Where Does The Durham Investigation Currently Stand?

This morning we have two fairly lengthy articles out that offer--along with generous helpings of political bias and tendentious misrepresentations--some idea of where John Durham's investigation stands and how we should expect it to proceed. 

The two articles appear in the NTY and at NBC. They track each other closely, meaning that they clearly rely on the same sources. The intent is just as clearly to get a narrative out, to rally the political left and intimidate Congressional GOPers. The narrative? That the Barr/Durham investigation is a "controversial" political witchhunt that may even somehow be legally suspect and, in any event, is based in conspiracy theory--the last claim being particularly rich, coming from a political position that's reduced itself to a bizarre lefty version of McCarthyism, accusing all opponents or even inconvenient dissenters as "Russian agents." The desperation verging on hysteria at the progress of the investigation is everywhere apparent in these articles, as also in the NYT Op-Ed yesterday.

Still, let's make of it what we can. Here are the two articles--NYT and NBC, in that order:

Review of Russia Inquiry Grows as F.B.I. Witnesses Are Questioned

The review, led by the prosecutor John Durham, has focused on former investigators who are frequent targets of President Trump.

AG Barr expands mysterious review into origin of Russia investigation

If U.S. Attorney John Durham is conducting a criminal investigation, it’s not clear what allegations of wrongdoing are being examined.

The NYT article is somewhat more detailed so I'll follow that, for the most part. I'll provide what appear to be reliable facts concerning the direction of the investigation. Follow the links for the political spin.

In general, what we see is what can be expected. Durham is methodically working his way up the investigative ladder. As expected, the FBI is located at the bottom rungs. Durham is interviewing the outer circles at the FBI before confronting the central players: Strzok, McCabe, Baker, and Comey. Once that aspect of the investigation has been completed he will be moving on to the CIA, which he clearly views as located at a higher position on the ladder. Left out of the story is where the position of former DoJ officials--Sally Yates, David Laufman, Andrew Weissmann, Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr, etc.--fit in this scheme of things. My guess is that they may occupy an even higher rung on the ladder, for the reason that, while Brennan may have been the core planner, none of this coup attempt would have gone anywhere without DoJ cooperation--they controlled the key legal levers of power.

At the same time, Durham has been hard at work tracking down foreign players, with AG Barr's assistance. Key in all this is Barr's role. He is reported to be closely monitoring and directing the entire investigation. Thus:

Federal prosecutors reviewing the origins of the Russia investigation have asked witnesses pointed questions about any anti-Trump bias among former F.B.I. officials who are frequent targets of President Trump and about the earliest steps they took in the Russia inquiry, ...

The prosecutors, led by John H. Durham, the United States attorney in Connecticut, have interviewed about two dozen former and current F.B.I. officials, ...

The number of interviews shows that Mr. Durham’s review is further along than previously known. ...

Closely overseen by Mr. Barr, Mr. Durham and his investigators have sought help from governments in countries that figure into ... the Russia investigation, ...

... Ukraine is one country that Mr. Durham has sought help from. His team has interviewed private Ukrainian citizens, ...

...

Mr. Durham has yet to interview all the F.B.I. officials who played key roles in opening the Russian investigation in the summer of 2016, the people familiar with the review said. He has not spoken with Peter Strzok, a former top counterintelligence official who opened the inquiry; the former director James B. Comey or his deputy, Andrew G. McCabe; or James A. Baker, then the bureau’s general counsel.

Those omissions suggest Mr. Durham may be waiting until he has gathered all the facts before he asks to question the main decision makers in the Russia inquiry.

...

Mr. Durham’s investigators appeared focused at one point on Mr. Strzok, said one former official who was interviewed. Mr. Strzok opened the Russia inquiry in late July 2016 after receiving information from the Australian government that the Russians had offered damaging information on Hillary Clinton to a Trump campaign adviser. Mr. Durham’s team has asked about the events surrounding the Australian tip, some of the people familiar with the review said.

Mr. Durham’s team, including Nora R. Dannehy, a veteran prosecutor, has questioned witnesses about why Mr. Strzok both drafted and signed the paperwork opening the investigation, suggesting that was unusual for one person to take both steps. Mr. Strzok began the inquiry after consulting with F.B.I. leadership, former officials familiar with the episode said.

Mr. Durham has also questioned why Mr. Strzok opened the case on a weekend, again suggesting that the step might have been out of the ordinary. Former officials said that Mr. McCabe had directed Mr. Strzok to travel immediately to London to interview the two Australian diplomats who had learned about the Russians’ offer to help the Trump campaign and that he was trying to ensure he took the necessary administrative steps first.

It is not clear how many people Mr. Durham’s team has interviewed outside of the F.B.I. His investigators have questioned officials in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence but apparently have yet to interview C.I.A. personnel, people familiar with the review said. Mr. Durham would probably want to speak with Gina Haspel, the agency’s director, who ran its London station when the Australians passed along the explosive information about Russia’s offer of political dirt. [Yes, notice how that last part is reported as "fact."]

Many of the questions from Mr. Durham’s team overlapped with ones that the Justice Department inspector general, Michael E. Horowitz, has posed in his own look into aspects of the Russia inquiry, according to the people.

... Mr. Durham has asked witnesses about the role of Christopher Steele,  ...

Mr. Durham’s investigators asked why F.B.I. officials would use unsubstantiated or incorrect information in their application for a court order allowing the wiretap and seemed skeptical about why agents relied on Mr. Steele’s dossier.

The inspector general has also raised concerns that the F.B.I. inflated Mr. Steele’s value as an informant in order to obtain the wiretap on Mr. Page. Mr. Durham’s investigators have done the same, according to the people familiar with his review.

Mr. Horowitz has asked witnesses about an assessment of Mr. Steele that MI6, the British spy agency, provided to the F.B.I. after bureau officials received his dossier on Mr. Trump in September 2016. MI6 officials said Mr. Steele, a Russia expert, was honest and persistent but sometimes showed questionable judgment in pursuing targets that others viewed as a waste of time, two people familiar with the assessment said.

Thus, the NYT. From NBC we glean this additional information. Some of it has already been discussed, as that Barr's investigation is in no way limited or constrained by Horowitz's IG investigation.

... Durham, has expressed his intent to interview a number of current and former intelligence officials ... including former CIA Director John Brennan and former director of national intelligence James Clapper, Brennan told NBC News.

Durham has also requested to talk to CIA analysts involved in the intelligence assessment of Russia’s activities, prompting some of them to hire lawyers, according to three former CIA officials familiar with the matter. And there is tension between the CIA and the Justice Department over what classified documents Durham can examine, two people familiar with the matter said.

...

Although the probe did not begin as a criminal investigation, Justice Department officials won’t comment on whether it has morphed into one.

...

But Barr has said he believes an IG inquiry is not sufficient to answer the questions he has about how the investigation began. In doing so, he made comments suggesting Durham had authority only a criminal investigation could provide.

In a May 31 interview with CBS News, Barr said Horowitz “doesn't have the power to compel testimony, he doesn't have the power really to investigate beyond the current cast of characters at the Department of Justice. His ability to get information from former officials or from other agencies outside the department is very limited.”

...

Justice Department officials have said that Durham has found something significant, and that critics should be careful.

Skeptics who have been trying to track Durham’s movements say he has yet to interview key figures, including former deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, former FBI agent Peter Stzrok and former FBI general counsel James Baker.

“Nobody who knows anything has been interviewed,” said a person in touch with those former officials. [No, Durham is not likely to be bullied by the press into interviewing those key players until he has all his ducks in a row. No interview before its time.]

But Durham has been busy on other fronts. ...

...

A Western intelligence official familiar with what Durham has been asking of foreign officials says his inquiries track closely with the questions raised about the Russia investigation in right-wing media. [LOL!] Many of those questions spring from accusations made by George Papadopoulos, a former Trump campaign aide who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. He declined to comment Friday.

Fmr FBI Director @Comey leaked classified info to “create public pressure for official action” — the appointment of a Special Counsel — to satisfy his personal political agenda against Pres Trump.

Let’s not pretend asking FBI Agents about their political views came from nowhere. https://t.co/7NwRbGGBPY

— Bryan Dean Wright (@BryanDeanWright) October 19, 2019

Trump and his "personal lawyer" enjoying a laugh together.