trump’s welcoming and encouragement consisted of a quip at a rally where he said he’d like to know what other information Russia had found on Secretary Clinton. There was no campaign/Russia coordination of even communication.
Durham’s report also describes several instances where DOJ declined to investigate Clinton campaign irregularities despite their having corroborated evidence of them, while every investigation it launched of the Trump campaign had no such evidence.
How do we know it was Russia and not China or North Korea or even Israel since Trump was more to their liking?
Main difference from foreign actors is that part of the state apparatus was engaged in investigation of one presidential candidate for the benefit of another while knowing that the basis of the investigation is dossier commissioned by Trump opponents.
This strikes me as more sinister than action of foreign countries.
This report does have to be taken seriously. It seems to be the first time that a serious person not suffering from TIS (Trump Infatuation Syndrome) has this kind of criticism of the Russiagate story. At the very least it reminds us that both sides in US politics make extensive use of dirty tricks. And the Russiagate investigation may well have been done badly and with bias.
The TIS side does have a big problem, though. It is accepted fact that Russian intelligence *did* hack Democratic emails, and *did* publish the results, and therefore that the Russia *did* actively work to distort the democratic election and make Trump president. (If you do not agree, just tell us: Who hacked and published those emails?). And Trump openly welcomed them and encouraged them to continue. Surely this warranted an investigation? Or is accepting help from the FSB one of those normal all-American things that every US politician has the right to do undisturbed?
Vote me down – if you do not have any arguments.