Senate Democrats Threaten ‘Hard Look’ At Durham Inquiry

Special counsel continued to exist for many years after its inception. John Durham‘s so-called “investigation of the investigators,” Senate Democrats are preparing to add another leg to the Trump-Russia debacle.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin (D-IL) signaled the onset of a new investigation in response to what his press team claimed was “alleged misconduct” outlined in a New York Times report published last week about Durham’s endeavor.

“These reports about abuses in Special Counsel Durham’s investigation — so outrageous that even his longtime colleagues quit in protest — are but one of many instances where former President Trump and his allies weaponized the Justice Department,” Durbin Monday’s statement.

“The Justice Department should work on behalf of the American people, not for the personal benefit of any president,” Durbin was also mentioned. “As we wait for the results of ongoing internal reviews, the Senate Judiciary Committee will do its part and take a hard look at these repeated episodes, and the regulations and policies that enabled them, to ensure such abuses of power cannot happen again.”

In May 2019, shortly after special counsel Robert Mueller released his report, Attorney General William Barr appointed Durham to investigate the origins and conduct of the FBI inquiry into alleged ties between former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and Russia.

Extending into the Biden administration, Durham’s investigation has been cheered by Trump and his allies as a means to unravel a suspected “Russiagate” Democrats and others criticize the plot against the former president as politically corrupted and meant to discredit Mueller, top FBI officials, and other members of the public.

Last week’s report by the New York Times gave fuel to Durham’s detractors as it divulged episodes that were said to show how the inquiry “became roiled by internal dissent and ethical disputes,” This includes the circumstances that led to the departures from multiple prosecutors. Durham claimed that he once extended his investigation to include an investigation into “suspicious financial dealings” Trump-related, but the report said the details were largely unclear and that Durham was not facing charges.

Some people were skeptical about the story. The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland Six reasons were outlined Why she believes that the New York Times is right “launched a preemptive assault” in anticipation of Durham’s special counsel report. Chuck Ross, investigative reporter at The Washington Free Beacon. Surmised the “flimsy” New York Times article will enable Democrats to give Attorney General Merrick Grland an opportunity “excuse to block Durham’s report, or frame it negatively for the media if it’s released.”

Durham has so far secured one guilty plea. That of Kevin Clinesmith, an ex-FBI lawyer, who was accused falsifying a document to renew FISA surveillance powers on Carter Page, Trump’s former foreign policy adviser. Clinesmith was not sentenced and will be facing a one-year bar suspension. This year, Durham endured setbacks when prosecutions against former Hillary Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann and Igor Danchenko, a key source for British ex-spy Christopher Steele’s anti-Trump dossier, ended in acquittal in Washington, D.C., and Northern Virginia, respectively.

Whenever Durham’s report is complete, Garland said He would “like as much as possible to be made public,” But he also said that there will be Privacy Act concerns as well as classification to consider.