US Attorney John Durham rejects key conclusions from Horowitz report

“Based on the evidence collected to date, and while our investigation is ongoing, last month we advised the Inspector General that we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions as to predication and how the FBI case was opened,” Durham said in his statement, adding that his “investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department” and “has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S.”

The Horowitz report and statements from a former Trump aide hint at possible entrapment and abuse of FISA warrants by surveillance agencies under the Obama Administration:

Horowitz noted that the FBI omitted exculpatory statements by former Trump aide George Papadopoulos in its surveillance warrant application to surveil another ex-Trump aide, Carter Page… . . Papadopoulos previously told Fox News he was convinced the CIA was behind an “operation” in which he met with two individuals in London in late 2016 who tried to probe whether the Trump campaign had ties to Russia. He later said he would head to Greece to obtain money in a safe from the FBI or CIA that he said was intended to entrap him.

Claims from Papadopoulos that the Obama CIA attempted to entrap the Trump campaign and used misleading information to get FISA warrants raise serious questions about the possible abuse of the power of the government surveillance agencies for political purposes.

My opinion is that Durham must have solid additional information beyond that in the IG report or else he would have remained silent. Do you agree?

1 Like

My opinion, which could be wrong, is that he merely disagrees with the ultimate decisions reached by Horowitz on the severity of the omissions.

And that’s it.


Of course. The next investigation will prove all the conspiracy theories correct.

Don’t worry if that one falls flat to - the one after that will reveal the “truth”. Any day now, it’ll all come true.


the report doesn’t validate his opinion, so it must be wrong.


I mean I’ll give the guy his time at the plate but he better not strike out and just bitch at the ump.

Well there’s no evidence to suggest he’s a political hack so I’m betting he has the evidence to support his statements.

We’ll see when the report is released.

1 Like

we need to investigate the investigation of the investigation.


Get right on it then. Let us know when your report is published.

Durham’s investigation is based on a broader review of available information than that used in the IG report. That is why he said:

“investigation is not limited to developing information from within component parts of the Justice Department” and "has included developing information from other persons and entities, both in the U.S. and outside of the U.S."

The additional information may provide insights into the purpose and methods used to for launch the investigation. If there is solid evidence that starting point for the investigation was an attempt to harass and intimidate the Trump campaign for political purposes, then the implications are huge.

1 Like

This has to be some kind of world record for falling for the same ■■■■ again.


You got Obama now.


Yep. We heard nothing but Russia collusion for most of three years until it was obvious that there was nothing there. Now its quid pro quo, no uh . . . bribery, uh . . . abuse of power . . .
What did the focus group say is the best phrase de jour?

The real story has always been the abuse of surveillance power for political purposes.


You have a weird definition of “nothing there.”

1 Like

This is why conspiracy theories never die. There is always something else or some other explanation. They point at different rocks, then when they run out of rocks… they create one and complain about that rock.


That sounds like it might be worth looking into?


Actually I think it is more like when they run out of rocks they say “Aha! What about the sticks?”

Q is pleased. Durham will be rewarded.

1 Like

The suspense. It’s killing me.

Notice the shift from Dunham’s statement: “we do not agree with some of the report’s conclusions” to Fox’s lead “he did not “agree” with key findings”.

Nice spin there.

We’ll have to wait for the Barr/Dunham opus. Hope springs eternal in conspiracy land.


Oh where oh where are The Who fans when we really need them!