A strong indicator emerges that the Bull Durham "investigation" into the Russia Hoax really was just Bull Sh*t. The Washington Times looked into the DoJ expenditures report for the fake investigation (released Friday), and came up with this:
Durham reportedly spent just $1.5m during first six months of Trump-Russia FBI probe
Figure is allegedly less than 25% of what Robert Mueller spent during similar timeframe.
Obviously Bluto Barr, disgraced former AG, understood what was going on--essentially nothing. He's not stupid. He knew then, he knows now. And yet has the effrontery to appear in public and comment on the state of the republic.
Per the Washington Times:
John Durham spent roughly $1.5 million of taxpayer funds during his first six months as special counsel probing the origin of the FBI’s investigation into Trump-Russia collusion in the 2016 presidential election, The Washington Times has learned.
The amount spent by Mr. Durham is a relatively small amount by Washington standards and less than a quarter of the amount that special counsel Robert S. Mueller spent in the first six months of his probe of links between Mr. Trump and Russian election meddling.
For conservatives who are already disappointed by Mr. Durham’s lack of results after two years on the job, the price tag only confirms suspicions that his investigation is a sham.
Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, said the costs suggest Mr. Durham is not working to expose corruption by Obama-era officials.
“The budget demonstrates what I think observers have already concluded: the investigation is low energy, and he’s disinterested in getting to the bottom of the worst government corruption scandal in government history,” he said. “Those expenditures are the resting state of an office.”
Andrew Leipold, a law professor at the University of Illinois, who worked on the Starr probe, said the salary costs suggest Mr. Durham isn’t working with a large staff.
“Nearly half-a-million dollars in personnel costs seems a little light,” he said. “If you just include staff costs like secretaries, office administrators, and an IT staff, you are already eating away that before you include the lawyers.”
Earlier this year, Mr. Trump mocked the investigation.
“Where’s Durham?” Mr. Trump said in March. “Is he a living, breathing human being? Will there ever be a Durham report?”
The article has lots more comparative details.
All I can say is, shame on Barr. As for me, it's never pleasant to feel duped.
The article makes some very valid points I've been harping on for a long time.ReplyDelete
Clinesmith came to Durham falling on a sword, not vice versa.
The lack of defense attorney back chatter crying about grand juries and client harassment and been a big tell of a nothing burger.
I'm sure the pro Durham crowd will keep up the false hope by invoking the need for secrecy and keeping it small. But like his prior FBI / mob case work, it's just a non starter.
Bright side, this should be the thriftiest cover-up in US history. We should simply defund the operations budgets of every agency the same way because criminal investigations are apparently very cheap.
We all got played. From Trump on down. Masterful work by Barr. Barr is simply the apotheosis of deceit, amorality, and dare I say evil? He sold his country down the river. What did he get in return? Were he and his family threatened? What have other heroes in similar positions done? All we know is that his country may be lost because of his actions and inaction. He knew the job was dangerous when he took it, so we must assume that he went into it planning to take Trump out. He just did it a bit more gracefully than an Mueller-driven impeachment would have been. He has my undying disdain--if not actual hatred.ReplyDelete
Great point. Where are all the heroes, real heroes? When you look back at US history, so many giants of courage leap out. Every decisive turning point came because individuals stepped up and risked their very lives, to say nothing of reputations and livelihoods. Where are the heroes today? Plenty of villains to go around. Gen. Flynn? Ok, Flynn stood up against a political prosecution but not exactly heroic. It remains to be seen whether a Washington or Lincoln,Jefferson, Adams, Sherman, Frederick Douglass will emerge.
Senator Rand Paul a good candidate, IMO.Delete
The only surprise here is why this blog put such a positive spin on Barr's motives for so long, despite overwhelming information to the contrary. I appreciate the late stage conversion but that's what it is.ReplyDelete
In fairness to myself I pointed out the reasons for trusting Barr--primarily his willingness to publicly state to the NYT in 2017 that Hillary was more in need of investigation than Trump and his 2018 public attack on the whole Team Mueller obstruction rationale. As evidence those two factors are not nothing. There were other factors that I also pointed to. People like you were never able to offer "overwhelming information to the contrary" that rebutted what I've noted here. Most of the information was relatively ancient history, i.e., from the 1990s, twenty years ago. Also, Trump's campaign reassurances to his supporters re Barr, IMO, counted for something. After the election I changed my view immediately when Barr called the fraud charges BS.Delete