For those interested in the truth about the Russian collusion investigation, the Durham Report has hundreds of pages of details of the alliance of political, government and media figures behind arguably the greatest hoax in U.S. history. The only thing it does not have is an actual indictment or true accountability for the critical players in an effort to derail an American presidency. Indeed, some witnesses associated with the Clinton campaign appear to have refused to cooperate with the investigation. Congress could change that.
Buried in the detailed account is a little noticed footnote stating that Clinton General Counsel Marc Elias “declined to be voluntarily interviewed by the Office.” Likewise, Durham noted that “no one at Fusion GPS … would agree to voluntarily speak with the Office” while both the DNC and Clinton campaign invoked privileges to refuse to answer certain questions.
It is not clear whether Durham was able to get a full account from these sources, but he was still able to establish the details on how this unprecedented political hit job succeeded despite a lack of evidence. In the course of that account, Durham demolished the prior claims of Democratic members like Adam Schiff and many in the media. Durham concludes that the investigation should never have been launched and that the whole effort was based on “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated” information.
It turns out that the “pee-tape” was the creation of a Clinton operative without any factual basis despite years of the media (and former FBI Director James Comey) referencing the false salacious claim.
It turns out that Trump was correct that the FBI did spy on his campaign despite years of mocking denials in the media.
Indeed, Trump was right that this was a manufactured hoax engineered by the Clinton campaign, weaponized by the FBI, and then promulgated by the media.
As expected, the media has imposed another virtual blackout on coverage of the report other than to deny that there is anything new for the public to see. For those of us concerned about the rise of a type of state media in the United States, the report and its coverage has only magnified those concerns.
So is that it? Just a shrug and spin?
Not necessarily.
In a recent Fox interview, former Attorney General Bill Barr indicated that he always viewed Durham’s primary mandate as establishing what occurred in the Russian collusion investigation and making that information public.
Congress can now use that foundation to compel cooperation from key figures in this scandal, if necessary, under a grant of immunity. The witnesses could still be prosecuted if they lie or mislead congressional investigators or commit perjury.
They could start with Marc Elias, who features prominently in the Durham Report. It was Elias who managed the legal budget for the campaign. We now know that the campaign hid the funding of the Steele dossier as a legal expense. (The Clinton campaign was later sanctioned by the FEC over its hiding of the funding).
New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said that Elias denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”
Elias was also seated next to John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, when he was asked about the role of the campaign, he denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Even assuming that Podesta was kept in the dark, the Durham Report clearly shows that Elias knew and played an active role in pushing this effort.
Elias is now ironically advising Democratic campaigns on election ethics and running a group to “defend democracy.” He is still counsel to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) headed by Rep. Suzan Kay DelBene, D-Wash. Elias was recently severed by the Democratic National Committee from further representation and has been previously sanctioned in federal court in other litigation.
Elias testified at the criminal trial of his former partner Michael Sussmann, but the scope of that examination was strictly limited by the court in the Alfa Bank matter. Congress could compel his testimony on the full range of conduct leading to the scandal.
Likewise, other figures from Steele to Comey could be compelled to give full accounts in light of this Report. Congress has an interest in hearing from these witnesses as it explores how to make real reforms at the Justice Department and the FBI.
The need for congressional action was made clear by the FBI itself in its immediate response to the Report. It insisted that it has reformed itself after what it described as “missteps identified in the report.”
There are many ways to describe an investigation into false allegations raised by an opposing political party to derail a presidency. Calling that a “misstep” is like calling the explosion of the Hindenburg a “mislanding.” The FBI has now gone through regular cycles of scandals followed by assurances of self-reform.
Even if one is willing to suspend disbelief over the latest “trust us we’re the government” press release, it ignores that fact that the FBI was accused again in 2020 of playing a role in burying the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.
If Congress wants to reform this system, Durham has given it a blueprint for how to do it. After the Report, there is now an undeniable right of Congress to seek this testimony as part of its legislative and oversight functions under Article I. While figures like Elias may “decline to be voluntarily interviewed,” this does not have to be a voluntary exercise.
In speaking with many witnesses, Durham was dealing with some potential crimes with expired statutes of limitation. If witnesses lie to Congress, they could also face charges under a new statute of limitations.
If history is any measure, nothing concentrates the mind as much as a subpoena and immunity grant . . . and it may be time to concentrate some minds in Washington.
Trump’s cult is still twisting their alternative reality wishes, Jorden has nothing, Comer has nothing, Durham has nothing, and Durham was appointed by one of the greatest political fixers of all time, and even then, nothing. The Cult wants to believe they are winning, they just can’t help themselves from yelling fire, when there is no fire. Day after day, week after week facts are coming to the surface on just how much Trump lied about the “crime of the century” and the cult yells….We are winning, sad…just sad.
Spoken like a true Leftard! Projection & Insults your stock in trade. The lies must be protected, at all costs. It’s the left that is a Cult, but please do carry on your shameful behavior! I’d expect nothing less.
Your projection is off the charts.
Can anyone explain why Durham did not subpoena witnesses who did not cooperate? It is not just Elias. Many of the former FBI officials chose not to appear. I had always understood that Durham had subpoena power as well as authority to grant immunity. Why did he not use it? This is further evidence of his lack of interest in prosecuting government officials.
Thanks Daniel, I was just crafting this question.
“Can anyone explain why Durham did not subpoena witnesses who did not cooperate?”
“Spray Paint” John Durham was appointed *after* “Bongo” Bill Barr received the Mueller report from Andrew Weissmann, where Clinton campaign organization of the Trump-Russia narrative does not appear. Special Counsel has closed this gap (see Chapter IV: “Background Facts and Prosecution Decisions”, pp 44-287)
In short: After IG Horowitz, Mueller (aka Weissmann) Durham was Silo # 3 [1] (followed by Smith).
Sections of the report that were not widely approached:
* “After the inauguration of President Biden, Attorney General Garland met with the Office of Special Counsel (“OSC” or “the Office”). The Office very much appreciates the support, consistent with his testimony during his confirmation hearings, that the Attorney General has provided to our efforts and the Department’s willingness to allow us to operate independently.” (p 3)
* “The Office exercised its judgment regarding what to investigate but did not investigate every public report of an alleged violation of law in connection with the intelligence and law enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns.” (pp 3-4)
* “The FBI’s OGC produced more than 6,580,000 pages of documentation in response to our multiple requests. We note that it did so at the same time it was coping with the personnel shortages brought about by the COVID-19 crisis, working to comply with various production demands from congressional committees, and addressing requests from other government entities. Moreover, FBI leadership made it clear to its personnel that they were to cooperate fully with our inquiry, which, in all but a few instances involving some personnel in the Counterintelligence Division, proved to be the case. In those few instances in which individuals refused to cooperate, FBI leadership intervened to urge those individuals to agree to be interviewed. Similarly, both the Central Intelligence Agency (“CIA”) and the National Security Agency (“NSA”) made their employees available for interview, including former CIA Director John Brennan and former NSA Director Mike Rogers, who voluntarily made themselves available for interviews.” (p 4)
* Confirmation bias is widely understood as a phenomenon describing how information is processed by individuals and groups. […] In short, people tend to give more credence
to information that supports what they already believe. […] In short, it is the Office’s assessment that the FBI discounted or willfully ignored material information that did not support the narrative of a collusive relationship between Trump and Russia. […] An objective and honest assessment of these strands of information should have caused the FBI to question not only the predication for Crossfire Hurricane, but also to reflect on whether the FBI was being manipulated for political or other purposes. Unfortunately, it did not.” (pp 303-305)
* In his letter to AG Garland: “we want to thank you and your Office for permitting our inquiry to proceed independently and without interference as you assured the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee would be the case during your confirmation hearings to become Attorney General of the United States.”
[1] Think of Sony in ’90s: The corporation was reorganized into 10, and then 25 sub-companies.
Dear Prof Turley,
Any word on the ‘classified Appendix’? It seems no Special Counsel Report is complete without a classified Appendix. This is the 21st century .. . you can ask ChatGPT.
You have to give Clinton associates credit for the pee pee fetish, but it may not be original (commenter ‘button’ says Hitler started that fad. h/t)
Congress passed the ‘retroactive immunity’ law back in 09 (giving giant telecoms immunity from surrogate-spying on US citizens – in advance.). Not sure if that helps?
While congress may catch more flys with honey-dew immunity deals, you can’t rob a thief. The general counsel @ the FBI knows full well possession is 9/10ths the law. And he didn’t just fall off the turnip wagon.
In any case, congress can’t get blood from a turnip. No matter how many fall off the wagon. .. even if they wanted to.
Sry for the mixed metaphors, but congress has about as much chance of ‘compelling’ the FBI/CIA, to do anything, as a snowball’s chance in hell.
*if the IC has six ways from Sunday bringing down a president .. . imagine what they can do to congress.
“Buried in the detailed account is a little noticed footnote stating that Clinton General Counsel Marc Elias “declined to be voluntarily interviewed by the Office.” Likewise, Durham noted that “no one at Fusion GPS … would agree to voluntarily speak with the Office” while both the DNC and Clinton campaign invoked privileges to refuse to answer certain questions.
It is not clear whether Durham was able to get a full account from these sources, but he was still able to establish the details on how this unprecedented political hit job succeeded despite a lack of evidence.”
*************************************
Oh, Gee. If only Durham knew a hard-nosed, incorruptable US Attorney who could convene a federal grand jury to compel testimony, squeeze the little fish to get to the big fish and then use RICO to indict the whole lot of animals forcing them to squeal even louder and get the hogs at top of the trough. I think we’d see all manner of federal crimes with lots of pedophilia/child porn, witness intimidation, influence peddling, payola, graft, bribery and every other manifesttion of actionable human excrement since man emerged from the caves. We’d also get our country back from the worst group of corrupt, evil, demonic (without the fashionable horns) ruling elite since Caligula sashayed his toga across the marble at the Roman Forum.
If only Durham knew somebody like that.
Note to Republicans in Congress…..ISSUE the Subpoenas immediately. Do not delay a single second.
Then do the necessary legwork to obtain sworn testimony prior to holding public hearings.
Then, every time a Democrat lies under Oath….notify the DOJ and insist AG Garland ensure prosecution of them.
In the end…they shall lie, they shall not be prosecuted, but it makes for a very compelling case to take to the Voters in 2024.
In short….Republicans must play the game exactly like the Democrats when it comes to playing politics over issues that they benefit from doing.
The corrupt DOJ fails to indict or even seriously investigate anything a Democrat does, (see Biden, Hunter) and then their co-conspirators in the media say there were no crimes because…nobody was indicted.
For the first time ever Carl Bernstein is right, this is worse than Watergate. Of course Watergate was the first KNOWN time that the FBI gave information to a favored “reporter” who then “investigated” the “crime” allowing a sitting REPUBLICAN president to be forced out of office.
They took down Nixon, they almost took down Trump, and did prevent his second term, and for the first time in my long life I am beginning to at least consider that they took down Kennedy. I have always been a lone killer believer with Kennedy, but what I have seen with this affair makes me at least start to keep an open mind regarding the intelligence communities.
“It insisted that it has reformed itself after what it described as “missteps identified in the report.”
If there is reform, why are whistleblowers being retaliated against? Why is Allen not paid and not permitted to get another job while he drains his IRA?
It seems the only ones punished are the good guys. Three testimonies are in this report.
—
FBI whistleblowers to testify on harsh retaliation from bureau, ‘weaponization’ of clearance process
Numerous individuals within those organizations have come forward with claims of misconduct at the highest levels, and have often reported severe professional backlash from their superiors in the process.
https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/fbi-whistleblowers-testify-harsh-retaliation-bureau-weaponization?utm_source=breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter
Thank you Jonathan. An excellent commentary and guidance for the House.
Is there a statute of limitations on a coup d’état?
small footnote…this is the LARGEST crime in US history…where Democrats across government tried to REMOVE an Elected president!
THEY SPIED and JAILED people around Trump…all ON LIES
Hillary/Democrats worked with a foreign spy and a RUSSIAN to OVER THROW the Election
Mueller and his TEAM should be JAILED…along with every CIA, FBI, DOJ, DNC, MSM, Congress person who was involved!
This is a million times WORSE than Watergate. And Nothing will happen…that is how bad it is!
Republicans are Neville Chamberlain trying to do Good
Democrats are 1930 German Socialists trying to grab total power and money!
Republicans need to DISMANTLE Federal Government…cut fed gov, move Fed gov from DC to Heartland, end all federal aid to cities, colleges and states….Democrats HAVE TOO MUCH MONEY AND POWER!
Why offer them immunity? Congress has the power to subpoena then charge them with contempt of Congress if they refuse to appear. As one commenter said, the Clintons are corrupt. This is another example of how corrupt Hillary Clinton and her entourage really are. As for Democrats and “democracy,” they’re like Communists (which is no surprise since most are Marxist.) The only “democracy” they’re interested in is Democracy.
A grant of immunity prevents them from hiding behind 5th Amendment protections. Then if they refuse to respond, they can be charged with contempt, which is of course prosecutable. It’s preferable to keep it localized to the little mice to gather evidence on the big rats, but on infractions that are already beyond the statute of limitations, it makes no difference. But they can be compelled to respond. And big rats like Comey can hardly claim to have forgotten things he wrote about in his “best-sellers”.
Congress can only demand they appear before them. They can’t force anyone to speak against their right to remain silent. Everyone has the right to remain silent and no congressman can force anyone to speak or answer their questions. There’s not a thing they can do about it.
This already happened when Jim Jordan’s committee subpoenaed former attorney who worked for Bragg. He showed up. But he refused to answer any questions by invoking the 5th repeatedly. They got nowhere.
blah, blah, blah…the DOJ, FBI, IRS, CIA, many DC judges, etc are 100% corrupt for Democrats. Nothing will happen. Only solution is to CUT 50% of Federal Government…then more 75% that remains to the Heartland…DC is LOST!
not more…then move 75%
The Durham report found nothing but that did not stop Durham and Barr from having a lot of press conferences pretending they were finding a lot. That fed right wing media and this blog for quite a long time. Turley wants more investigations by Congress to feed this even further. It does not matter that there is nothing really to find. That did not stop Durham from spending $6.5 million on an investigation.
This is the Benghazi playbook. Just keep having Congressional committees on these snipe hunts, and keep pretending there is a big revelation around the corner. There never is.
LOL…too early to be a stoned liar!
Dude, you must be the Village fool…
Assistant village idiot.
Dont hunt this snipe. Wiil be the same results of your first snipe hunt
>”There never is.”
I understand. Congress impeached Trump, twice, but nothing came of it. They keep pretending there is a big revelation around the corner. There never is. .. and lets face it, if you can’t impeach Trump, who can you impeach?
And now Trump has come out with that crazy ‘I want people to stop dying’ campaign on CNN. Weak. Joe Biden and the Democrats will fight Russia (and China) to the last Ukrainian. As long as it takes. Strong foreign policy, a force for good.
*remember to vote
Turley talks about the report containing no indictments, did he forget the actual indictments Durham brought against two peripheral individuals and in both cases they were found not guilty? Reports aren’t the forum for indictments. Indictments are the forum for indictments. What in the report is anything but a rehash of what the partisan Durham has been saying for years.
As for Russia collusion, Turley is part of the Republican cabal that keeps insisting there was no Russia collusion, ignoring all the people who went to jail related to their dealings with Russia. Paul Manafort anyone?
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury
When you don’t like the facts, attack the character of the person who states them. It’s called ad hominem abusive, and it’s nothing but a deflection.
Unless they’re not facts.
He is obliged to defend his Masters on the Democrat Plantation or else possibly earn a living as a realtor for Trump supporters
““I’ll have them n********** voting Democratic for the next two hundred years. ”
– Racist in Chief, Lyndon B. Johnson
It’s a fact that Durham indicted two people and lost at trial.
It’s a fact that more than one person in the Trump campaign had interactions with Russian agents (Manafort with Kilimnik, Stone with Guccifer 2). It’s a fact that Trump pardoned them and others associated with his campaign who also hid things about interactions with Russians (Flynn).
It’s a fact that Durham’s report was supposed to have only been a discussion of prosecutions and declinations but he chose to include a bunch of other stuff.
Turley is not factual when he claims “Durham concludes that the investigation should never have been launched.” Durham said that it would have been a “sensible step” to open it as a preliminary rather than a full investigation. It’s appropriate to call Turley out when he makes false claims.
Turley is a Democrat.
Manafort was prosecuted for dealings with Ukraine, not Russia.
his was PROSECUTED for being aligned with Trump!
Note his Partners…Clinton advisers…WERE NOT Prosecuted.
“…ignoring all the people who went to jail related to their dealings with Russia. Paul Manafort anyone?”
Oh yes, of course. Vox. And of course all the evidence used against these people was pristine and their convictions clean.
Mary, they still got convictions and guilty pleas. Durham got only one FBI lawyer convicted on altering an email. 12 months probation and 400 hrs of community service. Wow. That is….a thing I guess.
“What in the report is anything but a rehash “
I note that the word rehash suddenly appears frequently on the blog and in the news. There is no originality among the left. The Borg lives within them.
But is the Durham Report a rehash? No, but the left calls it so, as they are ignorant of its particulars. Quite the contrary, it is chucked full of information demonstrating criminal intent by the left to destroy a Presidency while destroying America.
S. Meyer, the reason the word “rehash” appears often is because the Durham report is mostly a rehash of past allegations that still have not been proven true. Even Turley notes that that Durham’s report lacks evidence.
You wouldn’t know if Durham’s report is a rehash because you haven’t read it. You’re not the type who buries their nose into a 300 page report. You rely on other’s analysis of the report and infer a lot more than what is being said as fact. In essence you’re too lazy to read the whole thing. If you did read it you would have noticed that it just parrots what the IG report already said. He just added a few more insinuations to make it look he really put some effort into it.
What you fail to recognize is there are synonyms for the word rehash and alternate phraseology. Statistically, one would expect more diversity, but lacking it is a Borg characteristic. You are both Borg and stupid, so we expect low-level discussion from you.
“You’re not the type who buries their nose into a 300 page report. You rely on other’s analysis of the report”
Maybe, maybe not. No one reads everything, but you are the type that requires a comic book presentation for everything. You impress no one. Do you recognize that?
Convictions had nothing to do with Trump, and/or Russia
If you think the Ukranian oligarchs put in place by Putin had nothing to do wioth Russia, then I guess you might believe that.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/paul-manafort-russia-polling-data-b2140727.html
Professor Turley is a long time, traditional Democrat of the JFK era along with people like Bill Maher and Elon Musk. Today’s Democrats would of called JFK a racist, white supremacist MAGA.
So you assertion that the good professor is part a “Republican cabal” is either a poor attempt at a smear, or delusion.
Vox is not a legitimate source.
Turley may have once been a Democrat, even a liberal one. He has done nothing in the last several years but serve Republican interests, for pay as a matter of fact. For the record, what do you consider a legitimate source? Fox News perhaps, who will have paid out over $1 billion for their lies before it’s over and is currently being considered to be banned in Canada for their anti-LGBTQ rhetoric. That is one of Turley’s side-hustles is it not?
No. The good professor is pointing out the double standers, the corruption, the lies, the authoritarianism, the censorship, the wokeism that has taken over the Democrat party. All of which are anti-Constitution, which he is clearly a strong defender of.
The fact you have to suggest I consider Fox News as a legitimate news source shows how weak your argument is.
As I have stated more than a few times on the good professor’s blog, I cut the cord over a decade ago. Who I read: Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Bari Weiss and her The Free Press, Sharyl Attkisson, Just The News, now The Messenger, and of course professor Turley. Once upon a time, I also listened to NPR from morning till Marketplace was over.
Not only does professor Turley also write for Fox, but The Hill, USA Today, the NY Post, and The Messenger.
“Not only does professor Turley also write for Fox, but The Hill, USA Today, the NY Post, and The Messenger.”
The “good professer” spreads the same message across several venues though he cleans it up a little depending on how mainstream the venue appears.
Wow, Marc Elias declined to be interviewed voluntarily by Durham’s office?
How many Trump officials ever agreed to be interviewed voluntarily about anything by any prosecutor’s office? It always took at least a subpoena, usually several court rulings and appeals, and then some even refused to testify because they knew Trump would pardon them for whatever they have done if they stick with his team.
Whatabout Trump. Whatabout Trump. Whatabout Trump. Whatabout Trump (yawn)
Agree. Gosh, but it’s exhausting.
But this whole thing is about Trump. Durham was hired to placate one of Trump’s conspiracy theories – investigate the investigators – as he tries to do anytime someone looks into anything Trump.
It’s about the corruption of the Obama administration, his Deep State Intel Agencies and the media lying, and making crap up to target Trump because they knew he would show everybody how little Congress gets done, and how corrupt they all are. To keep calling it a conspiracy theory shows how ignorant YOU are. It is true. They did it, and they should all be behind bars for sedition.
I think the professor is making a wise suggestion to the House of Representatives (unlikely to get much in the Senate). Grants of immunity could go a long way. Even better if the witness refuses to testify with the grant of immunity. Then it could be contempt. Unlikely to be pursued in a Democratic administration but it could come up in the not to distant future if there is a republican Attorney General who is receptive to the idea. Sounds like a talking point for Republicans in the coming election.
It is time for conservatives to take the gloves off. It is to the point that I don’t know if I am watching the news, or the latest episode of Designated Survivor or Rabbit Hole. Stop letting the left own the narrative, stop worrying about being the party of no, stop letting catch phrases like MAGA Republican make you retreat. Strap on a pair of cojones.
scpatriot – agreed, but see my comment below about today’s Republican party.
” Strap on a pair of cojones.”. I think that’s a mixed metaphor. “Grow a pair of cojones” is better.
There haven’t been any greater enemies of this democracy than the Clintons. They trampled on the “peace dividend” after 1991, they reoriented the Democratic party away from workers and towards mega donors, they built up NATO into a monstrous war machine, and they have perpetuated the worst hoaxes and crimes in US history. These two should go down in history as the infamous traitors they are.
Obama the America transformer belongs in their group too.
Conservatives are like Charlie Brown with the football.
We keep hoping and we keep getting disappointed.
When one side is a MMA fighter and the other side is an ineffectual chess player, the outcome is preordained.
Conservatives either learn to play hardball or learn to accept defeat.
Today’s Republican politicians are happy to be the “loyal opposition” (Trump excepted). It is more comfortable for them than actually governing, even if that means the American people get screwed. Newt Gingrich was different. Whatever his warts, he at least was a transformational figure in that he had a vision, which included the GOP in charge of Congress, and he made that vision a reality. America would benefit from a new, invigorated young counterpart to Newt Gingrich. But as Yeats wrote a century ago, the best among us lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity. That about sums up our present situation.
Sadly, you are spot on. The country is circling the toilet bowl at an ever faster rate. And Xi is laughing and biding his time.
KS oldman
I was going to point out that Trump got almost no support from Republicans. They all played the “we will let the process play out”. Never lifting a finger to go after the Dems.
The Senate seem particularity full of go along to get along, uni party GOPe members. The only logical explanation is the grift is more widely distributed amongst the 100. The common goal is to maximize the grift, that is why the power is shared and any conflict is carefully scripted and dripping with collegiality .
Good one. It would be funny if not so frightening. Defeat for the conservatives = defeat for America. The Dems are constantly projecting and saying the GOP is a “threat to democracy.” Democrat weaponization of government agencies like the FBI and IRS are the threats to democracy.
Personally, I don’t think witnesses, even with immunity, would actually cooperate. They would rather risk jail, than risk Arkancide! The Dems are like a jailhouse gang, you can join, but, you can never leave, except in a body bag.