Since we haven't heard any news on the Russia Collusion Hoax front for a few weeks, I thought I'd share a tidbit, courtesy of Michael Caputo, who life was tuned upside down by Mueller's goons.
This is a detail I nor many others had heard about previously. Caputo, who I believe worked in some capacity with the Trump campaign, says he was approached by a Russian peddling dirt on Hillary, asking for $2 million in compensation for "dirt."
Caputo says he told the guy to stuff it.
He told Mueller about it when they were all over Caputo, and he realized something was odd when they seemed to know more about the weird Russian character than Caputo did.
Further research indicated he was in prison in Russia a few decades ago, then suddenly appeared in the US, and was a long time FBI asset after arriving here.
<b>He also said he gave all the info on this guy to Durham.</b>
Now for the really intriguing part of the story:
Oh, look at what it says in the WaPO article:
Quote:
MIAMI — One day in late May 2016, Roger Stone — the political dark sorcerer and longtime confidant of Donald Trump — slipped into his Jaguar and headed out to meet a man with a “Make America Great Again” hat and a viscous Russian accent.
Either the FBI had a Russian "informant" take a run at the Trump campaign peddling fake Hillary Dirt, or Hillary's campaign inspired Greenberg to do it. There's no way Greenberg would know on his own in May 2016 that Trump would be accused of "collusion" with Russians to help him beat Hillary, so it has to the FBI running a CHS at the campaign without predication, Hillary running a scam on the Trump campaign using a former FBI asset, or perhaps some OTHER government or organization orchestrating the "dangle" by Greenberg.
Somebody is in deep shit. If the FBI did it, they were doing so without a valid predicated investigation underway.
And if Hillary did it, it means it was part of the "set-up" phase of the Russian Collusion Hoax, and since at that point only Hillary's people would have known that Trump Would Later be accused of collusion, it means they were the people orchestrating the entire "frame-up."
Also note that this "dangle" appears to precede, by a few weeks, the "Trump Tower dangle" to Don Jr., by the Russian lawyer, who in fact only wanted to talk about lifting sanctions related to the Magnitsky Act. And, the lawyer met with WHO before and or after the meeting?
<b>Glenn Simpson, from FGPS!</b>
What are the odds that Greenberg just randomly shows up to dangle Hillary dirt from Russia at about the same time overtures were made to the Trump Campaign for similar dirt from "Russia"? As far as we can tell, the only people aware that there would be allegations about such matters were the people coordinating it in and around the Clinton Campaign: Mook, Elias, Sussmann, Simpson, and possibly Steele, for starters. Maybe Dolan?
The alternative is a foreign intel org -- using Greenberg -- to serendipitously floating a "dangle" that COINCIDENTALLY matched the Hillary scheme to frame Trump's campaign for "collusion."
Or, it was "in" on the plan with Hillary's campaign from the get go.
Not actually news--unfortunately. Actually, I was on MC's radio show back during the Team Mueller witchhunt, so at that time I was up on all this. I agree that this smells very much like an FBI approach.
Here's some news that's been in the works for a while:
Can't help but wonder if this is one reason why Durham and Barr pushed back so hard against Horowitz conclusion that the CH investigation seemed to be properly predicated. They did say they had access to info that was outside Horowitz's authority. The Greenberg dangle, if it was an FBI op, means somebody is in deep trouble, or should be, because it predates opening CH by over 2 months.
It's always possible that there was another case opened on Caputo and his friends. Still, you come back to the issue of predication and the apparent targeting of the Trump campaign.
The thing that jumps out about the Greenberg dangle -- regardless of who was behind it -- is that it happened in late May, before there was any general knowledge of allegations of Russian Collusion regarding Trump. That suggests "inside knowledge" of the efforts underway to dirty up Trump and his campaign with allegations of "collusion," or it is the worlds biggest "coincidence."
And we know what Auric Goldfinger, and George Smiley, said about supposedly random chance "Goldilocks" events.
A number of people thought the travel expenses seemed rather large; SWC points out it's especially so, given how much Zoom meetings replaced in person meetings due to Covid.
• IC Appropriation: $280,922 was expended for travel, including:
o $39,863 for SCO direct-funded travel
o $241,059 for travel of DOJ employees detailed to the SCO
• The $280,922 reported this period includes $74,528 in expenses originating in the prior
period. The $74,528 is the difference between the prior period’s accrual estimates and
the actual costs reported this period."
When combined with this detail:
"Note 2 – Personnel Compensation and Benefits
• IC Appropriation: $672,182 was expended for salaries and benefits, including:
o $100,823 for SCO employees
o $571,359 for reimbursable DOJ employees detailed to the SCO"
it becomes clear that there are relatively few direct SCO employees. The bulk of the travel expenses and salary/benefits costs are for DOJ people detailed to the SCO.
And there is this:
"C. DOJ component expenses: Although not legally required, DOJ components that support
the SCO were asked to track expenditures attributable to this investigation. The
expenditures for this period totaled $471,056."
I'm not sure what this covers; I presume (perhaps MW can clarify) investigators from FBI (if that's who Durham is using, and there are rumors he isn't) assigned to the SCO come out of the SCO budget, so this expense has to be some other form of support from DOJ. What is it? It's a fairly big number.
And finally, we gave this:
" Note 4 – Contractual Services
• IC Appropriation: $797,359 was expended for contractual services:
o $386,702 for litigative support
o $410,657 for IT services.
• The $797,359 reported this period includes $139,624 of litigative support and $131,179
of IT services, totaling $270,803 in expenses originating in the prior period. The
$270,803 is the difference between the prior period’s accrual estimates and the actual
costs reported this period."
WTF?
This is CONTRACTUAL "litigative support" expense -- so it can't be DOJ charging SCO for DOJ staff support -- that's accounted for elsewhere. Is Durham paying outside legal experts for advice? Is it for pizza for the Grand Juries? Not clear to me what this covers, but it sure is expensive.
And then there is this mysterious IT expense. Subtracting out the expense difference from the previous reporting period, it' still nearly $300K in IT expenses. This is separate an apart from utility costs for data lines and phones, some of which are likely secure, for handling classified material, which falls under "Rent, utilities, and communications" -- which, all total, came to $136k.
So what are the near $300k for contractual "IT support" paying for? Does he have expensive IT people (one each) in CT, DC, and EDVA on near full time work schedules? What they hell are they doing? Is this what it costs to keep Hillary's minions (and other irksome people) from hacking into Durham's computer network? Or is Durham hiding deep technical forensic computer analytics and similar dark arts under the innocuous heading of "IT support." (Or perhaps it's hidden under "litigative support," again so the bad guys can't get insight into how deeply technical Durham is getting in his investigation?) Notice there is no line item for "Technical Analytical support" -- but how else can Durham probe into whether or not somebody faked, or caused the DNS records to be created, on which Joffe and his minions, and Sussmann then based the Alfa Bank DNS Hoax? And then there's the need for recovering data from attempted "bleaching" of hard drives and I-phones and such. He can't just job it out to the FBI, or Geek Squad -- if he did, everyone in Washington would know what he recovered. So I'm convinced he's doing these functions, but is burying the expense in such broad categories that potential targets can't learn anything from his expense reports.
Perhaps others on the 'net have addressed these mysteries, but so far I haven't seen any explanations.
And then there is the still mysterious travel expenditure: what could that be about when most people during the period would only meet online in a video conference?
One thought is that it involves activities that can't be done via Zoom -- collecting physical evidence (documents, for example) come to mind, where it has to be overseen by someone in-person.
Another would be to interview people who, for security reasons perhaps, should not be interviewed remotely over a data line. Face-to face interviews, perhaps conducted in foreign countries (more expensive,) to keep the info out of the electronic transmission realm?
Does Durham perhaps know something that we only suspect: that if Hillary's minions pulled off faking the Alfa Bank DNS hoax, they also can get the technical expertise needed to hack into almost any data line or network that isn't fully air-gapped and isolated from non-secure power and data systems (basically SCIF- rated, TEMPEST hardened systems)? Or does Durham have reason to suspect people in the IC could use the IC's tools to get a peek at what Durham is gathering, and pass it along to the co-conspirators and those in positions of power (but I repeat myself) who do not wish Durham to succeed, and thus hand-carried evidence and face-to-face interviews are the only safe way for Durham to do business? This would be a precaution similar to the German High Command transmitting orders for the execution of the Ardennes Offensive ("Battle of the Bulge") by COURIER only -- to avoid use of telephone/telegraph lines or radio comms, which they suspected were not secure, despite the use of what they believed to be unbreakable encryption (ENIGMA,) thus catching the Allies flat-footed.
I'll stipulate that's an awfully big chink of speculation I'm indulging in, but I'm at a loss to explain these curious expenditures.
As for "DOJ components", that would be almost certainly be FBI detailees. There are other possibilities, but they're not that likely.
I'm not an accountant or auditor. It seems to me that "litigative support" could be as simple as paralegal and similar staffing expenses for non-DoJ employees, but also expert consultants. That's just a guess.
The "IT expenses" could cover security experts as well as analysts. One would ordinarily expect the FBI to provide such services, but that does seem not to be the case here. I can only guess that this is pretty specialized work and that Durham wants to have total control over who knows what.
I think you're reading WAY too much into this. Durham works for DoJ. His expenses are submitted to DoJ, and I assume according to a standard format. They know what he's talking about and, if they don't, they'll ask for an explanation. They might also leak the details if they wanted to, although the circle of knowledge is probably highly restricted.
Re interviews, I doubt that Durham would be willing to use Zoom for any but quite routine interviews. That's just not how interviews are done--you want to see body language, etc.
In each category it does appear that Durham is maintaining very tight security.
What I mean is, the DoJ auditors will certainly understand the categories Durham's accounting is using, but they won't know the details of the investigation. They may understand enough to guess at directions of the investigation. OTOH, he does have to keep the AG informed in general. That's who he works for.
Further speculation: travel from April to Sept. 2021 covers the period shortly after the GJ reportedly looking into the Alfa Bank DNS Hoax started taking testimony and issuing subpoenae, and thus if could be travel related to that line of inquiry. perhaps investigators went to Alfa Bank in Russia, and obtained voluntarily provided forensic computer data, which maintains the chain of custody of the evidence.
It also covers the period of time in which we suspect Durham pierced the veil of att/client privilege at Perkins Coie -- could the travel expenses be related to things that were gleaned in emails and documents obtained by cracking open HCA's privilege with Sussmann/Elias? Perhaps HCA officials were talking to people overseas (hypothetically, the people who created the data subsequently "found" and used by Joffe and his minions)?
The mind boggles at the possibilities. And that's before considering Durham could be investigating aspects of this escapade we aren't even aware of yet. I do not think anyone knew about Dolan's role wrt Danchenko and the Clinton Dossier material until we saw the Danchenko indictment.
I'm hopeful of more such surprises before this is over.
I hope Durham produces much more. Durham has produced more than I expected. On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being top level indictments, his grade is still incomplete. I am surprised at how long it's taking.
I have this gut feeling somehow the uniparty, especially Bill Barr, has hamstrung Durham. Just as they have mostly hamstrung any investigation into the 2020 Voter Fraud. Along with any questioning on the January 6th "insurrection", and the treatment of the people stupid enough to get entrapped at the Capital and still in Jail almost a year later.
The small number of attorneys Durham employs is also a good hedge against 'unauthorized' leaks, even though the lame liberal media would prefer Durham just wrap up and disappear. Unlike Mueller, Durham has relied upon indictments to tell 'the story' rather than leaking to biased news organizations.
Worth noting that, according to news reports at the time, Durham TWICE added prosecutors to his team: first time was somewhere around Spring 2020, and a second time a year ago when they cranked up a GJ looking into the Alfa Bank DNS Hoax. From that GJ sprang the Sussmann indictment.
Heads-up:
Aaron Mate article in Real Clear Investigations, good overview of CH predication issues, and where Durham might be headed.
"Durham vs. Horowitz: Tension Over Truth and Consequences Grips the FBI's Trump-Russia Reckoning"
>> https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/01/20/the_tension_over_truth_and_consequences_gripping_the_fbis_trump-russia_reckoning_812321.html <<
Yeah, I'm writing about that currently.
I kinda figured ....
Since we haven't heard any news on the Russia Collusion Hoax front for a few weeks, I thought I'd share a tidbit, courtesy of Michael Caputo, who life was tuned upside down by Mueller's goons.
>> https://twitter.com/MichaelRCaputo/status/1482870028068438018 <<
>> https://twitter.com/MichaelRCaputo/status/1482872217025273861 <<
>> https://twitter.com/MichaelRCaputo/status/1482873872277979139 <<
>> https://twitter.com/RyanM58699717/status/1482874549196705798 <<
(two tweets per link except the last one)
My commentary follows:
This is a detail I nor many others had heard about previously. Caputo, who I believe worked in some capacity with the Trump campaign, says he was approached by a Russian peddling dirt on Hillary, asking for $2 million in compensation for "dirt."
Caputo says he told the guy to stuff it.
He told Mueller about it when they were all over Caputo, and he realized something was odd when they seemed to know more about the weird Russian character than Caputo did.
Further research indicated he was in prison in Russia a few decades ago, then suddenly appeared in the US, and was a long time FBI asset after arriving here.
<b>He also said he gave all the info on this guy to Durham.</b>
Now for the really intriguing part of the story:
Oh, look at what it says in the WaPO article:
Quote:
MIAMI — One day in late May 2016, Roger Stone — the political dark sorcerer and longtime confidant of Donald Trump — slipped into his Jaguar and headed out to meet a man with a “Make America Great Again” hat and a viscous Russian accent.
>> https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-associate-roger-stone-reveals-new-contact-with-russian-national-during-2016-campaign/2018/06/17/4a8123c8-6fd0-11e8-bd50-b80389a4e569_story.html <<
Either the FBI had a Russian "informant" take a run at the Trump campaign peddling fake Hillary Dirt, or Hillary's campaign inspired Greenberg to do it. There's no way Greenberg would know on his own in May 2016 that Trump would be accused of "collusion" with Russians to help him beat Hillary, so it has to the FBI running a CHS at the campaign without predication, Hillary running a scam on the Trump campaign using a former FBI asset, or perhaps some OTHER government or organization orchestrating the "dangle" by Greenberg.
Somebody is in deep shit. If the FBI did it, they were doing so without a valid predicated investigation underway.
And if Hillary did it, it means it was part of the "set-up" phase of the Russian Collusion Hoax, and since at that point only Hillary's people would have known that Trump Would Later be accused of collusion, it means they were the people orchestrating the entire "frame-up."
Also note that this "dangle" appears to precede, by a few weeks, the "Trump Tower dangle" to Don Jr., by the Russian lawyer, who in fact only wanted to talk about lifting sanctions related to the Magnitsky Act. And, the lawyer met with WHO before and or after the meeting?
<b>Glenn Simpson, from FGPS!</b>
What are the odds that Greenberg just randomly shows up to dangle Hillary dirt from Russia at about the same time overtures were made to the Trump Campaign for similar dirt from "Russia"? As far as we can tell, the only people aware that there would be allegations about such matters were the people coordinating it in and around the Clinton Campaign: Mook, Elias, Sussmann, Simpson, and possibly Steele, for starters. Maybe Dolan?
The alternative is a foreign intel org -- using Greenberg -- to serendipitously floating a "dangle" that COINCIDENTALLY matched the Hillary scheme to frame Trump's campaign for "collusion."
Or, it was "in" on the plan with Hillary's campaign from the get go.
I don't see an innocent explanation for this.
And Durham has the details.
Not actually news--unfortunately. Actually, I was on MC's radio show back during the Team Mueller witchhunt, so at that time I was up on all this. I agree that this smells very much like an FBI approach.
Here's some news that's been in the works for a while:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/media-blackout-muellers-star-witness-pleads-guilty-illegal-scheme-funnel-foreign-money-hillary-clintons-2016-campaign/
Can't help but wonder if this is one reason why Durham and Barr pushed back so hard against Horowitz conclusion that the CH investigation seemed to be properly predicated. They did say they had access to info that was outside Horowitz's authority. The Greenberg dangle, if it was an FBI op, means somebody is in deep trouble, or should be, because it predates opening CH by over 2 months.
It's always possible that there was another case opened on Caputo and his friends. Still, you come back to the issue of predication and the apparent targeting of the Trump campaign.
Yes, I heard about Nader's sentence.
The thing that jumps out about the Greenberg dangle -- regardless of who was behind it -- is that it happened in late May, before there was any general knowledge of allegations of Russian Collusion regarding Trump. That suggests "inside knowledge" of the efforts underway to dirty up Trump and his campaign with allegations of "collusion," or it is the worlds biggest "coincidence."
And we know what Auric Goldfinger, and George Smiley, said about supposedly random chance "Goldilocks" events.
I've always maintained that the FBI involvement began as early as April. Too many of those events.
With everyone busy before Christmas, did you happen to catch this article on CFP yesterday?
https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/marc-elias-democrats-will-try-to-remove-republican-house-members-via-14th-amendment/
Good luck with that. They'll be re-elected.
Interesting observation from SWC re: Durham's expenses
>> https://twitter.com/shipwreckedcrew/status/1474179320587653120 <<
A number of people thought the travel expenses seemed rather large; SWC points out it's especially so, given how much Zoom meetings replaced in person meetings due to Covid.
more from the actual expense report:
>> https://www.justice.gov/file/1458301/download <<
"Note 3 – Travel and Transportation of Persons
• IC Appropriation: $280,922 was expended for travel, including:
o $39,863 for SCO direct-funded travel
o $241,059 for travel of DOJ employees detailed to the SCO
• The $280,922 reported this period includes $74,528 in expenses originating in the prior
period. The $74,528 is the difference between the prior period’s accrual estimates and
the actual costs reported this period."
When combined with this detail:
"Note 2 – Personnel Compensation and Benefits
• IC Appropriation: $672,182 was expended for salaries and benefits, including:
o $100,823 for SCO employees
o $571,359 for reimbursable DOJ employees detailed to the SCO"
it becomes clear that there are relatively few direct SCO employees. The bulk of the travel expenses and salary/benefits costs are for DOJ people detailed to the SCO.
And there is this:
"C. DOJ component expenses: Although not legally required, DOJ components that support
the SCO were asked to track expenditures attributable to this investigation. The
expenditures for this period totaled $471,056."
I'm not sure what this covers; I presume (perhaps MW can clarify) investigators from FBI (if that's who Durham is using, and there are rumors he isn't) assigned to the SCO come out of the SCO budget, so this expense has to be some other form of support from DOJ. What is it? It's a fairly big number.
And finally, we gave this:
" Note 4 – Contractual Services
• IC Appropriation: $797,359 was expended for contractual services:
o $386,702 for litigative support
o $410,657 for IT services.
• The $797,359 reported this period includes $139,624 of litigative support and $131,179
of IT services, totaling $270,803 in expenses originating in the prior period. The
$270,803 is the difference between the prior period’s accrual estimates and the actual
costs reported this period."
WTF?
This is CONTRACTUAL "litigative support" expense -- so it can't be DOJ charging SCO for DOJ staff support -- that's accounted for elsewhere. Is Durham paying outside legal experts for advice? Is it for pizza for the Grand Juries? Not clear to me what this covers, but it sure is expensive.
And then there is this mysterious IT expense. Subtracting out the expense difference from the previous reporting period, it' still nearly $300K in IT expenses. This is separate an apart from utility costs for data lines and phones, some of which are likely secure, for handling classified material, which falls under "Rent, utilities, and communications" -- which, all total, came to $136k.
So what are the near $300k for contractual "IT support" paying for? Does he have expensive IT people (one each) in CT, DC, and EDVA on near full time work schedules? What they hell are they doing? Is this what it costs to keep Hillary's minions (and other irksome people) from hacking into Durham's computer network? Or is Durham hiding deep technical forensic computer analytics and similar dark arts under the innocuous heading of "IT support." (Or perhaps it's hidden under "litigative support," again so the bad guys can't get insight into how deeply technical Durham is getting in his investigation?) Notice there is no line item for "Technical Analytical support" -- but how else can Durham probe into whether or not somebody faked, or caused the DNS records to be created, on which Joffe and his minions, and Sussmann then based the Alfa Bank DNS Hoax? And then there's the need for recovering data from attempted "bleaching" of hard drives and I-phones and such. He can't just job it out to the FBI, or Geek Squad -- if he did, everyone in Washington would know what he recovered. So I'm convinced he's doing these functions, but is burying the expense in such broad categories that potential targets can't learn anything from his expense reports.
Perhaps others on the 'net have addressed these mysteries, but so far I haven't seen any explanations.
And then there is the still mysterious travel expenditure: what could that be about when most people during the period would only meet online in a video conference?
One thought is that it involves activities that can't be done via Zoom -- collecting physical evidence (documents, for example) come to mind, where it has to be overseen by someone in-person.
Another would be to interview people who, for security reasons perhaps, should not be interviewed remotely over a data line. Face-to face interviews, perhaps conducted in foreign countries (more expensive,) to keep the info out of the electronic transmission realm?
Does Durham perhaps know something that we only suspect: that if Hillary's minions pulled off faking the Alfa Bank DNS hoax, they also can get the technical expertise needed to hack into almost any data line or network that isn't fully air-gapped and isolated from non-secure power and data systems (basically SCIF- rated, TEMPEST hardened systems)? Or does Durham have reason to suspect people in the IC could use the IC's tools to get a peek at what Durham is gathering, and pass it along to the co-conspirators and those in positions of power (but I repeat myself) who do not wish Durham to succeed, and thus hand-carried evidence and face-to-face interviews are the only safe way for Durham to do business? This would be a precaution similar to the German High Command transmitting orders for the execution of the Ardennes Offensive ("Battle of the Bulge") by COURIER only -- to avoid use of telephone/telegraph lines or radio comms, which they suspected were not secure, despite the use of what they believed to be unbreakable encryption (ENIGMA,) thus catching the Allies flat-footed.
I'll stipulate that's an awfully big chink of speculation I'm indulging in, but I'm at a loss to explain these curious expenditures.
Looking forward to MW's thoughts on this;
As for "DOJ components", that would be almost certainly be FBI detailees. There are other possibilities, but they're not that likely.
I'm not an accountant or auditor. It seems to me that "litigative support" could be as simple as paralegal and similar staffing expenses for non-DoJ employees, but also expert consultants. That's just a guess.
The "IT expenses" could cover security experts as well as analysts. One would ordinarily expect the FBI to provide such services, but that does seem not to be the case here. I can only guess that this is pretty specialized work and that Durham wants to have total control over who knows what.
I think you're reading WAY too much into this. Durham works for DoJ. His expenses are submitted to DoJ, and I assume according to a standard format. They know what he's talking about and, if they don't, they'll ask for an explanation. They might also leak the details if they wanted to, although the circle of knowledge is probably highly restricted.
Re interviews, I doubt that Durham would be willing to use Zoom for any but quite routine interviews. That's just not how interviews are done--you want to see body language, etc.
In each category it does appear that Durham is maintaining very tight security.
What I mean is, the DoJ auditors will certainly understand the categories Durham's accounting is using, but they won't know the details of the investigation. They may understand enough to guess at directions of the investigation. OTOH, he does have to keep the AG informed in general. That's who he works for.
Understood, and agree.
$300k it support.
Hmm…
Probably some type of data warehouse for all the electronic evidence he collected.
We know for sure about his travels to Rome and London early on. I believe I heard about three trips to Rome. Australia as well?
True, but these expenses are for April to September 2021. That's what makes this travel expense intriguing.
Further speculation: travel from April to Sept. 2021 covers the period shortly after the GJ reportedly looking into the Alfa Bank DNS Hoax started taking testimony and issuing subpoenae, and thus if could be travel related to that line of inquiry. perhaps investigators went to Alfa Bank in Russia, and obtained voluntarily provided forensic computer data, which maintains the chain of custody of the evidence.
It also covers the period of time in which we suspect Durham pierced the veil of att/client privilege at Perkins Coie -- could the travel expenses be related to things that were gleaned in emails and documents obtained by cracking open HCA's privilege with Sussmann/Elias? Perhaps HCA officials were talking to people overseas (hypothetically, the people who created the data subsequently "found" and used by Joffe and his minions)?
The mind boggles at the possibilities. And that's before considering Durham could be investigating aspects of this escapade we aren't even aware of yet. I do not think anyone knew about Dolan's role wrt Danchenko and the Clinton Dossier material until we saw the Danchenko indictment.
I'm hopeful of more such surprises before this is over.
I hope Durham produces much more. Durham has produced more than I expected. On a scale of 1-10, with 10 being top level indictments, his grade is still incomplete. I am surprised at how long it's taking.
I have this gut feeling somehow the uniparty, especially Bill Barr, has hamstrung Durham. Just as they have mostly hamstrung any investigation into the 2020 Voter Fraud. Along with any questioning on the January 6th "insurrection", and the treatment of the people stupid enough to get entrapped at the Capital and still in Jail almost a year later.
The small number of attorneys Durham employs is also a good hedge against 'unauthorized' leaks, even though the lame liberal media would prefer Durham just wrap up and disappear. Unlike Mueller, Durham has relied upon indictments to tell 'the story' rather than leaking to biased news organizations.
Mueller's SCO didn't "leak" -- it dispensed RUMINT to a credulous news media with a fire hose.
Worth noting that, according to news reports at the time, Durham TWICE added prosecutors to his team: first time was somewhere around Spring 2020, and a second time a year ago when they cranked up a GJ looking into the Alfa Bank DNS Hoax. From that GJ sprang the Sussmann indictment.