Durham: Success or Failure?
Yesterday, June 20, 2023, there has been a hearing of Special Prosecutor John Durham at the House Intelligence Committee. The hearing has been held behind closed doors, so we know nothing of what happened during that hearing, and what has been revealed.
Today, June 21, there will be another hearing of John Durham at the House Judiciary Committee.
This hearing will be public, and will be televised live, so we will be able to watch it. The Durham hearing begins at 9:00 am, Eastern Time:
The John Durham Investigation has been going on for 5 years.
Officially, it started in 2019, but we know, from documentation I have, that John Durham began his investigation in March 2018, or even earlier.
One year before William Barr was appointed Attorney General. In fact, Barr took office in February 2019.
Therefore it was not William Barr who appointed John Durham.
Who appointed Durham?
As we know, the John Durham Team has produced a 316 pages long Report, named “The Durham Report”.
You can find the entire Report at this link:
https://www.justice.gov/storage/durhamreport.pdf
The big question is:
“Has the Durham Investigation been a success, or a total failure?”
Let us remark that the job of a Prosecutor, and especially of a Special Prosecutor, is to produce Indictments and obtain convictions, not to write Reports.
In his 5 years long investigation, John Durham has produced:
3 Indictments
Zero Convictions
A 316 pages long Report
Specifically:
The Indictment of Michael Sussmann, top lawyer at Perkins Coie, for “Lying to the FBI”
“Lying to the FBI” is a minor charge, with a maximum of 5 years in Jail.
Has Durham been able to obtain the conviction of Michael Sussmann?
No.
The Indictment of Igor Danchenko, with 5 counts of “Lying to the FBI”
Has Durham been able to obtain the conviction of Danchenko?
No.
A guilty plea for Kevin Clinesmith, a high level lawyer of the FBI.
Clinesmith was punished with a “slap on the wrist”, for falsifying Government documents: specifically for falsifying FBI documents.
We can sum up the results of John Durham with a Zero.
Now let’s compare the results of the 5 years long Durham Investigation with the results obtained by Special Prosecutor John Smith.
Special Prosecutor John Smith has been working for 9 months, and in 9 months he has produced zero Reports and 2 indictments, the most remarkable of which is:
The Indictment of President Trump with 34 counts, including several violations of the “Espionage Act”, and “Obstruction of Justice”.
For a maximum total jail time of 400 years.
Let’s compare:
John Durham:
5 years investigation,
1 guilty plea with a slap on the wrist,
2 indictments for minor charges
Zero Convictions
John Smith:
9 months investigation
Indictment of a US President with 34 charges,
summing up a potential 400 years in Jail.
Let’s recall our question:
“Has the Durham Investigation been a success, or a total failure?”
The answer is clear:
John Durham has been a total failure.
Durham is the most inept and the most incompetent Prosecutor in the entire history of the USA.
The fact that John Durham has produced a report which is “scathing for the FBI and the DOJ” is absolutely moot and useless.
The job of a Prosecutor is To Indict, and to Obtain Convictions,
not to write reports.
.
Seditious Conspiracy
to Overthrow
the President of the USA
In May 2020, President Trump gave an interview with Maria Bartiromo.
In that interview, President Trump said:
“They tried to overthrow a duly elected President of the United States”
Which is exactly what they did.
In the same interview, President Trump said (paraphrasing):
“It is the greatest political crime in the history of our country. These people should go to jail with 50 years sentences. A lot of people should go to jail for this.”
All those people should have been charged by John Durham with many counts of “Seditious Conspiracy to Overthrow the Goverment”.
Each count means 20 years in jail.
It should have been the Trial of the Century.
Who are “these people” who tried to Overthrow a duly elected President of the United States?
The 2nd Part of this article - the most important part - is exclusively for paid subscribers.