Bill Barr, John Durham, and Fun With Fishing

How Barr’s Quest to Find Flaws in the Russia Inquiry Unraveled by Charlie Savage, Adam Goldman and Katie Benner in the New York Times is THE article to read today. The link should take you to it without a paywall. To call this jaw-dropping doesn’t even come close. The whole thing was nothing but a fishing expedition. For example,

Mr. Durham used Russian intelligence memos — suspected by other U.S. officials of containing disinformation — to gain access to emails of an aide to George Soros, the financier and philanthropist who is a favorite target of the American right and Russian state media. Mr. Durham used grand jury powers to keep pursuing the emails even after a judge twice rejected his request for access to them. The emails yielded no evidence that Mr. Durham has cited in any case he pursued.

This sham was literally a weaponization of the Justice Department to protect Trump and damage Trump’s political enemies. There is nothing else you can call it. And I suspect more will trickle out about his over the next several days.

Andrew Prokop at Vox:

Attorney General Bill Barr appointed US Attorney John Durham to investigate those government officials who had presumed to look into Donald Trump’s ties to Russia.

The FBI’s Trump-Russia probe, Barr argued publicly, was born of chasing thin conspiracy theories and relied on phony evidence, and its investigators were either blinded by political bias or acting with blatant political motives.

And then Durham and Barr proceeded to do all those same things. …

Durham is supposed to be writing a final report about what he found. That should be fun.

6 thoughts on “Bill Barr, John Durham, and Fun With Fishing

  1. "This sham was literally a weaponization of the Justice Department"


    Well then Gym Jordan will take care of this with his new committee, Justice will be done!

  2. Great title, maha!

    Two urban, law school graduate "Good Ol' Legal Beagle Boys" have fun going fishing, but eventually end-up hooking themselves by the ass on their own lines!

    (AKA: "Hoist By.Their Own Petard)!

    Any bets on whether or not we ever get to find out what the Italians believe tRUMP's alleged crimes were?

    If he did commit crimes, I think the DOJ can find out.

    The question is, will they then, either: 

    Bury the knowledge?

    Or tell the public what tRUMP's crimes were, and then start the process to finally bring to justice this (sociopathic) man who's earned some real meaty consequences meted out to him?

    IF, he's guilty, if course.

    And we all know he is.

  3. I wonder if the Senate can subpoena Durham to answer questions about the size and cost of the investigation – the results – and how much influence, pressure, and questions from the White House drove the inquisition. The Muller report findings and conclusions which do NOT clear Trump should be quoted with questions to Mr. Durham asking if he found anything to disprove the Muller Report. The list of connections between the Trump campaign and Russians should be brought out, item by item, with inquiries if ANY of them were disproved by the Durham investigation. The Senate Committee should bring up Trump's claim that he had NO investments or financial ties to Russia (date stamped) and compare it to the written Letter of Intent to build Trump Tower Moscow, which never materialized but was an active proposal at the Time candidate Trump was denying connections with Putin. Mchael Cohen, I think had direct knowledge of the project. Did Durham interview Cohen re Russia connections?  Extra points to the Senator who asks Durman if he discovered penis pictures of Donald Jr. and if he had, would they have been considered relevant.Oh, and don’t leave out Manifort, his connections to a Russian agent, the delivery by Manifort to that agent of detailed polling information, Maniforts conviction and sweetheart pardon by Trump for staying quiet.

  4. Way OT:

    I just saw the video of Tyree Nichols' torture and execution at the hands of the state.

    I have no words.y

  5. I did not watch the Tyree Nichols video. You can't un-watch that or ever redo the psychological results you suffer from that sort of experience.  I did labor through the NYT article regarding the Durham report, which caused psychological damage of its own just reading it, much less I am sure than the distress the investigation induced into the lives of those in its wake.  

    To use the apt metaphor of a fishing expedition, much anxiety is caused by trolling with giant barbed trolling hooks.  Unintended damages will inevitably occur.  Here, when criminal activities which involved Trump were uncovered, (related to financial matters as one might suspect) this redacted news was morphed into reports that the Durham investigation was on to something.  What was omitted was that the criminal investigation had nothing to do with supporting the premise of the investigation.  A premise that was insufficiently supported by evidence at its inception and remained so throughout.  Yet the investigation was prolonged and politically manipulated through the election cycle it appears.  

    Bill Barr's book paints himself in a fine light, where this article casts a dark shadow of a conservative Catholic underworld coalition over his tenure.  A shadow which reeks of rooting fish and stinks of a targeted inquisition.  It was no shock to me that Batt's book was too rosy, but I was shocked that the truth might be so fowl.  

    • I agree about watching those videos, I choose not to watch all of it as well, it's certainly a personal choice. I do however think that our news media should also be airing the footage of these weekly mass shootings. Most of them are on video of some sort. Maybe if the American people are forced to watch that horrible carnage lawmakers will be forced to act?

Comments are closed.