emptywheel Profile picture
May 15 55 tweets 17 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
My thread on the Durham Report.

Durham took well over twice as long as Mueller and found, literally, bupkis.

documentcloud.org/documents/2381… Image
I bet you $100 sight unseen that Johnny D made significant errors here, who's up for that bet? Image
Durham wildly expands the remit of this report (in part to make debunked claims about people he failed to convict). I guess it's a precedent.

It's supposed to be declinations and prosecutions. Image
Here's a list of the investigations not covered--listing the Trump CI investigation among others. Image
This is literally the only thing that Durham was supposed to report on. Image
One reason Durham doesn't put more details to the international aspect of this is bc he'd have to report on all the whiskey-drinking goose chases he and Billy went on, chasing Papadopoulos conspiracy theories. Image
The Durham (4 full years) versus Mueller (22 months) Report ImageImage
Johnny D includes this bullshit language about juries when the two cases he charges were rejected by juries. Image
Here's how Johnny D describes his scope. Note that he doesn't describe his scope at founding. I'll come back to this but this is a BIG tell..... ImageImage
Johnny D suggests there should have been MORE surveillance of Trump. Image
Johnny D suggests Pete Strzok should have done MORE surveillance in advance. Image
Not only does Johnny D misunderstand why this might be briefed to Obama, but he suggests opening an investigation into Hillary for saying mean things about Trump, with no involvement of a foreign govt. It is INSANE. Image
After trashing the DOJ IG Report, Durham claims credit for the Kevin Clinesmith prosecution.

Hilariously pathetic. Image
Here Durham EXCLUDES information about how Danchenko's handlers accounted for the fact of prior investigation into Danchenko that rebuts his little theory, which was aired at trial. Image
Durham here WILDLY overstates his certainty about sourcing and lies about what Danchenko said. If I were Danchenko, I'd sue, bc Durham is making claims that were adjudicated to be false. Image
Durham criminally investigated something that he--with zero evidence--says contributed to a public narrative of conspiring and colluding. Image
This claim is 100% false. The evidence shows that Durham DIDN'T pursue the evidence needed to prove or disprove this claim.

Stunning corruption.

I think I'll make a criminal referral for lying to DOJ. Image
Durham's like, "Sure a jury told me I was dead wrong, but I'm going to claim it anyway."

Again it's stunning that he is doing this. Totally upends due process. Image
In which Durham tries to make the worst NYT story ever into a criminal issue.

Again, this is insanity. He is criminalizing writing things you believe to be true. Image
Another false claim. Durham's just churning out 1001 crime after 1001 crime -- and probably some lawsuits for DOJ to defend. Image
Nice of Durham to prove that he knew what rule he violated with Rodney Joffe. Image
Another rule Durham violated. Image
Another rule that Durham violated. Image
Durham complains that an Ombud report doesn't consider the Carter Page app -- RATHER THAN THE ENTIRE MUELLER INVESTIGATION -- background to why the IC was ignoring RU intelligence. Image
A reminder (since Durham doesn't provide it) that DOJ IG found evidence of just one campaign was being investigated by informants handled by biased FBI Agents in 2016, and it was Clinton, not Trump. Image
John Durham is so dumb he doesn't understand what physical surveillance entails. Image
This is a misstatement of what the FBI DIrector certification is about. It conflates means available to FISA with least intrusive means, which are not always the same thing.

EG remote access to Signal is something FBI only does on FISA. Image
John Durham retaliating against a witness for testifying truthfully. Image
Another false claim from Durham. Carter Page told FBI himself that he thought there was nothing wrong with providing non-public information to people he knew to be Russian spies. Image
One reason it matters that DUrham wildly misrepresents this is bc THIS investigation would get beyond all 1A concerns about Page tied to Trump. It is dishonest, and pathetic. Image
Durham invents an inconsistency when instead he provides clarification. Pap told more about the Russian dirt the first time.

In other words, Pap boasted TWICE that Russians were going to help Trump.

But Durham says this wasn't suspect. Image
To his credit, Durham actually MENTIONS Trump's Russia are you listening comment (he tried to exclude it from his two failed trials). But he doesn't seem to think there was anything wrong with it. Image
Durham's dumb and so may not understand this, but here he's complaining that MORE spooks weren't involved. Image
In case you need evidence that Durham is dishonest, this ellipsis omits a discussion of evidence that Papadopoulos told Sam Clovis about the emails.

documentcloud.org/documents/2040… Image
This is insanely obtuse. Durham suggests that the only place to get intelligence abt Trump's ties to RU was the Steele dossier WHILE REFERENCING Oleg Deripaska, who was getting campaign strategy from Manafort. Image
Johnny D making the case that the IC should have surveilled Trump FAR MORE than they did (and also proving that his claims about being spied on were false). Image
Durham includes 2 pages showing that the spooks weren't sufficiently concerned about Trump in advance, and WILDLY misunderstands the predication of the investigation (which was not about a conspiracy between THE CAMPAIGN and Russia). Image
Durham complains that FBI did not violate limitations on overt investigative steps before the election. He's basically bitching that FBI DIDN'T violate rules designed to protect the election. Image
Durham complains that Hillary got a defensive briefing about a CI investigation at least 10 months after the investigation was opened, before the election period.

Trump got his defensive briefing less than 10 months after Crossfire Hurricane started, in Feb 2017. Image
[In other words, the evidence actually shows that Trump was BETTER treated than Hillary.]
Durham then measures the amount of time it took to get a FISA on Page from the start of Crossfire Hurricane and not the opening of the investigation into Page.

In general, Durham just ignores that preexisting investigations. Image
Then Durham compares Hillary's campaign asking a foreigner NOT to attend with Trump, who begged Russia for help publicly.

This ... doesn't really help Trump, but Durham is too stupid to understand that. Image
Durham complains that the FBI didn't investigate why Hillary's campaign accepted a donation from a US person. Image
So at least one of three investigations into the Clinton Foundation was initially predicated on Clinton Cash--which would be the equivalent of opening an investigation SOLELY on the Steele Report. Image
Durham forgets, again, that the investigation into Page was opened in April. Image
This comparison is nuts.

First, it ignores that Hillary was hacked by Russia. Second, it equates Clinton Cash with the Aussies sharing information in response to the hack-and-leak.

It's like Durham has gone insane and people just keep smiling at him as he raves on a park bench Image
Here's how Johnny D rationalizes opening up an investigation into what would be, if true, Hillary's 1A protected activity. Image
Johnny D treats this report as exclusively pertaining to Hillary.

It reported on Guccifer 2.0. Image
Here Durham simply ignores the redacted information. ImageImage
There are points of this report where it's clear Durham has ENTIRELY forgotten that Hillary was hacked by Russia in the middle of a campaign. Image
Note how in this section Durham doesn't mention that Trump ASKED RUSSIA TO HACK HIS OPPONENT?!?!?!

Durham conducted a criminal investigation into Hillary's justifiable complaint about Trump asking Russia to hack her. Image
Btw, the only mention of Guccifer 2.0, with whom Roger Stone was discussing stolen records, is in the quote about this report. Durham just pretends it didn't exist.
Here, Durham is criminally investigating Hillary because she wanted the FBI to announce publicly that Russia had hacked her, which Russia had done.

Again, no mention that TRUMP ASKED RUSSIA TO HACK HILLARY. Image
Here, Durham presents evidence that Hillary wanted to know if the FBI was investigating her hack as proof that she had a plan to say mean things about Trump.

Because wanting to know whether the FBI is investigating the crime committed against you is proof of a crime, I guess. Image
Like he states that right out here: Hillary's campain wanting to know if the crime they were victimized by is proof of something else entirely. Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with emptywheel

emptywheel Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @emptywheel

Jun 3
LOLOL. This is effectively a rebuttal to @hugolowell's story from last week.
@hugolowell This is how NYT manages to not credit Lowell with reporting on these notes five days ago. Image
@hugolowell Lowell: Corcoran was waved off from searching anyplace besides the storage room. Image
Read 7 tweets
Jun 2
In which Amanda accuses me of having a "fixation" because I insist that people actually base their claims on available facts, rather than just screaming and helping fascists w/o any basis in fact.
There are, as I have written OVER AND OVER, OBVIOUS things that take time. We can account for the time that DOJ has taken--but it requires actual labor rather than just SCREAMING!!!

Those who wail abt time that due process takes are helping those who hate rule of law.

Amanda doesn't realize that this totally undermines her point.

She's arguing people have to indict NOW so the 70 days they have to prepare for trial will...not give the time to prepare.
Read 4 tweets
May 31
I'm really glad that @JamesComer has a plot to put a Democrat in charge of FBI for the first time ever ... even if just in Acting capacity.
@JamesComer Just wait until the frothers discover that Comer has a plan to replace a Trump appointee with a Democrat!
@JamesComer The OTHER thing that Comer is doing by threatening contempt is giving Peter Strzok what he wants: A quicker deposition with Wray.

My goodness his threats to hold Wray in contempt are great news for enemies of Donald Trump!!!
Read 4 tweets
May 31
I think it likely erroneous to imagine that Jack Smith is getting into Chris Krebs' firing JUST to get to Trump's mindset.

He fired Krebs for doing something his Admin had specifically bought off on. It was a necessary part of the plot.
Here's my thread on Krebs' J6C interview.

And here's my thread on McEntee's J6C interview. Importantly, he did 3 things: interfere at DOJ, making Insurrection Act a firing offense, and Krebs.

Also make withdrawing from Afghanistan a litmus test, but I've been told Trump was always hard on RU.

Read 5 tweets
May 30
Hoping someone smarter about FARA than me, like @BVanGrack, checks my work on this. But this story of Vivek Ramaswamy advisors registering under FARA is a far bigger deal than @politico makes out.

Who cares abt Ramaswamy and his aides, right?

@BVanGrack @politico But this screen cap gives a sense of how much money the Saudis are sloshing around via a golf cut-out.

And once some reasonable people believe they need to register, others might be expected to. Image
@BVanGrack @politico Those same reasonable people might be more likely to feel the urgency to register if they see coverage -- starting about 3 weeks ago -- that a prosecutor is looking into OTHER people receiving LIV graft.

nytimes.com/2023/05/04/us/… Image
Read 7 tweets
May 30
Let's have some fun with John Durham.

Durham claims a Hillary staffer's effort, on 7/5/16, to f-up on a Foer story on Trump's Russian ties "provide[s] some support...campaign was engaged in an effort...in late July 2016 to encourage scrutiny of Trump's potential ties to Russia" ImageImage
Here's the link to where Johnny D points to something that happened on 7/5/16 as proof that Hillary approved a plan on 7/26/16.

That's time machine 1.

Here's the article. You'll note how Foer's article (which is quite detailed and factual, btw), includes a line that is rather inconvenient for Durham's narrative.

slate.com/articles/news_… Image
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!