ANALYSIS
‘Circle of Garbage’: Experts Slam Durham ‘Wild Goose Chase’ as Investigation Into DOJ Trump-Russia Probe Ends With ‘Bupkis’
The four-year Trump-era probe examining why the FBI launched an investigation into Donald Trump, his 2016 campaign, and Russia’s efforts to attack the presidential election to help the GOP nominee win concluded Monday with the publication of a 306-page report that “appeared to show little substantial new information,” as The New York Times reports.
Former U.S. Attorney John Durham, once considered a well-regarded prosecutor, was assigned to lead the investigation by then-Attorney General Bill Barr four years ago, almost to the day. In October of 2020, Barr secretly altered Durham’s assignment, appointing him as a Special Counsel just weeks before the presidential election, ensuring the investigation would continue regardless of which party won the White House.
Legal and public policy experts, journalists, and political commentators are mocking Durham and his investigation, with several pointing out that Durham’s conclusions do not match the legal record, including sworn testimony.
“Special counsel John Durham concluded that the FBI should never have launched a full investigation into connections between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia during the 2016 election, according to a report compiled over three years by the Trump-administration appointee and released on Monday,” CNN reported, pointing to only the time Durham served as a Special Counsel.
But experts say – and prove – the report obscures the actual facts.
MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace, while reporting the breaking news of the release of Durham’s final report, interrupted herself to do some “fact-checking in real time.”
“Today’s report, NBC News notes, ‘accuses the FBI of acting negligently by opening the investigation based on big and insufficient information in a sweeping 300-page report made public Monday. This is likely to loom larger in politics than in law. I’m going to pause right here,” Wallace told viewers. “I’m going to keep reading you NBC’s reporting but I’m going to try to do some real-time fact-checking. Now that finding by Mr. Durham is contradicted by DOJ’s own IG, Mr. Horowitz, in 2019, who found that the investigation was opened was predicated, it was necessary, and that there was no bias.”
“Now, NBC News goes on to report that Durham finds that the FBI made a series of mistakes, including what I just talked about, the decision to open the Trump-Russia probe not being justified. Now the end of Donald Trump and Bill Barr’s term, their quest to investigate the Justice Department is where we begin today with these clashing narratives right the Durham report which contradicts another inspector general report already in the public sphere and on the record.”
Nicolle Wallace fact-checks the Durham report in real-time, “Now that finding by Mr. Durham is contradicted by DOJ’s own I.G. Mr. Horowitz in 2019 who found that investigation was opened, was predicated, it was necessary and then there was no bias.” pic.twitter.com/KDjDNrudWp
— Sarah Reese Jones (@PoliticusSarah) May 15, 2023
In fact, attorney and former FBI special agent Asha Rangappa observed, “I’ll be interested to see how Durham argues that there was no predication in the Russia probe when the DOJ’s OIG [Office of the Inspector General] found the opposite AND a Republican-led Senate Intel Committee found that Trump’s campaign manager was, in fact, in frequent contact with a Russian intel officer,” she wrote. “As many have noted, even before Durham’s report was released Monday, that FBI investigation Durham claimed had no basis of being opened, resulted in dozens of criminal prosecutions.
READ MORE: GOP Congressman’s Aide Tied to Neo-Nazi: Report
Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti also takes Durham to task. He writes, former Special Counsel Robert Mueller “rightfully resisted using the term ‘collusion,’ which has no legal meaning in this context, instead focusing on conspiracy law. Durham’s report comes out and says there is “no actual evidence of collusion,” a media soundbite, not a legal conclusion. What a contrast,” he notes.
“The Trump-Russia investigation produced 37 indictments and several other outside criminal referrals. People were convicted at trial. People pleaded guilty. Hostile foreign government actors faced legal and diplomatic sanctions,” notes Media Matter’s Craig Harrington. “All of this was real!”
Indeed, in December of 2019, Vox reported, “Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team indicted or got guilty pleas from 34 people and three companies during their lengthy investigation.”
“That group is composed of six former Trump advisers, 26 Russian nationals, three Russian companies, one California man, and one London-based lawyer. Seven of these people (including five of the six former Trump advisers) have pleaded guilty.”
That’s quite an accomplishment for an investigation John Durham claims should never have even been opened.
There’s more.
Saying, “Point me to the confirmation bias here?” former FBI Counterintelligence Deputy Assistant Director Pete Strzok, who led the Bureau’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections, points out:
Paul Manafort – guilty
Rick Gates – guilty
Mike Flynn – guilty
George Papadopouolos – guilty
Roger Stone – guilty
Michael Cohen – guilty
Konstantin Kilimnik – wanted, $250k reward
Michael Sussman – not guilty
Igor Danchenko – not guilty
(above are direct quotes from Strzok)
Sussman and Danchenko were Durham’s, and they were found not guilty. The rest were the FBI’s.
Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign investigative correspondent Greg Miller of The Washington Post: “Durham’s report faults FBI for rushing to investigate candidate who urged Russia to hack opponent, was backed by Russian interference op, welcomed Russian offer of ‘dirt’, secretly pursued Moscow real estate deal, shared classified into w/Russian diplos…”
Others also slammed Durham.
“Durham’s mandate was to ‘investigate whether any… person or entity violated the law in connection with the intelligence, counter-intelligence, or law-enforcement activities directed at the 2016 presidential campaigns.’ Failing, he wrote a 300-page take,” says Media Matters’ Matthew Gertz, adding: “Basically he took Hannity monologues and converted them into two failed prosecutions, a guilty plea for someone who got probation, and a lengthy report that provides fodder for more Hannity segments. Circle of garbage.”
Investigative journalist Marcy Wheeler, who specializes in national security and civil rights, says, “Durham took well over twice as long as Mueller and found, literally, bupkis.”
The Atlantic’s Tom Nichols, a retired U.S. Naval War College professor and Russia expert, called Durham’s four-year probe a “wild goose chase.”
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
President Donald Trump’s historic unpopularity is taking a toll on Republican candidates, with once-solidly-red states showing deepening blue cracks as his Iran war, gas and food prices, inflation, and overall economic uncertainty take hold of voters.
The signs have been there: the massive “No Kings” protests, the breaks by once-devout MAGA allies, Fox News acknowledging that Trump is “underwater” with voters, the mass exodus of Republicans from Congress, historically low consumer sentiment, and, of course, the polls.
Trump’s approval rating has been characterized as lower than any modern-day president’s at this point in their term.
According to The Economist, Trump’s approval rating is at 37 percent, and his disapproval rating is at 56 percent. That’s a net negative of 19 points.
It’s worse in the red state of Georgia, where Trump is 23 points underwater.
According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution’s Greg Bluestein, 56 percent of voters in the Peach State disapprove of Trump’s handling of rising gas prices. 57 percent say the money spent on his Iran war is contributing to higher prices and uncertainty. And 53 percent disapprove of his handling of the Iran war.
READ MORE: ‘He Reported to Me in Detail’: Netanyahu’s Boast on Vance Fuels Blowback
The Cook Political Report’s Jessica Taylor reports that they have just moved the Georgia Senate race from Toss Up to Lean Democratic.
“Some of this is outside of GOP candidates’ control,” Taylor writes, “and Trump is hurting them so much right now on Iran/gas prices when voters uniformly say their top worry is the economy.”
She also reports that Cook Political has moved three other Senate races toward the Democrats: North Carolina (Toss Up to Lean Democratic), Ohio (Lean Republican to Toss Up), and Nebraska (Solid Republican to Lean Republican).
“Right now, we see the likeliest outcome is a 1 to 3 seat Democratic pickup – just short of 4 they need” to take control of the Senate majority, Taylor writes.
Democrats have high hopes in other states as well, including Alaska, where Trump is 12 points underwater; Maine, where he is 25 points underwater; and Texas, where he is 19 points underwater.
And Iowa, where Trump is underwater by 14 points, according to The Economist.
“Iowa looks to be seriously in play for Democrats in November up and down the ballot, according to a new survey from a Democratic group that backs moderate candidates,” Politico reports.
Democrat Rob Sand is leading Republican Randy Feenstra in the Iowa governor’s race — by eight points, while Republicans hold “slim leads” in the Senate race.
The Republicans’ Senate Leadership Fund is expected to pour millions into Iowa, “making it one of five GOP-held states where they’ve made a major investment as they fight to keep the majority.”
Former Obama official Tommy Vietor notes that “Iowa really does look competitive this year. It’s a combination of Trump fatigue, economy/inflation, and tariffs crushing farmers. Dem pickup opportunities include: Governor, US Senate, three House races (dream big and its all four), and its WAY cheaper than other states.”
READ MORE: White House Fires Back After President’s Doctor Is Asked to Test Trump’s Mental Fitness
Image via Reuters
Fox News has published a striking assessment of President Donald Trump’s political standing ahead of the midterms.
In a Friday article about the president’s firing of Attorney General Pam Bondi, the conservative outlet reported that other Cabinet officials could also be on the “chopping block” — and offered a blunt assessment: Trump is “saddled with underwater approval ratings and an unpopular war ahead of this year’s crucial midterm elections, when Republicans are working to hold onto their slim House and Senate majorities.”
Last month, Fox News acknowledged that the Republican Party is “underwater” with voters, while reporting that Democrats had sunk to a “new low.” Fox News rarely applies the term “underwater” to Republicans, a search of the outlet’s website revealed.
On Wednesday, Fox News reported that “polls indicate” the war in Iran is “unpopular with many Americans, and a surge in gas prices as a direct result of the fighting have triggered a further slide in Trump’s standing in public opinion surveys.”
READ MORE: ‘Darker Clouds’: Experts Warn the Unemployment Drop Is a Warning Sign
That report noted at the top that “Trump stands at 41% approval and 59% disapproval in the most recent Fox News national poll.”
“The political implications are clear,” the report added. “The strikes on Iran and the erosion of the president’s approval ratings are warning signs for the GOP as Republicans ramp up to defend their slim House and Senate majorities in this autumn’s midterm elections.”
It also added that “Trump’s base remains extremely supportive of the president and the war,” and that “much of the slippage” is coming from “non-MAGA Republicans.”
Friday’s blunt Fox News language comes one day after Mediaite’s Colby Hall wrote an opinion piece about the Fox News channel, titled: “Fox News Viewers Have No Clue Trump’s Approval Rating Has Cratered.”
“President Donald Trump is currently enduring the most significant and sustained approval rating decline of his presidency, and the most-watched news network in America is virtually ignoring it,” Hall wrote.
READ MORE: ‘Come Personally to His Aid’: Group Warns Trump Could Install Two Loyalists on SCOTUS
Image via Reuters
House Republicans have inserted anti-LGBTQ language into a $66 billion must-pass funding bill for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, effectively granting civil immunity under federal law to individuals and organizations that discriminate against same-sex couples—by citing a religious or moral belief that marriage should be limited to one man and one woman. It also bans the federal government from taking a range of actions against those who hold and act on anti-same-sex marriage beliefs.
Section 544 bans the use of federal funds to take any “discriminatory action” against someone who cites their “sincerely held religious belief” or “moral conviction” that marriage is only “a union of one man and one woman.”
A portion of the provision exactly matches language U.S. Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) urged the House Appropriations Committee to include in 2023 legislation. Rep. Roy cited praise from anti-LGBTQ hate group leader Tony Perkins and other anti-LGBTQ activists in his press release urging inclusion of the amendment in a 2023 bill. It is not known who drafted or approved the current 2025 provision.
READ MORE: ‘Absolutely Incredible’: Dr. Oz Slammed for Telling Medicaid Users to ‘Prove You Matter’
Journalist Jamie Dupree, who writes Regular Order at Substack, first reported on the provision in the DHS funding bill.
The language could prohibit the government from withholding federal funds from a federally-funded religious school that fired a teacher who supports same-sex marriage. It could block the IRS from revoking the tax-exempt status of organizations that promote the belief that marriage is only between one man and one woman. It could ban the federal government from taking action against a hospital that receives federal funds if it refused certain services in some cases.
While the language is not found in The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, some of the core principles in Section 544 echo its recommendations.
Project 2025 calls on the federal government to “Protect faith-based grant recipients from religious liberty violations and maintain a biblically based, social science–reinforced definition of marriage and family,” and “Provide robust protections for religious employers,” while it denounces “the bullying LGBTQ+ agenda.”
READ MORE: ‘He. Is. Lying.’: GOP Senator Ripped for Spinning Medicaid Cuts as ‘Transitioning’
Image via Shutterstock
Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation
Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs
One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won
Inside the Group Helping MAGA Voters Walk Away — And What Finally Pushed Them
