John H. Durham, the United States attorney in Connecticut, has a history of serving as a special prosecutor investigating potential wrongdoing among national security officials, including the F.B.I.’s ties to a crime boss in Boston and accusations of C.I.A. abuses of detainees.
Here's the first paragraph of his Wikipedia bio:
John Henry Durham (born 1950) is the United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut. He is best known for leading an inquiry into allegations that FBI agents and Boston police had ties with the mob and his appointment as special prosecutor regarding the 2005 CIA interrogation tapes destruction. On November 1, 2017, he was nominated by President Donald Trump to be Connecticut's next U.S. Attorney. On February 15, 2018, his nomination to be the United States Attorney was confirmed by voice vote. He was sworn in on February 22, 2018.
Earlier today commenter Rick pointed out that Tony Shaffer has noted that one of the greatest difficulties Barr may face in this investigation is finding competent, non-compromised, investigators
Commenter Forbes inquired regarding a possible role for the Intel Community Inspector General in the Russia Hoax investigation.
In this appointment we see Barr reaching out for experienced investigators beyond the DC Deep State Swamp. I see no sign of ties to the likes of Comey, Mueller, Wray, Weissmann, or Rosenstein. Also, utilizing US Attorneys to lead this effort is probably the right approach, rather than getting bogged down in the IG process. The IGs have their role, and it's an important role, but we're at the point where we need prosecutors who will answer directly to Barr and will be leading their investigations with prosecution in mind.
The Deep State has no doubt long feared this development.
ADDENDUM: Will Chamberlain says the appointment of Durham--who has a history of having jailed a dirty FBI agent--may have spoiled the day for Comey, McCabe, Strzok. He calls this a "serious escalation" on Barr's part.
Oh, and Trey Gowdy thinks Durham should look for emails between Comey and Brennan in December, 2016. Hey, why not? That's what I say.
UPDATE 1: John Yoo, speaking to Laura Ingraham:
If I were the Democrats I would be quite worried. And the reason why is by appointing a US attorney Attorney General Barr is essentially signaling that he thinks it’s possible that criminal violations occurred in the start of the whole investigation into any kind of Trump-Russia collusion. As Judge Starr said there is already an inspector general investigation that’s been going on that’s going to come to a conclusion. [And inspector general investigation is] what you’d do if you were just interested in reforming… But you wouldn’t go with a US attorney like Durham or someone of his stature unless the Attorney General thinks actually something criminal might have happened.
In other words, Barr suspects criminality in the predication--the very foundation of the Russia Hoax on which everything else rests.
UPDATE 2: For those wondering "when's Barr gonna do something," it turns out that, according to Fox News, Durham has been at work on the origins of the Russia Hoax "for weeks." So Barr hit the ground running. Or to put it slightly differently, he's operating on the principle that a rolling stone gathers no moss. Question: What happens to someone who finds himself in front of that rolling stone?
UPDATE 3: Via Val Jarrett's daughter, no less:
Some news - AG Barr working closely with CIA Director Haspel, ODNI Director Coats and FBI Director Wray on surveillance issues related to Trump campaign - suggesting broader interagency effort underway
By God, Barr seems to be a serious man. He seems to be doing twat needs to be done to cure the FBI/DOJ of its systemic partisan corruption. Punish as many of the coup plotters & participants as you can find. The remaining scum will get the message. And the non-partisan FBI/DOJ employees will gain some backbone to resist future outbreaks of corruption.ReplyDelete
When Barr was nominated I wrote a post called something like "A Message of Hope." Thankfully, so far, no reason to alter that.Delete