Since late 2020 when he was named special counsel, John Durham has carefully avoided prosecuting the FBI handlers backing numerous anti-Trump informants.
While some of these informants have been investigated or indicted, Durham reportedly spared the people above them. This has raised concerns that he is letting certain key power players off the hook. (Related: Durham is the reason why none of the top deep state criminals have faced even a modicum of justice for their crimes.)
Recent court filings show that Durham tried to frame these informants as “naïve recipients of bad information,” to quote Real Clear Investigations. According to Durham, these individuals were somehow tricked into targeting Donald Trump, including obtaining invalid warrants to spy on his advisers.
It would seem as though Durham is simply putting on a deceptive show – this is the American way, after all – to make it seem like he is doing something useful. The reality, though, is that it is little more than a circus.
“Durham was supposed to clean up the FBI cesspool but it doesn’t look like he’s going to be doing that,” said Paul Kamenar, counsel to the National Legal and Policy Center, a Washington watchdog group.
“He started with a bang and is ending with a whimper.”
Real Clear Investigations‘ Paul Sperry says that despite his reputation as a “tough, intrepid prosecutor,” Durham has continually made excuses for the misconduct of the FBI agents he is supposed to be pursuing for prosecution.
Many of these FBI agents have been given “a ready-made defense against any possible future prosecution,” according to legal experts. That means the whole Durham investigation is a farce, which many have long suspected.
One recent example of this is the Durham case against former FBI informant Igor Danchenko, who is said to be the primary source for false claims regarding Trump and Russia. Danchenko also advanced the opposition research, known as the Steele dossier, that was paid for by two-time failed presidential loser Hillary Clinton.
Danchenko faced charges for lying to FBI investigators multiple times concerning the source information in the dossier, which the bureau used to secure a wiretap warrant against a former Trump campaign adviser.
“Relying on Danchenko’s reporting, the FBI claimed that the adviser, Carter Page, was a Russian agent at the center of ‘a well-developed conspiracy of cooperation’ between Trump and the Kremlin to steal the 2016 presidential election,” Sperry writes.
“‘The defendant was providing them with false information’ as part of ‘a concerted effort to deceive the FBI,’ Durham alleged in a recent filing with the U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Va., where the trial is scheduled to be held Oct. 11.”
Durham asserted that had agents known Danchenko fabricated the allegations, they might have asked more questions about the dossier instead of relying on it to justify the imposition of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).
It was Danchenko’s “conspiracy” coupled with the FBI vouching for it that ultimately convinced the powerful FISA to authorize the illicit wiretapping against the suspected Russian agent.
“If the FBI were skeptical of Danchenko, it didn’t show it,” Sperry notes.
“The next month, the bureau put him on its payroll as a confidential human source, or CHS, making him part of the bureau’s untouchable ‘sources and methods’ sanctum and thereby protecting him and any documents referencing him from congressional and other outside scrutiny.”
Be sure to read Sperry’s full report on the subject.
More related news about the United States system of “justice” can be found at Corruption.news.
Sources for this article include:Submit a correction >>