Trump's Italian job

Could somebody investigate this before November?  Durham and Barr certainly buried it, and I'm pretty darn sure if they found something to exonerate Trump, they would have published it.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Reality is whatever you can make people believe

"Crime of the century."  I think we all know what that was, and it wasn't this.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Weaponization of the government

"1st Rule of Weaponization Hearings? NEVER POINT THE WEAPON AT YOURSELF." -- Keith Olbermann

Aaron Rupar has a nice thread on that particular self-owning hearing.

I'm going to pick out one bit...

So let's then look at Bill Barr a little more closely.

Through its new “weaponization of government” subcommittee, the GOP-controlled House is preparing to pursue the same conspiracy theories that preoccupied Barr and Trump [...] .

This makes it all the more essential that the Senate, and the DOJ itself, conduct a comprehensive inquiry into Barr’s actual weaponization of the justice system for political ends.

[...]

The roots of Barr’s agenda date back to his tenure in the George H.W. Bush administration, during which he first served as attorney general. Barr was an early proponent of what became known as the “unitary executive” doctrine, which questioned efforts to limit presidential power in the wake of Watergate.

[...]

He facilitated Bush’s pardons, immediately before leaving office, of six individuals who had been convicted or charged by the Iran-Contra Independent Counsel, including former Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger, thereby truncating a potential criminal probe into Bush’s own conduct.

[...]

Barr defended Trump’s firing of FBI Director James Comey after his announcement that the bureau was investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election. Barr also publicly advocated for a DOJ investigation into the Steve Bannon-sponsored conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton corruptly facilitated a Russian company’s purchase of US uranium assets, contending that there was “nothing inherently wrong” with Trump pressing for the investigation of a political opponent.

[...]

Barr also contended that Trump had an “illimitable” executive authority to “start or stop” law enforcement investigations.

[...]

Barr’s scheme to turn the DOJ into a Trump protection racket began almost as soon as he took office. In March 2019, Barr released a letter purporting to recount the findings of the then still secret Mueller report regarding Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, as well as Trump’s own efforts to interfere with the Mueller and FBI investigations.

[...]

In his letter, Barr purported to exonerate Trump of liability for obstruction of justice.

[...]

But as the public learned only weeks later — when a redacted version of the Mueller report was belatedly released — there was actually ample evidence that Trump had engaged in criminal conduct [...] in an effort to shut down an investigation of his own conduct.

[...]

Barr’s efforts were not limited to protecting Trump; he also repeatedly employed the DOJ to protect Trump’s cronies.

First, in February 2020, Barr set out to protect Roger Stone, Trump’s long-time associate, who had been convicted of witness tampering, lying to Congress, and other charges brought by Mueller’s team.

[...]

The DOJ thereafter, in normal course, filed a memo asking the court to sentence Stone to nine years in prison.

But soon after Trump issued a tweet complaining about the DOJ’s sentencing request, Barr intervened, causing the DOJ to withdraw it. His unprecedented move led four members of the prosecution team to withdraw, and one of them resign from the DOJ entirely.

[...]

Second, in May 2020, Barr’s DOJ sought the dismissal of criminal charges against former Trump National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. Flynn stood charged with making false statements to the FBI, having brazenly lied about taped conversations he held with the Russian ambassador to the US before Trump took office.

[...]

In the face of the overwhelming evidence, Flynn had pled guilty, and agreed to cooperate with the Mueller inquiry (an agreement he ultimately reneged upon). But a prosecutor installed by Barr filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, contending — based on a strikingly dubious legal theory — that Flynn’s baldfaced lies to the FBI did not merit prosecution after all.

[...]

Finally, and perhaps most audaciously, in June 2020, Barr removed one of the DOJ’s most prominent prosecutors, US Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jeffrey Berman, in a transparent effort to frustrate investigations of persons close, or potentially dangerous to, Trump — likely including Trump’s closest crony (and former US Attorney) Rudy Giuliani. Barr tried to handpick Berman’s successor. That effort failed, but it again demonstrated that Barr was willing to do whatever it took to keep Trump’s inner circle above the law.

One of Barr’s most outrageous efforts to protect Trump remains the least explored: The attorney general’s elaborate 2019 scheme to employ the DOJ as a tool to conceal from Congress and the public Trump’s effort to extort Ukrainian President Zelenskyy.

As part of that scheme, the DOJ instructed then-acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire to violate his duty to turn over to Congress a whistleblower’s complaint recounting Trump’s demand — during his “perfect” phone call with Zelenskyy — that Ukraine announce a bogus “investigation” of Joe Biden in return for urgently needed weapons to defend Ukraine against attacks by Russian proxy forces.

As later came to light, the DOJ’s once respected Office of Legal Counsel had prepared a transparently defective opinion declaring that the DNI had no obligation to share the whistleblower’s complaint with Congress, and asserting that the DOJ’s criminal division had exclusive jurisdiction over the matter. Criminal division prosecutors then conducted a cursory “review” and closed the file.

[...]

Barr enlisted [John] Durham, then the Connecticut US Attorney, to engage in a wide ranging “investigation” into the Justice Department’s probe of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, in what amounted to an even more audacious chapter in his scheme to discredit Robert Mueller’s findings.

[...]

Barr was motivated by a conspiracy theory positing that “deep state” actors within US Intelligence or law enforcement agencies were behind the FBI’s — and Mueller’s — investigations of Russia’s election interference, as well as its potential links to Trump’s campaign. Barr was personally, and deeply, involved in Durham’s effort to prove this thesis, which ultimately, and spectacularly, failed.

The most disturbing new revelation in the recent Times article is that 2019 reporting that Durham’s investigation had become a “criminal” probe was highly inaccurate. [...]

According to Barr, Durham, however, concluded that the allegations — the nature of which remain secret — were without merit.

[...]

Ultimately, in a striking echo of other Barr schemes, several prosecutors left Durham’s team after being disturbed by his politicized tactics.

[...]

Barr had succeeded in creating a public impression that Trump’s baroque claims of a deep state plot actually had merit. Indeed, these fictional claims continue to be pursued, including by the new House “weaponization of government” subcommittee.

[...]

Barr resigned on December 15, 2020, in a letter showering Trump with praise. But soon thereafter, Barr began letting it be known that he objected to Trump’s election fraud claims, and later began to publicly, and harshly, criticize his former boss, whom he has variously accused of “extortion” and “sabotage.”

Yet these accusations flew in the face of Barr’s own aggressive efforts to bolster Trump’s election conspiracism before, during, and immediately after the election.

[...]

By resigning in mid-December, Barr avoided being in office when, only a few weeks later, the conspiracism he had enabled culminated in the attack on the Capitol.

  David Lurie

And it is certain that Barr was aware of what was coming.  Being the slimey character he is, he meant to get clear of any implication in the coup.  And in fact, he testified against Trump to the January 6 Committee.  A weasel of a man.

Some Democratic House members have called for the DOJ’s inspector general to commence a probe, which is certainly in order. But any investigation of Barr’s misconduct will, by definition, also be an investigation of the DOJ; and no institution can be relied upon to conduct a neutral and comprehensive investigation of itself. Therefore, the Senate, which now has a Democratic majority, with the authority to issue subpoenas and compel the production of documents, should conduct its own inquiry.

[...]

The recent, and notably successful, House January 6 investigation demonstrates that Congress remains capable of such inquiries. Those who recognize the importance of an effective DOJ, free of politically influenced misconduct, must hope that Durbin and his colleagues undertake their investigation of Barr’s repugnant legacy diligently and without fear or favor.

[...]

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin has announced that his committee will be undertaking an investigation. The question is whether the Senate inquiry will have the proper scope — it should encompass the entirety of Barr’s wide-ranging misconduct — as well as whether it will be as searching as past, successful Senate inquiries, including the Senate Watergate investigation.

Don't hold your breath.

.....but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE 02/12/2023:

There is no justice where Trump is concerned

And it often looks like there never will be.

Egged on by Mr. Trump, Attorney General William P. Barr set out in 2019 to dig into their shared theory that the Russia investigation likely stemmed from a conspiracy by intelligence or law enforcement agencies. To lead the inquiry, Mr. Barr turned to a hard-nosed prosecutor named John H. Durham, and later granted him special counsel status to carry on after Mr. Trump left office.

But after almost four years — far longer than the Russia investigation itself — Mr. Durham’s work is coming to an end without uncovering anything like the deep state plot alleged by Mr. Trump and suspected by Mr. Barr.

  NYT

Surprised?

Mr. Barr assigned Mr. Durham to scour the origins of the Russia investigation for wrongdoing, telling Fox News that he wanted to know if “officials abused their power and put their thumb on the scale” in deciding to pursue the investigation.

[...]

Interviews by The Times with more than a dozen current and former officials have revealed an array of previously unreported episodes that show how the Durham inquiry became roiled by internal dissent and ethical disputes as it went unsuccessfully down one path after another.

[...]

Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham never disclosed that their inquiry expanded in the fall of 2019, based on a tip from Italian officials, to include a criminal investigation into suspicious financial dealings related to Mr. Trump.

Was that the basis for Trump's false claims that Italy was involved in nefarious activity against his 2020 campaign? An attempt to preempt whatever might come out from that investigation? No doubt it would have been retaliation, a typical kneejerk Trump reactionto any negative publicity.

The specifics of the tip and how they handled the investigation remain unclear, but Mr. Durham brought no charges over it.

[...]

Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham decided that the tip was too serious and credible to ignore. But rather than assign it to another prosecutor, Mr. Barr had Mr. Durham investigate the matter himself — giving him criminal prosecution powers for the first time — even though the possible wrongdoing by Mr. Trump did not fall squarely within Mr. Durham’s assignment to scrutinize the origins of the Russia inquiry.

[...]

The extraordinary fact that Mr. Durham opened a criminal investigation that included scrutinizing Mr. Trump has remained secret.

Well, until now, I guess.

Taciturn and media-averse, the goateed Mr. Durham had spent more than three decades as a prosecutor before Mr. Trump appointed him the U.S. attorney for Connecticut.

[...]

As a career federal prosecutor, Mr. Durham already revered the office of the attorney general, people who know him say. And as he was drawn into Mr. Barr’s personal orbit, Mr. Durham came to embrace that particular attorney general’s intense feelings about the Russia investigation.

[...]

Referring to the C.I.A. and British spies, Mr. Barr also said he suspected that the N.S.A.’s “friends” had helped instigate the Russia investigation by targeting the Trump campaign, aides briefed on the meeting said. And repeating a sexual vulgarity, he warned that if the N.S.A. wronged him by not doing all it could to help Mr. Durham, Mr. Barr would do the same to the agency.

[...]

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.

[...]

The publicly unexplained resignation in 2020 of his No. 2 and longtime aide, Nora R. Dannehy, was the culmination of a series of disputes between them over prosecutorial ethics. A year later, two more prosecutors strongly objected to plans to indict a lawyer with ties to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign based on evidence they warned was too flimsy, and one left the team in protest of Mr. Durham’s decision to proceed anyway. (A jury swiftly acquitted the lawyer.)

[...]

By summer 2020, it was clear that the hunt for evidence supporting Mr. Barr’s hunch about intelligence abuses had failed. But he waited until after the 2020 election to publicly concede that there had turned out to be no sign of “foreign government activity” and that the C.I.A. had “stayed in its lane” after all.

I'm guessing it wasn't a "hunch" anyway.  It was simply Barr's own attempt to "find" something to exonerate Trump and keep him in power.

Mr. Barr has never prosecuted a case and is known for using his law enforcement platform to opine on culture-war issues and politics. He had effectively auditioned to be Mr. Trump’s attorney general by asserting to a New York Times reporter that there was more basis to investigate Mrs. Clinton than Mr. Trump’s “so-called ‘collusion’” with Russia, and by writing a memo suggesting a way to shield Mr. Trump from scrutiny for obstruction of justice.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

As was Bill Barr.

Your tax dollars at work

Oh my

Durham loses his first case in his unreasonably long investigation

A jury in Washington, D.C., has acquitted lawyer Michael Sussmann on a single charge of lying to the FBI, dealing a blow to the three-year investigation by special counsel John Durham.

Jurors deliberated for six hours, spread over two days, before delivering the unanimous verdict.

[...]

The jury forewoman, who did not give her name, told reporters outside the courthouse that "I think we could have spent our time more wisely."

"It didn't pan out in the government's favor and that's on them," she also said.

[...]

The Trump administration appointed Durham to probe the origins of the FBI's investigation into possible links between former President Donald Trump and Russia. This case amounted to the first courtroom test for Durham, a prosecutor known for going after mobsters and corrupt public officials But his now three-year-long probe has not uncovered explosive evidence of wrongdoing by the FBI. Instead, in this case, the FBI was cast as a victim.

  NPR

Haha. That might be going a little far.

The two-week trial featured witnesses with prominent political ties including election lawyer Marc Elias, former Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook, and several former FBI and Justice Department officials who served in key roles in 2016.

[...]

Prosecutors produced a Staples receipt for thumb drives they said Sussmann had billed to the Clinton campaign, as well as calendar entries and other bills from Perkins Coie, the law firm where the defendant had worked until his indictment.

The defense focused in on taxi receipts, apparently to and from the FBI meeting, which Sussmann had not billed to clients with Democratic ties.

The case has been closely watched as the first courtroom test for the Durham probe, launched by former Attorney General Bill Barr amid hostile tweets from then President Trump about the investigation into Russia's election interference in 2016.

[...]

"Despite being falsely accused, I am relieved that justice ultimately prevailed in this case," [Sussman] said, adding that it had been a "difficult year" for him and his family.

His lawyers, Sean Berkowitz and Michael Bosworth from the law firm Latham & Watkins, LLP, went further in a statement, saying the verdict "sends an unmistakable message to anyone who cares to listen: politics is no substitute for evidence, and politics has no place in our system of justice."

[...]

The single criminal count stemmed from a meeting Sussmann brokered with then FBI general counsel James Baker in September 2016, only weeks before the election. Sussmann was accused of lying to Baker about whether he appeared on behalf of Democratic clients such as the Clinton campaign or a technology executive named Rodney Joffe.

[...]

In the months before the trial, prosecutors belatedly asked Baker to sift through his electronics for relevant evidence. Baker found a text from Sussmann, who typed that he was coming on his own – "not on behalf of any client or company."

And that's when the whole thing should have been dropped.

I would hope Sussman would at least be able to recover costs.

Durham secured a guilty plea from an FBI lawyer who ultimately avoided prison time. Another one of his cases is scheduled to go to trial in Virginia later this year against Igor Danchenko, a Russian citizen and former think tank employee who faces five charges for allegedly lying to the FBI.

Danchenko, who is fighting the charges, is accused of lying about the sources of the information he provided to former British intelligence operative Christopher Steele, for what became the Steele dossier.

UPDATE:

Durham is still at it

And as long as there's information against him like this coming out, his investigation will never end.

In case you need refreshing, he's investigating the investigators of the first impeachment of Donald J Trump.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

Investigating the investigators follow-up

The key source of information used to compile a salacious 2016 dossier on former President Donald Trump has been arrested and charged with [five counts of making false statements] to the FBI as part of special counsel John Durham's long-running inquiry into the Russia investigation.

Igor Danchenko, 43, an associate of former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele, was taken into custody in northern Virginia and is expected to make his first court appearance Thursday afternoon, a Durham spokesman said Thursday.

[...]

In September, Durham, who has been examining abuses during the Russia investigation, secured an indictment against a Washington attorney accused of lying to the FBI.

The charge against Michael Sussmann, a prominent cybersecurity attorney whose firm is closely tied with Democratic Party interests, is linked to a 2016 contact with the FBI when he raised concerns about a secret channel of communications between a Russian bank and the Trump Organization.

[...]

In one instance, according to federal prosecutors, Danchenko falsely claimed he obtained information from an anonymous caller who indicated that there were "communications ongoing between the Trump campaign and Russian officials and that the caller had indicated the Kremlin might be of help in getting Trump elected."

[...]

The dossier, first published by BuzzFeed just before Trump's 2017 inauguration, suggested in part that Russia had obtained compromising information as part of a Kremlin effort to co-opt Trump.

Its explosive contents became part of the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 campaign and were used to help support a surveillance request for former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.

  Yahoo News

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

What passes as a statement these days

Sneaky Pete

Barr hedging all his bets.

Attorney General William Barr has appointed the prosecutor investigating the origins of the 2016 Russia probe as a special counsel, a move that insulates U.S. Attorney John Durham from facing a swift removal in the incoming Biden administration.

Barr appointed Durham, the U.S. attorney in Connecticut who has been investigating the origins of the Russia investigation since May 2019, as special counsel on Oct. 19.

[...]

“Following consultation with Mr. Durham, I have determined that, in light of the extraordinary circumstances relating to these matters, the public interest warrants Mr. Durham continuing this investigation pursuant to the powers and independence afforded by the Special Counsel regulations,” the order states.

Barr notified the leaders of the House and Senate Judiciary committees of his decision in a letter sent Tuesday.

  The Hill

Is that what you'd call timely?

Barr said he waited to notify Congress of the move until more than a month later after “having previously determined that it was in the public interest to toll notification given the proximity to the presidential election.”

Congress isn't "the public" Bill.

Under this federal statute, only an attorney general can fire the special counsel, and they must provide a reason for the termination in writing that falls along the lines of misconduct, conflict of interest or dereliction of duty.

The misconduct in this case is Barr's.

Durham is currently conducting a criminal probe that has significantly narrowed, Barr says. Now Durham is focusing his probe on the conduct of FBI agents involved in Crossfire Hurricane, the name for the original FBI investigation into the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russians.

[...]

The Oct. 19 order authorizes Durham to investigate “whether any federal official, employee, or any other person or entity violated the law in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns, individuals associated with those campaigns, and individuals associated with the administration of President Donald J. Trump, including but not limited to Crossfire Hurricane and the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller, III.”

The order also authorizes him to prosecute any federal crimes that arise from the investigation.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.

UPDATE: Jesus Christ.