Durham's report found DOJ, FBI 'failed to uphold' mission of 'strict fidelity to the law' in Trump-Russia probe

[Jon Miller]

Doe the report include any additional facts beyond that of the Inspector General's report ( https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf ) which found some minor FBI malfeasance but nothing serious (and nothing related to any politician of either party, the accusations against Obama and Hillary and Biden in this thread seem not to be present in any facts or filings? ).

JM

[Berzerker]

It actually is a great injustice that the allegation wasn't 3ven made until 25 years later and the Democraps in NY State specifically changed the law just for this allegation which was only made to help her sell books. Given there 2as no evidence, she kept changing her story, and frequently said it was mutual and not rape... Well, we really do have law used as a political weapon simply because he is running for 2024. Hate him all you want, I prefer DeSantis as he actually gets good legislation passed, but unequal application of the law to use it as a political weapon is a gross injustice.

That is what Democraps are all about days though.

DeSantis wont make peace in Ukraine, but you're right about what the state of NY did. Not that they care about her book, this is to drive Trump out of the race so we can keep the war going. I doubt what happened was mutual but who knows, she did decline calling it rape and instead wandered off to fantasizing about rape. Very strange response to 'did he rape you?' So the state made a 1 year retroactive loophole in the law specifically for her to get Trump. I cant imagine that passing constitutional muster, ex post facto laws are explicitly forbidden.

The 2 parties are so damn corrupt we're stuck on a pendulum swinging back and forth between lesser evils (where is this greater evil?). But there is a silver lining, the ousted party will hopefully have a renewed vigor for reform while the incoming party ran on it. Not much really happens of course, Wall St runs the country so the swamp thrives. At least Trump was able to pass drug war reform of Joe Biden's mass incarceration state, black lives mattered a little more to Trump.

[Jon Miller]

I just went to the Post, this seems very relevant. https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ion-fbi-trump/

Can anyone here who maintains that this is important address the opinion above?

JM

[Geronimo]

Doe the report include any additional facts beyond that of the Inspector General's report ( https://www.justice.gov/storage/120919-examination.pdf ) which found some minor FBI malfeasance but nothing serious (and nothing related to any politician of either party, the accusations against Obama and Hillary and Biden in this thread seem not to be present in any facts or filings? ).

JM

Are you bringing up the Inspector General's report as evidence demonstrating the impartiality of Department of Justice investigations?

Which is more suspicious, an earlier report originating within the DOJ which largely exonerates the DOJ or a later report originating within the DOJ which largely does not? The latter report certainly seems to have put more resources into its investigation.

[Geronimo]

I just went to the Post, this seems very relevant. https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ion-fbi-trump/

Can anyone here who maintains that this is important address the opinion above?

JM

no paid access. can you cut and paste and paraphrase enough for us to address it?

[Berzerker]

rubbish. By that logic if the government removed the ability to deduct church contributions as a charitable deduction in response to church political activism against abortion, then it wouldn't constitute using the law as a political weapon. I would also insist that the fort lee lane closure scandal constituted "using the law as a weapon" or Trump even suggesting that politically useful investigations be made by a foreign power in the same conversation as a discussion of aid to that foreign power.

Tell me more about how you extrapolate my state of delusion and ignorance by my comparison of Desantis retaliation against Disney to the politically skewed activities of the FBI. I definitely thought it curious that you endorsed Desantis in the same breath as condemning abuse of executive power against political opponents.

I will however concede that what Desantis did was vastly less concerning than politically motivated investigations by law enforcement per the OP.

I agree the Disney thing is political retaliation, DeSantis would look the other way at special arrangements benefiting his donors. As for Trump, he was impeached for asking Zelensky to investigate Ukraine's interference in our election in '16 and Biden's connection to firing a prosecutor harassing his son's company. Those things did happen. Biden used aid to that foreign power as a bribe a few years before Trump wanted Ukraine's help to investigate it. Back in 2017-18 Senate Democrats asked Ukraine to investigate Trump over Russiagate - the lie to frame Trump et al as traitors.

So before Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate actual corruption the Democrats wanted Ukraine to interfere in our election and investigate Trump over lies from the Clinton campaign. If the Democrats are accusing Trump odds are they're projecting. Imagine that, Ukraine brings down Manafort while publicly attacking Trump but Democrats are upset by foreign interference in the election.

[Berzerker]

I dont remember Alexander Vindmann griping about the Democrats using aid to Ukraine to get what they wanted. Its very suspicious how he stayed mum when Biden was using aid to fire a prosecutor and when Senate Democrats used aid to investigate the president.

[PLATO]

As for Trump, he was impeached for asking Zelensky to investigate Ukraine's interference in our election in '16 and Biden's connection to firing a prosecutor harassing his son's company. Those things did happen. Biden used aid to that foreign power as a bribe a few years before Trump wanted Ukraine's help to investigate it. Back in 2017-18 Senate Democrats asked Ukraine to investigate Trump over Russiagate - the lie to frame Trump et al as traitors.

So before Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate actual corruption the Democrats wanted Ukraine to interfere in our election and investigate Trump over lies from the Clinton campaign. If the Democrats are accusing Trump odds are they're projecting. Imagine that, Ukraine brings down Manafort while publicly attacking Trump but Democrats are upset by foreign interference in the election.

Happily I have found somethings we agree on!

[Berzerker]

that makes you conspiracy nut adjacent

[Berzerker]

From what I've heard so far Crossfire Hurricane had no justification either, that was BS too. Not surprised, I always thought it absurd Putin would have a professor deliver a message for Trump thru Papadopoulos. But it would make sense for the Clinton brain trust framing Trump as a traitor to fabricate ties to Putin. The Tower meeting was likely another effort. Sure, Putin sent people to NYC to tell Trump he had dirt on Hillary (didn't George tell Donald the 1st time?). Same thing as the Misfud case, these people purportedly sent by Putin keep meeting with the Trump campaign. Makes sense lol. So thats why Durham issued a rare public statement contradicting the IG's report finding no bias with the FBI's initial investigation. Democrats happily repeated Horowitz to conflate Crossfire Hurricane with the Fisa warrant to spy on Trump.

[PLATO]

So the state made a 1 year retroactive loophole in the law specifically for her to get Trump. I cant imagine that passing constitutional muster, ex post facto laws are explicitly forbidden.

If this is the case, and it is overturned prior to the election, this will further the "witch hunt" narrative immensely. It may end up being a win for Trump.

[Dinner]

rubbish. By that logic if the government removed the ability to deduct church contributions as a charitable deduction in response to church political activism against abortion, then it wouldn't constitute using the law as a political weapon. I would also insist that the fort lee lane closure scandal constituted "using the law as a weapon" or Trump even suggesting that politically useful investigations be made by a foreign power in the same conversation as a discussion of aid to that foreign power.

Tell me more about how you extrapolate my state of delusion and ignorance by my comparison of Desantis retaliation against Disney to the politically skewed activities of the FBI. I definitely thought it curious that you endorsed Desantis in the same breath as condemning abuse of executive power against political opponents.

I will however concede that what Desantis did was vastly less concerning than politically motivated investigations by law enforcement per the OP.

Making them follow all the same laws as their competitors is hardly "retaliation" and, yes, it is delusional to claim otherwise.

[-Jrabbit]

Dude, DeSantis proudly proclaims it to be political retribution.

[Geronimo]

Making them follow all the same laws as their competitors is hardly "retaliation" and, yes, it is delusional to claim otherwise.

That makes no sense. Whether or not something is retaliation has nothing to do with whether it involves a special privilege or not and everything to do with what triggered the retaliation for removing the privilege.

If that makes me delusional I suppose if your boss took away your special parking spot you previously won for best performance but only after you embarrassed him while you fixed a problem at work which drew unflattering attention to an error he made, then I suppose you would say it would be delusional to call that retaliation as well?

[Dinner]

I am off the opinion no company should have special privileges and every company should have to follow the same rules. It is a good thing that Disney lost its special privileges especially since such special zones have been illegal to create since the 1070'w. Disney got to keep ots special zone because it was grandfathered in but 60 years of special status is enough and it is great DeSantis is making companies equal before the law.

[-Jrabbit]

This was done as political retribution for Disney publicly criticizing the Don't Say Gay law.
It had nothing to do with leveling the playing field.

[Jon Miller]

no paid access. can you cut and paste and paraphrase enough for us to address it?

Special counsel John Durham published his long-awaited report Monday into how U.S. government agents handled their investigations into possible coordination between Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and Russian efforts to interfere with the U.S. election.

The probe was initiated in 2019, when Durham — a veteran prosecutor — was first directed by the Trump administration to conduct what was effectively an investigation into an investigation, mired from the beginning in political controversy. While Trump predicted Durham would reveal the “crime of the century,” Democrats largely dismissed the probe as politically motivated.

In the end, Durham’s report criticized the way the FBI relied on raw intelligence in conducting its investigation and made recommendations for how politically sensitive probes could be conducted in the future. Many of his findings echoed a similarly-tasked 2019 report by the Justice Department inspector general, however. In addition, his four-year probe did not send anyone to jail and resulted in asingle guilty plea.


(%%% CUT %%%)

What did Durham’s report find?

Durham concluded that bias kept agents from properly examining evidence — leading to “extremely troublesome” failures by the FBI. The report was based on more than 480 interviews and reviews of more than 1 million documents and you can read it in full here.

In particular, Durham accused the FBI of moving too quickly with its investigation of Trump’s 2016 campaign. His report suggested agents relied on uncorroborated evidence when launching their investigation. He also pointed out that agents did not give advance warning of the evidence they had gathered to Trump’ advisers, in contrast to the way they had briefed Hillary Clinton’s aides during her 2016 presidential campaign in advance when they gathered evidence a foreign actor was trying to garner influence with her.

Durham recommended a new position be created at the FBI to help vet and ensure the integrity of politically sensitive investigations.

How much in Durham’s report is new?

Not all of Durham’s findings are fresh. Much of the FBI conduct denounced in his report was criticized in a previous 2019 Justice Department report in which Inspector General Michael Horowitz similarly identified “serious performance failures” among FBI agents. Those findings prompted FBI Director Christopher A. Wray to implement changes at the agency.

But Durham went further in his criticism of the FBI than Horowitz did. Whereas Horowitz concluded there was no “documentary or testimonial evidence of intentional misconduct” and found that the FBI had an “authorized purpose” in initiating its investigation into the Trump campaign, Durham’s report said that the FBI’s probe into Kremlin ties had been based on “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence.”

Did John Durham find any criminal wrongdoing?

Durham was tasked with finding violations of the law, and he found few.

Kevin Clinesmith, a former FBI lawyer, was sentenced to one year probation after admitting in a plea deal with Durham to altering a government email used to justify secret surveillance of a former Trump campaign adviser, Carter Page.

Durham’s investigation led totwo failed prosecutions — one against private researcher Igor Danchenko and the other against cybsercurity lawyer Michael Sussman. He accused both of lying to the FBI, and both were acquitted in court.

The results contrast sharply with the more than half a dozen guilty pleasor verdicts secured by Mueller’s investigation. The probe also fell short of uncovering the “crime of the century,” as Trump predicted it would, in a 2022 interview with Fox News.

Democrats feared Durham’s probe would not be an evenhanded investigation but a partisan errand conducted on the behalf of an aggrieved president. Some accused Barr of timing the probe to benefit Trump during the 2020 presidential election.

Others have pointed to the high cost of the probe to the taxpayer and questioned whether it was worth it. As of December, the investigation had cost taxpayers more than $6.5 million, according to the Justice Department.

(%%% CUT TO END %%%%)

JM

[Geronimo]

That's a lot to digest. I'll note quickly that had the investigation used fewer resources (cost less) then its findings would surely be dismissed from that angle.

I wonder how the cost compares to the jan 06 2020 investigations?

I'd maintain that possible partisan weaponization of federal law enforcement is at least as dangerous a threat to democracy as the capital riot.

Thomas Jefferson famously said "a little rebellion now and then is a good thing".

Has anyone ever suggested "a little political corruption of law enforcement now and then is a good thing"?