“You Will End Up on the Bottom of a Pyre”: Democrats Attack Special Counsel John Durham 

Below is my column in Fox.com on yesterday’s hearing with Special Counsel John Durham and the personal attacks that he faced from the Democratic members of the Judiciary Committee. Without challenging a single fact in the report as untrue, members heaped personal attacks on one of the most respected prosecutors at the Justice Department. Durham’s testimony was detached, detailed, and unbiased. He was everything that the members were not. However, one moment stood out more than the rest . . .

Here is the column:

Special Counsel John Durham has spent decades investigating and prosecuting mob leaders to murderers. Yet, nothing could have prepared him for what unfolded this week in the House Judiciary Committee.

Long praised as a professional and apolitical prosecutor, Durham looked about as comfortable as a Benedictine monk in a strip joint. Democrats accused Durham of being a MAGA stooge and a lowlife for his report detailing the lack of professional standards and factual support leading to the Russian collusion investigation.

What Durham found was that the investigation showed an abundance of bias and a paucity of evidence.

As expected, the Democrats attacked Durham and suggested that he was “tasked” with defending Trump and fostering conspiracy theories. However, the most telling moment came early when Tennessee Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen issued a dire warning to Durham.

Cohen said that Durham no longer had a good reputation because he has undermined the basis for the Russian collusion investigation: “You had a good reputation. You had a good reputation … but the longer you hold on to Mr. Barr … your reputation will be damaged … you will end up on the bottom of a pyre.”

Durham seemed less concerned about liars than pyres in presenting the facts from his team: “My concern about my reputation is with the people who I respect, my family, and my Lord, and I’m perfectly comfortable with my reputation with them, sir.”

It was like a Joseph Welch moment in another hearing with then-Wisconsin Republican Sen. Joe McCarthy. After McCarthy criticized a young lawyer in the office of Welch, who was chief counsel for the Army, Welch famously responded, “Until this moment, senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness.” He continued the exchange, adding, “Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last?”

This is not the first moment in recent weeks that raises analogies to the McCarthy period.

I testified recently in Congress on the Twitter Files and how they suggest what I have called “censorship by surrogate” or proxy. In my testimony, I warned that the government’s support of blacklists and censorship was reminiscent of the McCarthy period where the FBI targeted socialists, communists, and others. I encouraged Congress not to repeat its failures from the 1950s by turning a blind eye to such abuse.

That appeared to be taken by Democrats as more of an invitation than an admonition. At that hearing, Democrats attacked virtually every witness, including former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, who was labeled a “Russian asset” by Hillary Clinton.

Soon after the end of the hearing, MSNBC contributor and former Sen. Claire McCaskill appeared on MSNBC to denounce fellow witnesses Sen. Chuck Grassley, Sen. Ron Johnson, and Gabbard as “Putin apologists” and Putin lovers. She exclaimed, “I mean, look at this, I mean, all three of those politicians are Putin apologists. I mean, Tulsi Gabbard loves Putin.” (For the record, she also attacked me as not being “a real lawyer.”)

In later hearings, Del. Stacey Plaskett, D-VI, the ranking member of the House Judiciary subcommittee, attacked the reporters appearing as witnesses as “so-called journalists” and said they were “a direct threat” to the safety of others by reporting the censorship story. Plaskett also later called for the possible arrest of Taibbi.

Virgin Islands Democrat Del. Stacey Plaskett attacked reporters appearing as witnesses at a previous hearing as “so-called journalists.” (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Democrats have attacked experts, whistleblowers and former FBI agents who came forward to raise concerns with Congress.

Now it is Durham’s turn. Rep. Ted. Lieu, D-Calif., accused a man who has served his country honestly and faithfully for decades as acting as a “political hack.”

While Durham noted that no one has challenged the facts in his reports, he was labeled as a handmaiden of MAGA and one more body to throw on “the pyre.”

Of course, the pyre reference ignored who was stoking and feeding that fire for those who depart from the mainstream narrative. Many have found themselves tossed on that pyre. Even when allegations were disproven, it did not matter.

Indeed, in the hearing, various Democrats were resurrecting bogus past claims about criminal acts linked to a meeting in Trump Tower with Russian figures. No one, including former FBI director Robert Mueller, found any such criminal conduct despite a host of legal experts declaring clear evidence of crime on cable programs.

Despite dozens of crimes long alleged by pundits and politicians that were never charged, their reputations are of course intact. That’s the point of Cohen’s advice. If you want a future, get on the team.

After all, figures like Peter Strzok were fired for bias and misconduct. It was Strzok who was part of launching a full investigation within three days of an account of a comment in a pub. It was Strzok who promised his colleague and lover Lisa Page that she did not have to worry about Trump being elected: “there’s no way he gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take the risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

It was Strzok who countermanded agents who wanted to close Crossfire Razor due to a lack of evidence against Michael Flynn, Trump’s former National Security Adviser.

As expected, the Democrats attacked Durham and suggested that he was “tasked” with defending Trump and fostering conspiracy theories. However, the most telling moment came early when Tennessee Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen issued a dire warning to Durham.

However, Strzok did what Cohen suggested. He stuck with the narrative and found a soft landing on sites like LawFare, CNN and MSNBC as an analyst. He got the parade not the pyre.

There was an obvious frustration that the attacks did not seem to matter to Durham. His North Star has remained constant in maintaining his own integrity and his reputation with “the people I respect.” That clearly does not include some of these members.

However, it likely includes some of the professionals referenced in Durham’s testimony. He spoke of FBI agents who came to him to apologize for assisting in the Russian collusion investigation after learning the full story. It includes an agent who Durham said broke down emotionally when he learned what the FBI leadership hid from him and had to leave the room.

Durham has nothing to worry about on his reputation. History will be less kind to the members who have attacked him.


206 thoughts on ““You Will End Up on the Bottom of a Pyre”: Democrats Attack Special Counsel John Durham ”

  1. Wyndham Earl

    According to Trading Economics US mfg has been negative every single month since Dec 2023 except February which was a tiny bit up.


    The claim that government can stimulate the economy successfully is complete garbage – not only that but it is the same garbage that got us into the current mess.

    I have no problem with electric cars. I have massive problems with government subsidies or other market meddling.

    I will tell you the same thin I tell those who rant about the Chinese subsidizing US exports.

    Government subsidies steal from the people.

    1. John Say,
      We all know Wyndham Earl (aka Elvis Bug) is making things up.
      Anyone who has been paying attention to the economy knows the economy is not doing well.
      In May, the Leading Economic Indicators declined again. That would be 14 straight months in a row.
      “The US LEI continued to fall in May as a result of deterioration in the gauges of consumer expectations for business conditions, ISM® New Orders Index, a negative yield spread, and worsening credit conditions,” said Justyna Zabinska-La Monica, Senior Manager, Business Cycle Indicators, at The Conference Board.
      “The US Leading Index has declined in each of the last fourteen months and continues to point to weaker economic activity ahead.

      Rising interest rates paired with persistent inflation will continue to further dampen economic activity. While we revised our Q2 GDP forecast from negative to slight growth, we project that the US economy will contract over the Q3 2023 to Q1 2024 period.

      The recession likely will be due to continued tightness in monetary policy and lower government spending.”

      Many Americans already feel the recession is already here. Bidenflation is the reason behind it. Fed chairman Powell stated on Wednesday that there will be more rate hikes in the future.

      1. I am deeply concerned.

        We dodged a Bullet this winter – an unusually warm winter forestalled economic collapse in Europe.
        But we are still in deep schiff globally.

        We do not know how bad the chinese ecconomy is – i is too closed, but indications are that it is in deep trouble.
        And that alone is reason to be concerned about War with China. China like many countries has gone to war to quell possible internal disention.

        It appears that NK is experience the same murderous starvation that occured toward the end of the Clinton presidency.
        China, Japan, Russia, nearly all of europe are all facing varying degress of population decline that will have negative economic consequences – some of that is near imediate, while in other places like the US the reckoning may be more than a decade away.

        I for one would be very happy if the Fed can find a way to purge inflation without ruining the economy.

        But wishing does not make it so.

        Both short term and long term we are facing radical economic changes globally.

        The good news for the US is that as stupid as we have been, and as bad as things will be, we still will weather this better than most of the world.

        Further, we are with near certainty at the end of the superpower era. The US has the power to pick specific conflicts and radically influence them – Ukraine Tiawn.

        But we do not have the power to play police for the entire world. Increasingly we do not have the power to defend global trade.

        The US NAvy (and the rest of the militry) have shifted focus from protection of Trade – a role the US has lead since before our founding, to power projection in conflicts.

        A US Carrier Battle Group is more formidable than ever. But we have far fewer of the frigates,a dn destroyers that are the backbone of protecting global free trade.

        Alot of this is self interest – the US increasingly does not need global free trade.

        North america is energy self sufficient. We increasingly do not care about the mideast – that is a European problem.
        We care about SOME pacific Trade.

        Increasingly we do not need to and are not prepared to protect the world.

        I think to a large extent that is a good thing – but it will mean more global conflict. Ones we will hopefully stay out of .

        1. Not to worry. Fungal infections are on the upward swing, physicians are misdiagnosing them as bacterial infections, using inappropriate anti-infectives, prescribing anti-fungals when it is too late, and resulting in deaths. So really your many concerns are trifling compared to incompetent physicians.

          OTOH, you can always consult with Young on here to contact his BFF Robert Malone who “invented” the mRNA vaccine. That is the same Robert Malone who had 2 papers published with his name along with other lab members in 1989 and 1990. Yup, 1989 and 1990. If you are concerned that Robert Malone failed to launch “his” mRNA vaccine back in 1990 when he “discovered” them and make millions of dollars like Paul Offit and colleagues did with Rotavirus vaccine, that might be because Malone is a charlatan like the physicians who fail to differentiate bacterial from fungal infections.

          When physicians are in doubt about infections, they should think fungal infections.

          Deadly Fungal Infections Confound Doctors—‘It’s Going to Get Worse’

          Wall Street Journal

          Many medical schools aren’t adequately training aspiring doctors to identify and treat fungal disease, infectious-disease experts said. Some schools dedicate a couple of hours to the topic, those experts said. “Most fungal diseases are taught in medical school as being rare or unusual or some even regional, but we see these on a daily basis,” said Dr. George R. Thompson, an infectious-disease specialist at the UC Davis Medical Center in Sacramento.

          1. “Fungal infections are on the upward swing… So really your many concerns are trifling compared to incompetent physicians.”

            That statement needs an in-depth discussion because there is so much to discuss.

            Why are fungus deaths increasing?

            Part of the reason is that physicians are saving lives with chemotherapy and the like leading to increasing numbers of patients with immunocompromised systems. They are harder to treat even when the correct medications exist.

            But when one looks at fungi, one also has to look at bacteria. The WSJ mentions 35,000 deaths from drug-resistant bacteria and fungus infections. I don’t know the exact numbers, but my assumption is the deaths from fungi are far outweighed by drug-resistant bacteria 4-5:1. Don’t quote me because I am guessing.

            We need new antibiotics as well as treatment for fungi. All of that costs money that the Democrats throw down the drain in an idiotic fashion while they steal from the public. Add to that Democrat economic policies are a disaster leaving less and less money for research that provides benefits.

            But when we look at such numbers, we should also look at the drug deaths from drugs where Chinese Fentynal is a major threat. It threatens the healthy young, rather than the older cancer patient with fewer years of life remaining. The number of deaths from drug overdoses is over 100,000, but Democrats keep the borders open and help the cartels set up shop everywhere. We can thank Democrats for their utter disdain for life.

            So yes, Estovir is right. We must consider this relatively low number of deaths from fungi that increases and is likely to become a bigger threat. He is also correct that doctors aren’t trained well enough.

            Why is that? Democrats are pushing to lower the standards. Does anyone realize how difficult medicine is? You don’t want affirmative action doctors and systems that downgrade the learning process. That is what Democrats are doing. Democrats are killing us in many ways, yet we hear from the nuts on this blog that Trump is bad because he has orange hair. That is how leftists judge our leaders and how we get into the mess we are in.

            That takes us to the election coming up. Do we want more stupid doctors, or do we wish to improve the quality? If you wish for the latter, vote Republican. If you wish for better antifungals, vote Republican. If you want new types of antimicrobials so people don’t die from bacterial infections, vote Republican. If you want better doctors, vote Republican.

            Skip worrying about the orange hair and the mouth that sometimes needs to be shut tight. Vote Republican.

            Many Republicans are willing and able to do the job. Don’t destroy them by fighting alternative candidates. When you do that, the Democrats have succeeded in getting you to bloody your own.

            Vote in the primary for your choice, and then in the general election, vote Republican.

            I say this as a person who was a Democrat most of my life but voted as an Independent. That option is no longer feasible as Democrats are lethal to our way of life. Therefore, when voting, one must vote against Democrats for any office, including dog catcher.

            Our nation and our way of life are at stake. Destroy the present Democrat Party unless you wish to face disaster.

            1. the antibiotic (ABX) market is a very crowded one. There is little incentive for pharma / biotech to invest in bringing to market new classes of ABX drugs. Additionally community physicians are to blame for ABX resistance for inappropriately rxing them when their patients have a viral infection or rxing under pressure from their patients. Also, community physicians develop poor prescribing habits by using the same ABX over and over. Appropriate ABX utilization depends on the community physician having a copy of their hospital antibiogram, and adhering to it and subsequent annual updates. Most do not do this. See

              Truong WR, Hidayat L, Bolaris MA, Nguyen L, Yamaki J. The antibiogram: key considerations for its development and utilization. JAC Antimicrob Resist. 2021 May 25;3(2):dlab060. doi: 10.1093/jacamr/dlab060.

              As for increase in fungal infections, we tend to forget we share this planet with other organisms. They also undergo natural selection and evolutionary pressures just like us. They to exist to survive better, stronger, more fit than previous generations. Humans are no longer doing the latter as I have explained many times on here.

              yes, medical education in America is atrocious today. They teach DEI but when it comes to teaching medical science paradigm shifts, not at all.

              I hope this helps

              1. Estovir, I am interested in saving and elevating lives. That is what physicians do, and it is a noble profession, but it has drastically changed. The government’s entry into the system has made things worse. The only thing that has kept healthcare on the positive side is technology.

                The skills of physicians have not kept up with what one should expect, and that is due to all sorts of things. Today with so much insurance, physicians are churning, not treating. In the process, they are not spending the time to evaluate treatment, and this includes the preservation of antibiotics so that we have their use in the future without the problem of resistance.

                I am not saying physicians are bad. They aren’t. They are great, but the government has created a system where physicians are force-fed bad habits, and their training includes too much PC garbage. We are wasting at least 50% of what we spend while wasting the productivity of too many of our brightest people.

                Restrain the government, and we can have a standard of living climbing at tremendous rates and healthcare that one cannot conceive of.

                In the past, I have discussed with others the US healthcare system as a money maker, not one that helps destroy the economy as we see it today. I have considered how to move some healthcare offshore on islands nearby or the gulf where we have real estate past our legal boundaries in the form of oil platforms. We can do tremendous things. We can save patients money while providing better care, save the government money, and enrich the healthcare community all at the same time if only we would unleash ourselves from the government.

                1. A Circuit Judge friend sent me the following NYT article because their offspring is a medical student, whom I was against attending. Thus the article created red flags for my friend knowing all too well I implored them not to send their kid to MD school. It was tempting to respond with “I told you so” but instead replied with “tell X to get an MBA degree after medical school”.

                  As the medical business landscape changes, so must physicians. Most do not as the NYT depressingly recounts.

                  The Moral Crisis of America’s Doctors
                  The corporatization of health care has changed the practice of medicine, causing many physicians to feel alienated from their work.

                  New York Times

                  1. Medicine is a wonderful endeavor. Where else does one earn money by doing good while having a high-status position? Of course, in recent years, physician autonomy has been diminished, and those that work half as hard and are less than half as smart are telling physicians how to practice medicine. That is a recipe for disaster.

                    I have some tangential experience in the healthcare sector, with significant time spent with economists, statisticians, professors, physicians, and others. I fought for MSAs and then HSAs and against all entries by the government into the healthcare sector. We are going down the tubes quickly, unnoticed by the average person, because only the sick recognize the problems. The healthy can be pleasantly excited over receiving a free hearing aid from their insurer even though it is substandard, and they pay double what they should.

                    In general physicians are very bright and very hard working so they would be in a high income level in most fields. The government is always blaming physicians for high costs, but at least in the past their percentage of the cost has been low and relatively stable. The government should blame itself. We had the best healthcare in the world and were capable of making that sector into a profit center but government screwed it up.

      2. I am actually seeing an uptick in one of my businesses – but then again – my business is incredibly interest rate sensitive. Business dropped almost 1000% from august to April, and is now down only 100% from last year.

        That business is a leading indicator – meaning we tank first, and we rise first. But it is more complex than that because we are short term interest rate sensitive, but NOT long term sensitive. As the expectations that interest rates are going to remain high for the foreseable future are settling in business is returning.

        I think Treasury, Biden’s choices as well as those of the Fed are focus on having the least bad economy for the 2024 election.

        That is an economic mistake. We are better off to rip the bandage off and get this over with.

        It is my view that if the Fed had reacted MORE draconian in mid 2023, we would have had a short severe recession that we likely would already be pulling out of and interest rates and inflation would be soon headed back to normal.

        For those on the left who wish to claim I am wrong on economics – I would love it if that were the case.
        I would love it if the “experts” were actually able to game the laws of economics.
        But the evidence in my lifetime is that is not possible.

        What is surprising is that we never learn anything.

        The Keynesians and MMT’rs will be backif they are not already.
        And even most republicans including Trump are easily seduced into stimuluas and government subsidies – as long as they are for a pet cause.

        As Adma Smith found 250 years ago

        Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism, but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice; all the rest being brought about by the natural course of things. All governments which thwart this natural course, which force things into another channel, or which endeavour to arrest the progress of society at a particular point, are unnatural, and to support themselves are obliged to be oppressive and tyrannical.

        And yet we can not get this fundimental truth into our heads.

  2. Anonymous

    Durham’s conclusion was that CrossFire Huricane – and therefore its progeny the SC investigation were unconstitutional.

    As top the Senate -= that report is actually damning to the left.
    It merely contains a few paragraphs that pay lip service to never substantiate claims fo russian collusion.

    Do you have evidence that some claim in the Meuller report that you celebrate is accurate ?
    Mueller did not provide evidence.
    The senate did not provide evidence.

  3. “You Will End Up on the Bottom of a Pyre”

    I was in my Jacuzzi sipping cognac liquor and playing with a plastic submarine when the news broke about the OceanGate tourist submersible….All are dead.

    Even if the occupants signed a wavier, there will be lawsuits.

    1. Who you going to sue. This company that made a submarine out of sheet metal cannot have any assets

  4. Anonymous

    The jury found no problems with the evidence Durham provieded.

    The jury concluded that Sussman and Denachenko had lied to the FBI.

    They also correctly concluded that it did not matter – because the FBI knew it was a lie.

    convicting Danchenko and Sussman would have exhonerated DOJ and FBI.

  5. Darren;

    It is increasingly virtually impossible to reply to a comment by an anonymous poster.

    Whenever I do, I get notice that replies to unapproved comments are not allowed.

    This is a recent development.

    If you are going to allow a comment to show up publicly – please allow us to respond to it.

    The remedy for bad speech is more speech not silence.

    While I as well as the constitution establishes a value to anonymous speech,
    This is a not a government blessed public forum. jonathanturley.org is free to bar anonymous posts.

    I hope you do not, but there is no doubt you may.

    But if you are going to allow them – please let the rest of us reply.

    1. John Say,
      A number of these Anonymous have a long history of violating the civility rules to include foul language, obscene graphics, and other rude and crude language.
      One even boast about getting put in time out on Twitter for his rude and crude language.
      Others have promoted the sexualization of children as young as 6 years old, attempted to normalize pedophilia and the mutilation of pre-pubescent children.
      I have commented to some of them in the past, ending my comment with, “I look forward to my comment getting deleted.”

      1. Absent IP tracing which I doubt that turley.org is doing, there is no means to block an anonymous poster without allowing the post to go through and be read first.

        I disagree with most of these posts.

        But found none that violated the rules.

        I do not think that is the issue.

        I have no problems with what Darren has identified as “the rules” here.
        Those who violate them should be blocked.

        But the standards for civility here are very low – which I am OK with.

        And it is very easy to weaponize claims of incivility.

        Every single uncivil left wing nut here thinks they are civil and thinks those posts in response are not civil.

        There is a significant amount of racist posting by those on the left.
        But they are oblivious to their racism.
        They do not seem to grasp that treating minorities as inferior and needing special protections is discriminatory and racist.

    2. I agree about the anonymous issue; have been complaining about it forever; never respond to one
      That being said I just made an anonymous comment about lawsuits vis a vis the submersible because I was too lazy to fill out al the stuff below. Blog should use Facebook or… for commenting. (I check off the box which is fine for one session but I have my browser set to wipe out things like that when I close it.)

      1. Dennis,

        “If I ruled the blog”, no one would be blocked for any post that did not violate the law. Even laws I disagree with.
        I will defend your right to post some illegal remarks. I will not go to jail for you.

        But I do not rule the blog.

        Turley can have whatever rules that he wants.

        Apparently something has been changed recently that makes replying to SOME comments more difficult.
        The patterns seems to be that SOME anonymous posts can nto be replied to.

        But that is a pattern not a law. I have successfully replied to atleast 1 anonymous post in the past day, and I have been blocked replying to atleast two posts that had names. So whatever is going on it is not universal.

        I do not generally respond to anonymous posts that I agree with – so maybe it is some kind of left wing nut targeting that is occurring.

        It is also possible that it is just some WP thing rahter than some politically driven conspiracy.

        But it is frustrating and anoying and the PATTERN – which is NOT the same as proven fact, is that it mostly has to do with some anonymous posts and it mostly has to do with posts of those on the left.

        I have no problem shaming posters on the left for their idiotic views.
        I oppose silencing them.

        But even if there is not some political censorship going on – whatever is happening is frustrating and aanoying and oddly goes to FEATURE the posts that are being “disfaovred” as they can not be replied to they can not easily be rebutted.

        The response to bad speech is MORE speech.

      1. ATS, you are wrong as usual.

        Reply to one of Bug’s responses whether under his name or the names of many others. Frequently they are independent responses using a new name. You will get a message informing you that John Say is correct and you are wrong as usual.

        1. I would be happy to discover this was some mistake on my part.

          but I doubt that.

          The problem is not unique to anonymous posters, nor true of all anonymous posts.

          I also beleive that on atleast one occasions I was able to respond to an anonymous post AFTER waiting a day or two.

  6. Anonymous

    All these left wing nuts would absolutely require total censorship – IF spreading disinformation was a real criteria for censorship.

    But right or left it is not.

    Those left wing nuts listed provide a value service.

    They make two things clear – that the left is batschiff crazy,
    That they have no argument of merit.

    We must hear the voices of those we like the least – more so than thosw we like the most, to be able to tell the merits of our own posistions.

    “He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion… Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them…he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
    ― John Stuart Mill, On Liberty


    coup d’état

    plural coups d’état or coup d’états

    : a sudden decisive exercise of force in politics

    especially : the violent overthrow or alteration of an existing government by a small group

    a military coup d’état of the dictator

    “We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.”

    – Barack Obama

    “We will stop him.”

    – Peter Strzok to FBI paramour Lisa Page

    “[Obama] wants to know everything we’re doing.”

    – Lisa Page to FBI paramour Peter Strzok

    1. What the —- are conservative, actual Americans doing; wishing their once-great country “Bon Voyage?”

      The Constitution is the very definition of conservative and nothing the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) have illicitly imposed is constitutional.

  8. What would we have gained/spared if AG Bill Barr had not been a “coward” (© # 45)?

    Again, very old wine in new barrels:

    1. Igor Danchenko, the primary source for “Steele Dossier”, worked earlier with Fiona Hill at Brookings. President Trump appointed latter to NSC.

    2. On 3/20/17 FBI Director James Comey confirms (during a congressional hearing) for the 1st time that “Crossfire Hurrican” criminal counterintelligence investigation “whether individuals associated with [Trump’s] presidential campaign were coordinating, wittingly or unwittingly, with the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election” [1] was opened on 7/31/16.

    3. At this time, Kathy Chung moved boxes around D.C., Robinson Walker, LLC functioned as clearing house for Romanian & China money transfers: Large incoming payments where split and peu à peu wire-transferred to various Biden family members including Hallie.

    4. On 5/17/17 acting AG Rod Rosenstein (R) authorized Robert Mueller (R) as Special Counsel to “conduct the investigation […] including any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump […]. His team consisted of 19 lawyers, who were assisted by 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants and other professional staff. The counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas and interviewed around 500 witnesses. Andrew Weissmann [2], who headed Obama’s criminal fraud section at DOJ in ’15, served as lead prosecutor.

    5. In 2018 a criminal investigation was opened against Hunter Biden about Tax-evasion (among other matters). Although banks are quick to report suspected money laundering, the many small-scale transfers from abroad don’ t seem to have led to any further investigations.

    6. A redacted version of the 448-page Mueller report was publicly released by DOJ on 4/18/19. During several congressional hearings Mueller steady fest explains his tasks (see # 4) followed by “outside my purview” answer.

    7. Following this report, AG Barr directed Durham to conduct a preliminary review into certain matters related to the 2016 presidential election campaigns, and that review subsequently developed into a criminal investigation. In a broad NBC-interview on 12/10/19, AG explained his actions: “The core statement, in my opinion, by the IG, is that these irregularities, these misstatements, these omissions were not satisfactorily explained. And I think that leaves open the possibility to infer bad faith. I think it’s premature now to reach a judgment on that, but I think that further work has to be done, and that’s what Durham is doing” [3]

    8. Senators Grassley & Johnson closed their 87 pages report on “Hunter Biden, Burisma, and Corruption: The Impact on U.S. Government Policy and Related Concerns” [5]: “There remains much work to be done.” AG Barr missed the opportunity to appoint a Special Counsel for these matters.

    9. My two most remarkable settings during the hearing: Chairman Comer’s chat with Durham about Danchenko’s presence & Rep. Bishop’s question about the time when Durham realized that Danchenko was a paid CHS, including a very vague answer on a simple question. BTW: What was he paid for?

    [1] OIG Report “Review of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI’s Crossfire Hurricane Investigation” (12/9/19), p ii
    [2] “Where Law Ends: Inside the Mueller Investigation”, Random House, 9/29/20
    [3] Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN): “Natalia Veselnitskaya […] had been working with none other than Glenn Simpson and Fusion GPS since at least early 2014.” Are you aware of that: Mueller: “Outside my purview.”
    [4] https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/12/11/full_interview_ag_bill_barr_criticizes_inspector_general_report_on_the_russia_investigation.html
    [5] https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC%20-%20Finance%20Joint%20Report%202020.09.23.pdf

  9. In his response to Rep. Dan Bishop’s question as to why Durham did not compel testimony from certain named key witnesses who declined to be voluntarily interviewed, Durham explained that because subpoenas are limited to prosecutorial proceedings they are not a tool investigators can use in the investigatory stage that proceeds a prosecution. Essentially, investigators cannot compel witnesses to give answers to things of interest to initial stage investigators. Also problematic for investigators with persons who refuse to cooperate is that they may always continue refusing to cooperate. The constant refrain that “I do not recall”, I have no memory of that”, etc., is all that is needed to escape justice.

    What it comes down to, as it is in all of human existence, is integrity. The many FBI persons who did cooperate with the Durham Investigation had the integrity that brought the investigation’s conclusions. Unfortunately, the integrity of those who might have mattered most remains sorely lacking.

    1. Durham’s purported “explanation” for his failure to serve subpoenas wasn’t correct. Subpoenas can be issued in criminal cases, in civil lawsuits, and can be issued by government agencies and special counsels conducting their own investigations and proceedings, administrative or criminal.

      1. I fail to understand how SC Durham could investigate the shocking, shocking allegations in his own report without issuing subpoenas? (evidently, SC Smith had no such reluctance-hindrances in his investigation?)

        *I’m only confident Joe Biden knows nothing .. . he probably didn’t even get up this morning.

      2. Durham explained the practicalities that argue against the time and expense of subpoenas. While I cannot fault his reasons, I too wish he had at least tried, if only to fail. The matter is too serious for the Republic for the likes of Charles Dolan, Igor Danchenko, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Bill Priestap, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Glenn Simpson to go unpunished.

        1. Durham failed. No excuses. He allowed them all to get away with their seditious conspiracy.

          1. Had you read the Durham Report you would know that Ron is wrong, and given him the Bronx cheer

    2. 1. Former Chairman Nunes sent Durham criminal referrals (including for alleged perjury by witnesses including former FBI official Andrew McCabe) but – Durham (who had same power than Mueller) refrained from.

      2. Smith got access via court ruling (Howell) to notes of Trump’s lawyers, while Durham was refused access even to Fusion GPS correspondence due to “privilege”.

      3. Which of these people knew that Danchenko was placed on the FBI’s payroll: Sessions, Rosenstein, Barr, Brennan, Comey; Wray, McCabe, Horowitz, Szrok, Page, Baker, Mueller, Weissmann, Ohr, Thibault, Auten?

      4. Did Durham wait until the statue of termination?

      5. Did Russia hack DNC?

      6. “In those few instances in which individuals refused to cooperate, FBI leadership intervened to urge those individuals to agree to be interviewed.” (page 4).
      I know, “few” is comparative: Strzok, Priestap, Comey, McCabe, Clinesmith, Joffe, Elias, Simpson (was declining an interview an option with Mueller?)

  10. Durham put absolutely zero pressure on any of the top perps. None. Total pass.
    There was indeed a conspiracy to subvert Trump’s presidency that came from the top.
    That was part of Durham’s job: Expose a little of the seditious plot, but not too much.
    Slow walk the investigation past the 2020 election, past the 2022 election.

    YEARS of investigation into an actual conspiracy. Zero accountability.
    Zero subpoenas for the biggest perps. Zero indictments. Zero arrests. Zero prison time. Zilch.

    And now the Democrats continue to spin their bold lies all over the Fake News media, with total disregard to what Durham’s report actually says. Democrats continue their shameless lying to the American people with nods of agreement from their fake news co-conspirators.
    Andrew McCabe is all over MSNBC spinning his own crimes as a serious legal analyst.
    Clapper is all over CNN spinning his own lies as well.
    They think you are stupid.

    MSLSD is pure propaganda trash. So is CNN. And now Fox News has been exposed as much the same.
    Turn it all off. It is all spin, lies, and propaganda designed to manipulate and divide the public.
    Don’t be fooled again.

    1. As I said below, Matt Gaetz had the best metaphor for what John Durham’s role was. Gaetz said that Durham was akin to the Washinton Generals.

      (For those who don’t know who the Washington Generals are, they’re a basketball team that serve as “opponents” of the Harlem Globetrotters, but were really skilled stooges who were “paid to lose” while making it look like they were trying their best.)

      1. I think that Durham did an excellent job.

        But Gaetz’s criticism’s were warrented and struck home.

        Durham did NOT even investigate several things that were inside of his authorization.
        Which Gaetz correctly pointed out.

        But Durham did do an excellent job in what he did investigate.

        And as Hagmen pointed out and Durham himself concurred

        This country can not last long if this continues.

    2. The funeral pyres for Special Counsel Durham are already well lit. I’ve read 3 articles this morning accusing Durham of ‘lying’ to congress during his testimony yesterday. burp.

      *’the Intelligence Community has six ways from Sunday (getting president Trump)’ ~ Sen. Schumer

    3. @RepTiffany

      Jun 21

      Joe Biden and Barack Obama knew about it.

      Hillary Clinton fabricated it.

      The FBI orchestrated it.

      And the mainstream media sold it.

      Trump-Russia collusion was all a made-up HOAX, and Republicans WILL get accountability for the American people.

    4. My recollection is that Durham’s writ from Barr was simply and solely — following up on the IG report — to see if there was anything criminal in the Crossfire Hurricane investigative process itself, which was found by the IG to be poorly done but fairly launched. Durham was not re-investigating what Mueller had already investigated and had found nothing (people forget that in the Mueller report, Mueller says that not only did no one related to Trump collude with Russians but that NO American colluded with Russians relative to the 2016 election).

      Durham found not only was it poorly done but unfairly launched. Ho-hum… improve procedures. Durham also found three crooks he could document. Their (2/3) successful defense is that the FBI knew they were crooked. The FBI and DOJ obviously burned every incriminating document and sledgehammered every incriminating cell phone the day in early 2018 when it knew there was no “there their” and that Mueller would bring no charges (and no, “early 2018” is not a typo)

  11. “My concern about my reputation is with the people who I respect, my family, and my Lord, and I’m perfectly comfortable with my reputation with them, sir.”

    I assume Trump is his Lord. Or maybe Lord Vader.

    1. You can assume whatever you want.

      Durham had nothing to do with Trump.
      I do not think he has ever expressed a view on Trump.
      I doubt he likes Trump.

      Unlike Mueller and Smith – Durham has a long history of quiet success – often against those in government right or left who are corrupt.
      He is neither the failure that Mueller and Smith are, nor the partisan they are.

  12. “Long praised as a professional and apolitical prosecutor, Durham looked about as comfortable as a Benedictine monk in a strip joint.”
    Cohen is an unmitigated, preening prig of a man all full of moralizing and fake compassion. Oh and he’s a Dim. Ooops, sorry for the redundancy.

    Oh and I would think a Bendictine would feel quite at ease in a strip club. How did that line go? “They that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Luke 5:31-32 (KJV)

  13. You just have to wonder how the Democrats have become so morally bankrupt. I can remember how the Democrats were praising Robert Mueller as being the man who would finally put Trump in jail. When he didn’t come through they threw him on the witch hunt pyre just like their throwing Durham on the raging fire. A Democrat has finally told the truth for once when he admits that they are gathering the kindling for the fire of a new witch hunt. They are growing more capable of finding new witches day after day. “No shame” is an understatement.

    1. TiT,
      Of course they do not.
      For them, by any means necessary allows them to forgo shame.
      It is all for the sake of power that also allows for by any means necessary.
      James recently said,
      “They have already proven there is no low they will not stoop to. It’s occurred to me this may be the motivation of wokeifying the military. They may try a hard coup next time, and they may try to lock us down over ‘climate’.”
      At this point, I could see them doing exactly that to keep or expand their power.

  14. John Durham deserves sharp criticism, but not for any of the fake reasons spun by the Democrats, RINOs, and other UniParty members.

    Durham is properly to be criticized for his complete failure to subpoena any of the government criminals (“alleged,” if you must), such as Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page, etc. Sure, every one of them would have pleaded the Fifth Amendment if compelled to testify. But under those particular circumstances pleading the Fifth would correctly be interpreted by the public as tantamount to an admission of guilt.

    But Durham’s role was never to expose any of the crimes of the government actors. His role was solely to make it only appear like he was doing something, while effecctively covering up the crimes of the government actors. Matt Gaetz had the best metaphor for what John Durham’s role was. Gaetz said that Durham was akin to the Washinton Generals. For those who don’t know who the Washington Generals were, they were a basketball team that were the “opponents” of the Harlem Globetrotters, who were “paid to lose,” while making it look like they were trying their best.

  15. Jonathan: Your column, particularly your comments about Dem Rep Steve Cohen’s Qs to John Durham–comparing Cohen’s comments to Joe McCarthy’s attack on one of Joseph Welch’s young lawyers–has provoked some rather bizarre responses on this blog.

    “Semcgowanjr” [6/22 @ 9:36 am] says “the Democratic Party IS the party of ‘socialists, communists and others’ ” and that “Joe McCarthy was right”, i.e., that the Dems are part of a conspiracy to “destroy America and establish ‘a new social order'”. Semcgowanjr goes on with some vile anti-semitic attacks on Cohen–calling him a “Jewish scumbag”. He accuses the Dems on the Judiciary Committee of trying to “stir up their base of blacks, far leftists and diehard Democrats who would vote for Satan if he ran as a Democrat”.Semcgowanjr ends his racist and anti-semitic diatribe by saying: “I see a civil war on the horizon and it may end with the foot of Jesus traveling down on the Mount of Olives”. Semcgowanjr apparently thinks Jesus will smite the enemies of Christianity–the Jews, Blacks and every Democrat. I couldn’t make up all this drivel if I tried.

    This is not the first time your columns have inspired the anti-semites and racists to come out from under their rocks. It’s all part of the “age of rage”, as you call it. But don’t you think your continued attacks on the DOJ, the Biden family “corruption scandal” and the Dems in generally may be contributing to the “rage” we see on your blog? Steve Cohen is not Joe McCarthy–the disgraced guy who thought he could expose all the “communists” in government. All your allusions to McCarthy are just making the “age of rage” much worse–especially as reflected in Semcgowanjr’s vile and hate-filled comments.

    1. Joe McCarthy actually was right. The American government had a lot of Communists and Communist sympathizers. He went too far, but he’s far less of a miscreant than Schiff, Cohen and all the other crew. What Democrats did to undermine Trump was appalling. And Joe Biden and Barack Obama were in on it. They greenlighted a Logan Act investigation into Michael Flynn. And then the FBI doctored 302s to frame him.

      1. MacCarthy was correct about the dangers of communism.

        But he was wrong in that we can not preserve our freedom by destroying it.

        We must both preserve the freedom of all – including marxists,
        as well as remain vigilant to assure that those like marxists never get the power to constraint the freedom of others.

        I have sworn upon the altar of god eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.“ — Thomas Jefferson

        1. How did McCarthy try to take away the freedoms of communists? Are you saying we should permit spies to access critical security? Who did McCarthy ask to be arrested and incarcerated? What speech did McCarthy prevent?

          1. Are you really going to defend Maccarthy ?

            Communist and Spy are not synonyms. With a few notable exceptions the worst spies for the USSR in the US were NOT communists.

            Walker was probably the single most damaging Russian Spy. Providing the USSR with information that allowed real time tracking of the atlantic fleet.
            In the event of a war Russian boomer might have been able to evade US hunter killers and traverse the IUK gap undetected.

            Next was Hanson who cost us numerous sources inside the Kremlin and made international relations more dangerous.

            MacCarthy was investigated for using his Hearings as a means of extorting influence within the Army – seeking the appointment of cronies in return for backing down on investigations.

            Just to be clear – I think you are stupid if you are a communist.
            Nor do I have a problem with precluding favorable treatment of communism in public schools.
            Though the best solution is to end public schools.

            But people are allowed to be stupid, and political litmus tests are NOT acceptable for govrnment service.
            But Political advocacy within the executive IS a crime. Regardless of ideology.

            1. “Are you really going to defend Maccarthy ?”

              Yes, for those things he is accused of but didn’t do, and for those things where history has changed the context of what was said. My defense has nothing to do with my preferences.

              “MacCarthy was investigated for using his Hearings as a means of extorting influence within the Army”

              What influence are you talking about? Trump has been investigated for all sorts of phony things by the left. The left is doing today what they did during the McCarthy era. The left even rigged at least one of the J6 types of hearings. They used the news media against an honest man who testified at those hearings.

              “– seeking the appointment of cronies in return for backing down on investigations.”

              This is not atypical, but what investigations did he back down on for the appointment of what cronies? What was he convicted of? Where is the quid pro quo? So far, you haven’t produced anything solid directed at McCarthy. In the end, McCarthy was proven correct by multiple sources. He never requested firing anyone, though he did request the removal from sensitive areas of those under suspicion until cleared.

              You deflected your argument by discussing other people like Hanson and Walker. They have nothing to do with McCarthy. Get to the point. What was the worst thing McCarthy did?

              1. I explained the case of MacCarthy being investigated for using claims of communist infiltration as a means to extort the executive – particularly the military to make personal selections from his recommendations.

                MacCarthy was right about the long term damage of communism if we did not remain vigilant.
                That was almost all he was right about.

                He was BYW not allone in his depridations – other Republicans as well as prokinent Democrats such as RFK and JFK was engaged as well.

                But the dark era of censorship and blacklists was named after him for good reason.

                The question is who will we name this moment of censhorship after ? Biden ? Sorros ? Fauxi ? Schiff ?

                Regardless, this is Worse.

                1. “I explained the case of MacCarthy being investigated for using claims of communist infiltration as a means to extort the executive – particularly the military to make personal selections from his recommendations.”

                  This and what you said before are so vague it is nearly meaningless. How did McCarthy extort the executive? McCarthy wanted investigations of those with potential ties to our enemies investigated if they were in sensitive positions. How is that extortion? He didn’t ask to fire them, only removed them from sensitive information. The list of names McCarthy had was shorter than the FBI’s. He was proven correct. What are you talking about?

                  “But the dark era of censorship and blacklists was named after him for good reason.”

                  Why? Because of the ‘have you no shame’ remark? Welch asked McCarthy to release the names of people on his list. McCarthy refused to release them, and finally, after being attacked, he released one name, the lawyer from the same firm as Welch, who had continuously been attacking him. The lawyer whose name was released had a history of involvement with a group associated with communists, and Welch was supporting him for a sensitive position.

                  Don’t change the subject. Deal with McCarthy. Deal with the facts.

                  1. If you are so unfamiliar with the details of MacCarthy – look him up.

                    My posts are not the only source of information available.

                    You should be aware that I very very rarely make mistakes in claims of fact.

                    1. John, I am surprised at your attitude. Your facts are far from perfect, and your knowledge of Joe McCarthy is limited. Repeatedly you avoid providing facts about McCarthy, and instead of considering that you might be lacking details, you do what the left does and say, “look him up” while making unfounded accusations. I looked him up a long time ago, have you?

                      Check out the book written by Stanton Evans. Check out the videos of the hearings with a fresh ear, not already told what to think. Check out documents that are missing from the government files and newspapers. Check out what McCarthy actually said and did. Finally, check out the results of the inquiries, including the Venona Project decrypts that are available for viewing. This subject is important because what the left did then, they are doing now.

                    2. John, since you have repeatedly said the same things while never stating what he did wrong, maybe it is best if I enclose Amazon’s blurb.

                      Accused of creating a bogus Red scare and smearing countless innocent victims in a five-year reign of terror, Senator Joseph McCarthy is universally remembered as a demagogue, a bully, and a liar. History has judged him such a loathsome figure that even today, a half-century after his death, his name remains synonymous with witch hunts.

                      But that conventional image is all wrong, as veteran journalist and author M. Stanton Evans reveals in this groundbreaking book. The long-awaited Blacklisted by History, based on six years of intensive research, dismantles the myths surrounding Joe McCarthy and his campaign to unmask Communists, Soviet agents, and flagrant loyalty risks working within the U.S. government.

                      Evans’ revelations completely overturn our understanding of McCarthy, McCarthyism, and the Cold War. Drawing on primary sources, Evans presents irrefutable evidence of a relentless Communist drive to penetrate our government, influence its policies, and steal its secrets. Most shocking of all, he shows that U.S. officials supposedly guarding against this danger not only let it happen but actively covered up the penetration. All of this was precisely as Joe McCarthy contended.

                      Evans shows that practically everything we’ve been told about McCarthy is false, including conventional treatment of the famous 1950 speech at Wheeling, West Virginia, that launched the McCarthy era, the Senate hearings that casually dismissed his charges, and much more.

                      In the end, Senator McCarthy was censured by his colleagues and condemned by the press and historians. Blacklisted by History provides the first accurate account of what McCarthy did and, more broadly, what happened to America during the Cold War. It is a revealing exposé of the forces that distorted our national policy in that conflict and our understanding of its history since.

                    3. No I am not doing what the left does.
                      They make things up.

                      I provided you with assertions regarding MacCarthy.
                      I have established a reputation for accuracy in my assertions and for correcting the rare errors I make.
                      You are free to trust my assertions – or not. You are free to do your own research – or not.

                      I am not going to cite every assertion I make. Nor am I going to go back and re research something I did previously.
                      My time is my own. Yours is yours.

                      I have had this debate with left wing nuts before – and they did not get anywhere.

                      If you wish to beleive that Joe MacCarthy was a hero – I can not stop you.
                      MacCarthy was right about ONE thing – and that was that marxism is dangerous.
                      But he was nearly entirely wrong in dealing with that danger.

                      Today the modern marxist left is doing to half the country what MacCarthy tried to do to small numbers.

                      That is even worse and they need held accountable.

                      But trying to rehabilitate MacCarthy is the worst possible way to do that.

                    4. “I provided you with assertions regarding MacCarthy.”

                      John, your assertion was a generality and had no teeth. “particularly the military to make personal selections from his recommendations.” That would be consistent with his request to investigate certain people in security positions. That is part of the job of everyone working for the federal government; to secure the nation from its enemies.

                      “MacCarthy was right ”

                      Say no more because that means the most critical of McCarthy were wrong.

                      “That was almost all he was right about.”

                      That is what the discussion is all about. That is what the criticism is all about, but McCarthy was right. If there is a spy in the CIA, should he say nothing? If he says something and the CIA does nothing, is he supposed to remain silent?

                      “But the dark era of censorship and blacklists was named after him for good reason.”

                      Tell us the reasons.

                      I’ll repeat what I saidt because every time I ask, you are not responsive. Tell us the reasons.

                      “But trying to rehabilitate MacCarthy is the worst possible way to do that.”

                      Rehabilitate him for something that didn’t exist? If you can’t put your finger on what he did, that was so heinous, consider yourself wrong. I am not asking for a citation; I don’t need it. As accurate as you think you are, you sound as if you do not know enough about Joe McCarthy’s role or what was happening at the time.

                    5. Actually my claim regarding MacCarthy was specific – that he used his office and specifically his hearings to leverage personal power over parts of the executive.

                      Further your claim that generalizations have no teeth is obviously FALSE.

                      You get hung up on generalizations all the time.

                      Newtons laws are WRONG – they are faulty generalizations.
                      At the same time they are the bedrock of just about all engineering.
                      The fact that they are WRONG is irrelevant – because that error is not consequential in ordinary human life.
                      Though it can be critical in nearly everything involving the quantum world or the universe.

                      Newton is WRONG nearly all the time. But he is RIGHT, for nearly everything that ordinary humans deal with on a daily basis.

                      Humans run their lives driven by generalizations. Nearly all of which are WRONG atleast some of the time.
                      But most of which are right often enough for us to THRIVE by adhering to them.

                      While that does not mean that many generalizations are problems.
                      It also means YOUR claim that something is a generalization – even one that is less than perfect, is NOT sufficient argument to reject it.

                      Otherwise we would be unable to build bridges or anything else.

                    6. “Actually my claim regarding MacCarthy was specific – that he used his office and specifically his hearings to leverage personal power over parts of the executive.”

                      John, my response to you shows how thin your claim was. Your claim was, in part, what McCarthy was talking about. There were communists at the highest level. I think you misunderstand McCarthy’s claims because you keep repeating this weak claim.

                      “Further your claim that generalizations have no teeth is obviously FALSE.”

                      I am claiming it again. McCarthy argued that communists were at the highest level of government. They existed in positions near the chief executive and the agencies protecting us from our enemies.

                      In the end, McCarthy was correct, which makes your argument fall apart.

                      I will not go on the tangent of Newton and his laws to demonstrate that the tangential has nothing to do with our argument. Newton was right on his level and McCarthy on his. We suffered from not recognizing what he said was true.

                      “No one is debating the USSR’s efforts to infiltrate and spy on the US”

                      We are not debating what the USSR was doing. We are debating what our leaders were doing to eradicate spies in our government. The ones you defended were wrong. McCarthy was right and proven so in multiple ways.

                      “The vast majority of those spying for the USSR were NOT Ideological.”

                      Whether they were ideological or not is meaningless in our debate. They existed, and McCarthy correctly pointed them out.

                      “This subject is important because what the left did then, they are doing now.”
                      And that is FALSE.”

                      Why is that false? I provided you with what happened then and what happened on J6. Deal with what is in front of you, not what suits your argument and has no value.

                    7. No one is debating the USSR’s efforts to infiltrate and spy on the US government. That was not something unique to the 50’s.
                      The vast majority of those spying for the USSR were NOT Ideological.

                      “This subject is important because what the left did then, they are doing now.”
                      And that is FALSE.

                    8. “This subject is important because what the left did then, they are doing now.”
                      And that is FALSE.”

                      I went through this before with you. It is not an identical situation, nothing is, but as I discussed the last time, there were committee meetings where Democrats were in control. People hired to search for problems had improper interviews, other witnesses weren’t interviewed, and those that went beyond the PC of the time were libeled in the press. I think that similarity is enough.

    2. I take offence at calling someone a “jewish scumbag” – that is inappropriate.

      As to the rest of the remarks you attack – while not my own views – they are NOT racist on their face.

      Democrats ARE often openly engaged in precisely the pandering they are being accused of.

      The good news is that those they are pandering to are NOT as stupid as the left presumes.

      Democrats are slowly losing votes among various minorities, depite their pandering – proving that the actual racists are on the left.

      The religious triumphalism that you attack is poor argument, but neither racist, nor innappropriate.

      If you wish to beleive Jesus will decend from heaven and vindicate the righteaousness of your permission – you are free to argue that and to wait forever for it to happen.

      Regardless, it is neither racisit nor anti=semite.

      Every view you do not like. Even those that are wrong are not automatically racist.

    3. And yes Cohen – as well as Schiff and many other democrats are actually WORSE than MacCarthy.

      As some have noted – MacCarthy has been proven RIGHT – but you, By Cohen, By Nadler, by Schiff in his concern about the dangers of marxists.

      MacCarthy’s error was that you can not sacrifice liberty to thwart those who would destroy it.

      The problem with YOUR ilk, is that their ideology is dangerous and places no value on individual liberty and they are gleefully sacrificing truth and liberty for power.

  16. This Comment is a Re-Post from June 21, 2023
    As this related to this Jonathan Turley’s Column in Foxnews.com

    Column Excerpt:
    “… In later hearings, Del. Stacey Plaskett, D-VI, the ranking member of the House Judiciary subcommittee, attacked the reporters appearing as witnesses as “so-called journalists” and said they were “a direct threat” to the safety of others by reporting the censorship story. Plaskett also later called for the possible arrest of Taibbi. …:

    𝐇𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐒𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐚𝐢𝐦 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐣𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐬’ 𝐝𝐚𝐭𝐚 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐠𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞
    Officials couldn’t force reporters to turn over data that might reveal sources.

    News gatherers in the US may soon have safeguards against government attempts to comb through their data. Bipartisan House and Senate groups have reintroduced legislation, the PRESS Act (Protect Reporters from Exploitive State Spying), that limits the government’s ability to compel data disclosures that might identify journalists’ sources. The Senate bill, would extend disclosure exemptions and standards to cover email, phone records, and other info third parties hold.

    By: Jon Fingas | @jonfingas | June 21, 2023

    1. Re: Jonathan Turley’s Column in Foxnews.com

      𝐃𝐮𝐫𝐡𝐚𝐦 𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐃𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐬 𝐛𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐛𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐰𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐥 𝐇𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐦𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬
      Rep. Cohen claims Durham lost his ‘good reputation,’ but Democrats need to worry about theirs
      By Jonathan Turley | Fox News – June 22, 2023

      America Reports – June 21, 2023
      Durham fires back at Democrat attacking his reputation: ‘Perfectly comfortable’ with my reputation before ‘my Lord’

  17. Dear Prof Turley,

    I was wrong. U.S. Politics is an infirmary. A blistering boil on the temporal lobes of civil society. A ‘stupid clown of the sprit’s motive’ and a blight on the soul of America.

    Accountability? Surely, the stunning abuses outlined in Durham’s report require some accountability? The report details the DoJ opened unwarranted investigations (see @ Crossfire Hurricane), and refused to open investigations where clearly warranted. At the highest levels of government. SC Durham describes the abuses in excruciating detail, but provides no remedy. At all. .. In that sense, Durham’s report is a Nothingburger.

    Nor, as was the case during Joe McCarthy’s Red Scare, is there a balance between the U.S. government’s outrageous abuses of civil liberties outlined in the constitution, and any threat posed by Russia/Putin or any other ‘adversary’ around the world.
    There is no need for Putin/Russia, or any malcontent adversary, to interfere in our grossly dysfunctional elections. .. on the contrary, last I checked, Putin/Russia is still looking, hoping beyond hope, for any sane person in a position of authority in the U.S./NATO alliance willing and able to negotiate peace in Ukraine.

    “Reputation, reputation, reputation! Oh, I have lost my reputation! I have lost the immortal part of myself, and what remains is bestial” ~ William Shakespeare

    *Do you know where the laptop is, or not?

    Clapper told CNN host Kaitlan Collins that he doesn’t “regret” signing the letter. “I thought, at the time, that it was appropriate to sound a warning about, watch out for the dark hand of the Russians,” he explained.

    “To this day, I still have not seen any official results of a forensic analysis of that laptop as to whether or not, in some way, the Russians messed with it,” he said.

Leave a Reply