About That WSJ Report of the Durham Probe Investigating FBI Tipsters
People keep sending me emails about a Wall St Journal article [SEE HERE] highlighting John Durham and a grand jury receiving evidence. According to the article: “Special Counsel John Durham, appointed during the Trump administration to examine the origins of the FBI’s 2016 Russia probe, is presenting evidence to a grand jury and preparing a lengthy report expected to be completed in the coming months, according to people familiar with the matter.”
The article goes on to say Durham is looking into whether any informant or tipster to the FBI intentionally gave false information, ergo they have committed a crime:
…“Mr. Durham has been examining potential criminal charges against several lower-level Federal Bureau of Investigation employees, and people who aren’t in government, according to people familiar with the matter.” (link)
…”Prosecutors working for Mr. Durham have focused on people outside the FBI who provided information that helped fuel the 2016 investigation, the people familiar with the matter said.”
It gets a little frustrating reading these articles, yes I said plural – because the New York Times ran an almost identical article in April {See Here} – because NOTHING is going to come of Durham except for the possibility of another obtuse report that will look almost identical to the report issued by DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz.
How can we be so certain?… Because of Robert Mueller, that’s why.
If John Durham was to outline evidence of any FBI and DOJ corruption and/or wrongdoing in his review of the Spygate or “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation, the transparently obvious questions would be: (1) why didn’t Robert Mueller see it?… and (2) why would Mueller be investigating something that he knew stemmed from a false point of origin?
See the problem?
As soon as John Durham found out that Robert Mueller and team were dirty; and as soon as John Durham found direct evidence that DOJ and FBI officials were coordinating with dirty politicians in the Senate Intelligence Committee (both parties); and as soon as he found out that all of them -in both branches of government- were working together to frame a false narrative (based on nothing) just to target and eliminate Donald Trump; he would know he needed an exit.
Special Counsel John Durham cannot prosecute anyone for anything the Robert Mueller team should have known; and the Robert Mueller team should have known everything… because Mueller and team used ten times as many DOJ and FBI assets and resources as Durham; used all of the originating evidence that Durham is now re-reviewing; looked at the exact same set of facts and witnesses now under review by Durham; and spent two years doing it.
Anything of substance that Durham would prove now, only highlights the corrupt intent of Robert Mueller (and team).
See the problem?
That’s why nothing will ever come of it.
A report that says “mistakes were made”, “should have known”, “accepted mistakenly”, “didn’t follow standards”, etc etc etc… is the only possible outcome from John Durham. It might paint a slightly more ugly picture than Horowitz did, but in the end the result is the same.
Chaff and Countermeasures. Nothing more.
John Solomon might write an article or expose’ of outrage. Sara Carter might wax philosophically with an outraged ‘oh, and one more thing‘ Sean Hannity. Catherine Herridge may point out five years worth of granular details from her experience with the former DOJ and FBI officials. Dan Bongino might spit into the microphone; and Lindsey Graham might promise a hearing with John Durham as a witness…. and the day after tomorrow is Monday.
Post a Comment