At that time I pointed out the significance of Barr's pick, and then added some additional details. In this excerpt from the linked post please note, among other things, the word "predication." Barr suspected "something criminal" in the very origin of the investigation, which means in the "predication," which distills that origin. And that criminal taint flows from Crossfire Hurricane to the Team Mueller Witchhunt. Barr has always understood that (as have readers here):
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.
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. [An 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?
The next thing to note is that, in the UPDATE, we learn that, although this news is coming in May, Durham has been at work on the origins of the Russia Hoax "for weeks." So, Barr became AG on February 14, 2019, and we learn in mid-May that Durham has been on the job "for weeks." Note that: not "for a few weeks," just "for weeks." How many weeks is that, exactly?
The other day we learned that Durham's "review" (or whatever) had morphed into a criminal investigation, with Grand Jury powers. At that time I expressed the view that I would be surprised if Durham's investigation hadn't been a criminal investigation for some time, whether or not a Grand Jury had been empanelled. That was speculation. Today I've come across a twitter thread by Greg Rubini dating back to mid-August which provides fascinating evidence that John Durham may have been on the case not just "for weeks" but "for months." As in, since September of 2018 at the latest!
We're talking about actual documentary evidence here, not speculation. So that puts a rather different light on a lot of things, and hints at the complexity of the Deep State attack on our Constitution and the complementary complexity of Trump's defense. It also puts a different light on Rod Rosenstein's role in all this. That's something we've discussed here before. I'll stipulate that I agree with the various commenters who have maintained, in essence, that Rosenstein may have been snookered into starting up the Mueller Witchhunt but that at some point someone got to him and enlightened (or "woke") him as to what was really going on.
At that point plans would have been laid for Trump's counterattack, including the replacement of Sessions and Rosenstein by Barr and his team at DoJ. In the meantime, Rosenstein began preparations for that counterattack--as by appointing John Durham to begin work, very much behind the scenes. All this suggests that Barr stepped into a counteroffensive that he had been planning well before confirmation as AG and which was already underway. The implications are fascinating, and further suggest that the Deep State is already under a great deal of pressure that will only increase. We, and they, may be in for more surprises.
I'm going to paste in Rubini's fascinating thread, but for a bit of additional perspective or context I'll point out that Bill Barr's famous letter to Rod Rosenstein--in which Barr disputed the obstruction theories that animated the Mueller Witchhunt--was dated June 8, 2018. As you'll see, the key for understanding when Durham began his work is that, already during James Baker's (Comey's FBI lawyer) testimony in October, 2018, we learn that US Attorney John Durham is on the case. I've slightly edited Rubini's thread, but only for readablity--capitalization and so forth:
1. I know (from my own sources) that Prosecutor John Durham has been in charge of "Investigating the Investigators" and the Spy Operations against Trump since Sept 2018.
That is ONE YEAR ago.
(And I can provide OFFICIAL proof)
What does this mean?
2. Remember that William Barr officially announced only on May 13, 2019 that he had put in charge US Attorney John Durham in charge of "investigating the Spy Ops against Trump" and "the origins of the Russia-Trump probe".
"May 13, 2019.
"Barr assigns US attorney in Connecticut to look into government surveillance involving Trump campaign: source.
"Attorney General William Barr has appointed a U.S. attorney to examine the origins of the Russia investigation and determine if intelligence collection efforts targeting the Trump campaign were "lawf…
3. Before May 13, 2019 nobody had even heard the name "John Durham",
4. but John Durham had been investigating since Sept 2018.
This means that John Durham had been [quietly] investigating all of this for many more months ...
[Stealth] - under the radar...
for 12 months, now...
5. Imagine what the John Durham Team has uncovered, in 12 months ... and what else does it mean?
[Comment: There is no #6]
7. That means also that it was NOT William Barr who put John Durham in charge ...
William Barr was not Attorney General in Sept 2018 ...
Who was AG in Sept 2018?
8. Yes, AG was Jeff Sessions, but Jeff Sessions was recused from ALL THINGS Russia-Trump related ...
9. Oh yeah, it was Rod Rosenstein!!
It was Rod Rosenstein - Deputy Attorney General - who put prosecutor John Durham in charge "of investigating the Spy Operations against Trump" and "the origins of the Russia-Trump probe".
See the pattern?
11. In case you doubt that John Durham was investigating the Fake Steele Dossier, SpyOps and related matters in Sept 2018, read on:
12. James Baker closed doors hearing, of October 3, 2018 (DECLASSIFIED on April 8, 2019).
James Baker was the General Counsel for the FBI. General Counsel of James Comey.
Mr. Jordan: How about leading up to just prior to the Presidential election of 2016, how many times did you talk with David Corn in the weeks and months prior to election day? [Comment: The questioning is leading into FBI interactions with the media, which was targeting Trump with the Steele dossier. The obvious focus is--did the FBI, specifically Baker, collude with the media against Trump?]
Mr. Baker: I don't remember.
Mr. Jordan: Is it fair to say you did?
Mr. Baker: Yes, I did, but I just don't remember how many.
Mr. Jordan: So did you talk to Mr. Corn about anything that the FBI was working on, specifically the now infamous Steele dossier?
Mr. Levin: I'm sorry, I'm going to cut - not let him answer these questions right now.
Mr. Jordan: Just to clarify for us, you're advising Mr. Baker not to answer that question not because of it's classified, not because of any classification concerns, but because there is an ongoing investigation by whom?
Mr. Levin: By the Justice Department.
Mr. Jordan: I mean, is the Inspector General looking at this or is this ...
Mr. Levin: No, it's Mr. John Durham, a prosecutor. [Comment: Note that Levin specifies that this is not some sort of OIG review--Durham, he says, is a prosecutor. Also note that this is news to Jim Jordan.]
Mr. Jordan: Mr. Huber?
Mr. Levin: Durham, Durham.
Mr. Jordan: Oh. Say it again ...
Mr. Levin: John Durham
Mr. Jordan: All right.
19. Source: James Baker closed doors hearing - transcript, October 3, 2018, pages 36-37.
Is it correct, @Jim_Jordan ?
21. Is that enough as OFFICIAL PROOF that Prosecutor John Durham was investigating already in Sept 2018:
- the Spy Operations against Trump
- and the origins of the Russia-Trump probe ?
Is the word of a DOJ lawyer (Mr. Levin) official enough?
22. The James Baker closed doors hearing, of October 3, 2018 was DECLASSIFIED on April 8, 2019.
Everyone could read it - it was publicly available on the web.
23. Prosecutor John Durham was investigating all this already in Sept 2018.
I didn't see the New York Times @nytimes reporting about this.
I didn't see Fox News, nor Hannity, nor Sara Carter, nor John Solomon talk about this.
Of course, the Deep State understood all this.
Now, consider all this in light of the questions that William Jacobson poses at Legal Insurrection regarding John Durham (h/t commenter Bebe)--
Posted by William A. Jacobson Friday, October 25, 2019 at 9:20pm
Wait. With John Durham leading the investigation, maybe the question should be: Who was the first to flip? Because it may already have happened.
But now that we understand how long Durham has been examining the coup attempt, we have to ask another question--if someone has already flipped, then how long ago? In investigations like this, time is of the essence. If someone like Baker actually flipped months before Barr became AG, imagine the recorded conversations he may have had! And we're not talking just pre-election history. Has someone flipped who knows a lot about Team Mueller? In addition to Rosenstein?
Well, we'll find out.