Saturday, September 19, 2020

Durham Report: May Be Barr's October Surprise for Trump Outside of DOJ Policy

 

AG Barr firmly lip-locked on Trump’s gluteus maximus
(Droopy Disapproves of Look-ALike)

 The story below is from NPR:

Democrats Worry Attorney General Has an October Surprise in the Making

AG Barr has promised that the DOJ will not take any action to influence the upcoming election. But Democrats and department veterans aren't so sure about that. In opinion pieces and letters, they warn that Barr might be preparing to spring a so-call “October Surprise.” There's one big reason for that: recent testimony from the attorney general himself.

Democrats are monitoring the status of an investigation by CT Federal Prosecutor John Durham who is looking at intelligence gathering and other actions by the Obama administration in 2016 whom Barr tapped to look into the origins of the Russia investigation in May 2019.

Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell (D-FL) asked Barr whether he would commit to not releasing any report by Durham leading some lawyers familiar with the investigation to believe he may be close to the end and Barr said bluntly: “No.”

Another source told NPR that Durham has asked to interview Obama's former CIA director, John Brennan that confirms a report by NBC News. The source added that Brennan has been told he is not a target of prosecutors – Brennan said recently he will appear.

For his part, Barr said Obama and Joe Biden are not targets in the case – and that any criminal investigations are focused on others.

One of those targets may be former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who allegedly doctored an email used as part of a process to secure court approval to renew a FISA surveillance warrant on Trump’s former and onetime campaign adviser Carter Page.

Those FISA applications contained major errors identified by independent IG General Michael Horowitz, highlighted by many Republicans. A second area of interest may be the leak of sensitive information to a Washington Post in early 2017 about conversations between Michael Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Synopsis of those two talking is here reported on by Politico: 

Flynn told Kislyak in late 2016 to take “reciprocal actions in response to Obama administration sanctions for election interference, rather than escalating the situation into a tit for tat.”

Kislyak replied to Flynn’s request on the December 29, 2016 call saying:You might appreciate the sentiments that are raging in Moscow.”

Flynn responded:I know, I – believe me, I do appreciate it, I very much appreciate it. But I really don't want us to get into a situation where we're going, you know, where we do this and then you do something bigger, and then you know, everybody's got to go back and forth and everybody's got to be the tough guy here, you know?”

The next day, Trump, the president-elect praised Putin for declining to retaliate tweeting:Great move on delay (by V. Putin) – I always knew he was very smart!”

When Flynn and Kislyak followed up on December 31, 2016, Kislyak emphasized that Putin opted not to escalate the sanctions battle because of his talk with Flynn — despite “raging feelings in Moscow.”

Kisylak argued that the Obama administration sanctions were aimed at damaging the incoming Trump administration just as much as they were the Kremlin and he said: “I just wanted to tell you that we found that these actions have targeted not only against Russia, but also against the president elect.”

Those exchanges are at the heart of the controversy over the FBI’s investigation by Durham.

The full scope of Durham's probe is a closely held secret.

Barr has said he expects the prosecutor will put some findings in writing in the form of a report that may be made public. Barr told the House Judiciary Committee on July 28 that he's well aware of the longstanding DOJ that bars taking action that could produce uproar in an election year, saying: “Any report will be in my judgment not one that is covered by that policy.”

I note: How arrogantly pathetic is that statement in essence Barr is saying he won’t follow DOJ policy but will decide on his own (at Trump’s whim bet on it) how to report on Durham’s report.

If the report is not made public then only Barr’s word prevails?

That is both disgusting and may end up being illegal itself.

Also, to violate DOJ policy is a serious matter and rightly so.

Amid uncertainty about Durham's fact-finding, and what Justice Department leaders will do about it, looms a recent historical precedent. Four years ago, actions by then-FBI Director James Comey did seem to hurt presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

This time around, Democrats said they're suspicious of Barr. They said he misrepresented the findings of an earlier investigation, by special counsel Robert Mueller, to benefit President Trump.

One attorney involved with Durham said:Is there such a thing as a predictable surprise?”

I note: Directly related is this from Federal prosecutor Nora Dannehy, a top aide to Durham in his Russia investigation. She quietly resigned and at least partly out of concern that the investigative team was being pressed for political reasons to produce a report before its work is done, some of her colleagues also said.

That report here from the Hartford (CT) Courant.

Star Prosecutor Quits – Says Investigation Too Political

In the past year, Barr has told interviewers that the Durham probe has turned up surprising and damaging information.

But the Justice Department typically avoids making comment about ongoing investigations.

This week, Fred Wertheimer from the group “Democracy 21” appealed to Durham directly in an open letter on the site’s blog “Just Security,” writing:A public release of Durham's findings, or indictments, will become a campaign issue with political consequences. If your investigation is not complete, you should not complete it until after the election. If the report is complete, you should publicly oppose any release of your report before the election.”

He further said that if Durham gets overruled by Barr or others, then they should withdraw from the case to avoid actions that could interfere with the presidential election and taint his “long and distinguished career.”

My 2 cents: All this is a classic Barr stunt and fancy footwork to wheel and deal for Trump and not the public’s good as the DOJ is supposed to be.

I hope there is massive public and congressional outrage over this craziness by Barr – it must not stand. If anything a move to impeach Barr (if that’s the proper legal route) and ASAP.

Barr is truly a “clear and present danger” to our entire judicial system with the massive power that he wields along with Trump – the both are a serious threat to our entire democratic system of government operations.

Thanks for stopping by.


No comments: