No Predication For Russia Hoax--Where Should That Have Led Durham?

Bull Durham testified before Congress today regarding his report on the Russia Hoax. I haven’t bothered to follow the news reports of his testimony closely, but from the little I’ve seen it appears that it was largely DC theater as expected. The idea seems to be to blame the FBI, as if no other government actors or influential Power Elite members played significant roles in the hoax.

Well, the FBI does make a very attractive target, and deservedly so. As an institution it has no one to blame but itself, although the lion’s share of the blame can be focused on the managerial ranks of the FBI. These, after all, were the people who had the responsibility to evaluate whether or not there was an articulable basis (predication) for launching an investigation that was, in effect, an investigation of Trump and his campaign. Not only did they have the responsibility, they also had the training and experience to exercise that responsibility. If you scan the list of major Russia Hoax players at the FBI you’ll quickly realized that their ranks were top heavy with lawyers. Moreover, these were not lawyers simply pulled in off the street or fresh out of law school. Many of these lawyers had years and years of experience either as investigators (McCabe) or as prosecutors or high officials at the DoJ (Comey, Lisa Page, James Baker, and more). They had years of experience in assessing evidence in precisely this type of situation. And they all made the same “mistake”?

Durham today testified to what I, and others, have been saying since at least 2018—there was no there, there—to quote everyone’s favorite villain in the hoax, Peter Strzok. There never was any articulable predication for the Russia Hoax investigations and therefore, not for some of the most egregious investigative steps that were taken—like, the Carter Page FISA. What to me gives Durham’s non-report and his testimony today as DC theater is that, as far as I can tell, Durham went unchallenged when he essentially attributed this grotesque scam on the American people to bad judgment. I quote in what follows from a Fox News story:

Durham testifies that the FBI ignored Hillary Clinton plan to link Trump to Russia

Durham says the plan to tie Trump to Russia links back to Clinton

First, here are the Durham statements that suggest bad judgment

The FBI failed to "sufficiently scrutinize information it received."

"The FBI was too willing to accept and use politically funded and uncorroborated opposition research.”

The FBI should have acted “with far greater care and caution when receiving, analyzing, and relying upon materials of partisan origins.”

This assessment appears to have gone unchallenged, even though Durham did include statements that—to any critical observer—really allow for no other explanation except that the FBI was using government resources to target people they had no reason to suspect of criminal activity or as agents of a foreign power, and they were doing this for political purposes. But there’s any amount of evidence that strongly suggests that all this went far beyond bad judgment. Consider …

The key FBI players in the Russia Hoax openly expressed—in text messages—contempt and hatred for Trump and his supporters, even suggesting that Trump supporters could be identified by their smell. How would you like to have powerful officials of the federal government deciding whether to open a criminal investigation on you if those officials felt free to express such views about you and you associates—in writing?

Again, how who you feel if some of those officials (Comey) had made millions of dollars from business related to the person most desirous of putting you in jail (Hillary) or who had received huge funding for your wife’s political campaign (McCabe) from a powerful political figure who was inveterately hostile to you?

I would argue that these facts—and of course that only scratches the surface of the available evidence—constitute strong circumstantial evidence that the FBI opened its Russia Hoax out of strong political animus against Trump. Not just as a result of bad judgment.

Now, add to that several other key items—well known for years and repeated by Durham today. This includes what the title of the Fox News article is referring to, the FBI “ignoring” persuasive evidence that cast doubt on whether or not any investigation should have been opened:

The Director of the FBI was briefed by the CIA that there was “a Clinton campaign plan underway to stir up a scandal tying Trump to Russia."

The top officials at the FBI “kept that information from” the supervisory FBI official must directly involved in the fake investigation—thus depriving him of key information that might have led him to question the threadbare predication even more strongly.

The FBI knowingly used “politically funded and uncorroborated opposition research, … knowing there was likely material originating from a political campaign or political opponent."

In what world can such behavior be written off—unchallenged by Congress and its huge staff—as simply bad judgment?

But it’s important to remember that the bad behavior goes beyond just the FBI. Throughout this entire sordid episode of investigative and legal corruption, experienced attorneys at the DoJ were intimately involved with vetting the investigation as well as vetting sensitive investigative techniques. They would have been privy to much the same information. In fact, Bruce Ohr—the highest ranking DoJ official who wasn’t a political appointee—was acting as an FBI informant in the Russia Hoax, and his wife worked for the opposition research firm (Fusion GPS) that fabricated much of the hoax.

There’s more. Longtime readers will be familiar with my regular refrain, that in the Durham investigation “all roads lead to Mueller”. The reason I have always maintained that is simply this: The Mueller Witchhunt was legally—and quite explicitly—nothing but a continuation of Crossfire Hurricane, the Russia Hoax investigative umbrella. That means that the same legal infirmity—no evidence of wrongdoing—that applied to Crossfire Hurricane also applied to Team Mueller when they took up the Witchhunt. Interestingly, IG Michael Horowitz strongly criticized several DoJ attorneys for inserting themselves into Crossfire Hurricane, despite the fact that that investigation was totally outside their responsibilities at DoJ. At least two of those attorneys—Andrew Weissmann and Zainab Ahmad—went on to become key members of Mueller’s Witchhunt team. Go figure, right?

And it gets worse. Ask yourself, what was the most consequential matter that Rod Rosenstein ever got involved in during his entire legal career? No need to guess—I’ll tell you: Authorizing Mueller as Special Counsel. With so much on the line, the only thing Rosenstein had to do was demand from the FBI all their files for review to determine whether there was predication for the investigation. Wouldn’t you like to read a transcript of Rod being grilled about exactly what was the basis for his determination? Because Durham—without mentioning Rod or “Bob” Mueller—in effect testified today that there was no basis. At all. If there wasn’t predication for Crossfire Hurricane, then there wasn’t for its continuation as the Mueller Witchhunt. Oh, good thing for all concerned that someone told Durham not to look into that, even though Rod stated—in writing—that the Mueller Witchhunt was a continuation of exactly the matter that Durham was supposed to be investigating. Funny how these things work. That’s right—Bluto Barr’s fingerprints are all over this, and that’s a clue of sorts.

I think we all know that for the FBI and DoJ, under both Dem and GOP administrations, to act in this way there was a lot more behind this than what Durham spoke about today. And, of course, the continued pursuit of Trump, from impeachments to J6, to Mar-a-Lago and onwards, is a continuation, too. None of that would have gained any traction in the public mind but for the Russia Hoax. You know I’m right about that.

Now, my main point is this. If I’m right that the Russia Hoax was simply the FBI opening a full investigation without a legal basis for doing so, and that this—as argued above—was done with full knowledge and with the intent of throwing a presidential election toward a particular candidate, are there no criminal statutes to cover the case? The FBI, just like any other government agency, is only allowed to use its authority and resources for designated government purposes. We’re talking here about misappropriation of vast government resources for non-governmental purposes. And since a faked investigation could lead to calls for prosecution, to legal expenses for the targeted individuals (as did happen), we’re also talking about violations of civil rights under color of law. And conspiracy to do both things. There may well be additional fraud related statutes. I’m not gonna get into that. Prosecutors can come up with the applicable violations. I was never a prosecutor, but you can trust me on this one—there were criminal violations that the lack of predication plays right into. You can see why this is all a charade now. The perps are all walking, but not perp walking. Biggest criminal conspiracy in US history, and our elected reps are pulling the wool over our eyes.