Justice Department hasn’t interviewed key Russia probe witnesses
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
For months, President Donald Trump’s allies have been raising expectations for prosecutor John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the Russia probe, predicting that he will uncover a deep state plot to stage a “coup” against the president.
Durham “is looking at putting people in jail,” Republican Senator Lindsey Graham told Fox News host Sean Hannity in July. Republican Rep. Jim Jordan said Durham is about to unleash “a pile of evidence” that will “debunk” everything House Intelligence Chairman Adam Schiff has proclaimed for “the last two years.”
“Stuff is going to hit the fan” when Durham is done “investigating the investigators,” said Fox News personality Geraldo Rivera. “If indictments are warranted, U.S. Attorney John Durham will be bringing them,” wrote conservative commentator Hugh Hewitt.
The omission raises questions about what, exactly, Durham—alongside Attorney General Bill Barr—has been investigating.
Those not contacted include former FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok; former FBI general counsel Jim Baker; former chief of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section David Laufman; and former head of DOJ’s National Security Division Mary McCord. Former CIA Director John Brennan, Trump-Russia dossier author Christopher Steele, and former Trump adviser Carter Page—who was the subject of a surveillance warrant that is now under investigation by the inspector general—haven’t been contacted for interviews, either.
Combined with reports that Barr has traveled with Durham internationally seeking evidence from the U.S.’s closest intelligence allies, Durham’s apparent lack of interest in the FBI at this point suggests that he and Barr are focusing on examining the intelligence community’s role in the Russia probe—and, in accordance with Trump’s desires, looking at whether the help provided by U.S. allies in the Russia probe, including the U.K., Italy, Australia and Ukraine, may itself have constituted foreign interference.
The new revelations about Barr and Durham’s work and travels also present the clearest contrast yet to the Justice Department’s internal investigation into the Russia probe origins, led by the DOJ’s inspector general and focused on the FBI’s conduct. That probe remains ongoing.
“The question Durham and Barr now seem to be asking is, ‘How was this information fed to the bureau in 2016?” said one former FBI official. “That’s distinct from what the IG has been looking at, and seems to indicate that their theory now is the FBI itself was duped by the intelligence community and its overseas partners.”
A tweet sent out by Republican Sen. John Cornyn on Friday suggested that the inquiry is also broader than has been reported. “Now, the Trump Justice Department is investigating foreign government influence, VP Biden conflicts of interest, and possible corruption,” he wrote, referring to Vice President Joe Biden. But a Cornyn aide said the senator meant to say "that the Durham investigation could end up also looking at the Bidens," not that it already was. The Justice Department declined to comment.
In his phone call with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky on July 25—which Trump’s national security team delayed for months because they were wary of how Trump’s fixation with conspiracy theories surrounding the origins of the Russia investigation would be reflected in the call, according to former officials—Trump asked Zelensky to do him a “favor” by looking into Ukraine’s role in the 2016 election, and suggested he connect with Barr “to get to the bottom of it.”
Trump also asked the newly elected leader to investigate Biden and his son, who sat on the board of directors of an oil and gas company that at one point was investigated by Ukraine’s top prosecutor. Ukrainian officials on Friday announced a fresh review of why that probe was shut down.
The Justice Department has denied that Barr received any instructions from Trump to work with the Ukrainians on a Biden investigation. But Barr’s reported personal involvement in Durham’s probe suggests the attorney general has been more closely overseeing an inquiry of deep importance to the president than was previously believed.
Durham, for his part, appears to have trained his focus on the intelligence community, reportedly seeking interviews with the CIA analysts who drew conclusions about Putin’s motivations in 2016. Trump’s allies have been fixated on the question of how the intelligence community determined that Russia intervened specifically to help Trump win rather than to just sow chaos and distrust in the Democratic process. Some accounts have suggested that the intelligence community had a human asset in Putin’s inner circle, though others have indicated that the U.S. used signals intelligence to intercept conversations among Russian officials.
As POLITICO first reported , that question has already been asked and answered at the CIA’s highest levels — by Mike Pompeo, a Trump loyalist. Just after Pompeo took over as CIA director in 2017, he conducted a personal review of the CIA’s findings, grilling analysts on their conclusions in a challenging and at times combative interview, people familiar with the matter said. He ultimately found no evidence of any wrongdoing, or that the analysts had been under political pressure to produce their findings.
George Papadopoulos, another Trump campaign adviser who has repeatedly declared that the entire FBI investigation was a setup by Western intelligence services including the British, Australians, Italians and CIA, twice declined to comment when asked whether he’d been interviewed by the prosecutor.
Papadopoulos pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI about his own contacts with a Russian-linked professor named Joseph Mifsud, who told Papadopoulos in the spring of 2016 that the Russians had “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of her emails.
That disclosure, which was relayed to the FBI by an Australian diplomat who heard about it from Papadopoulos, is what the FBI has said spurred its initial counterintelligence investigation into Trump campaign associates with links to Russia. But Papadopoulos has claimed, without evidence, that Mifsud was actually a plant, sent by Western intelligence officials to entrap him and give the FBI an excuse to open an investigation.
Mifsud’s whereabouts remain unknown. But Barr reportedly asked Trump to solicit the Australians’ help in the investigation. And he and Durham recently traveled to Italy to investigate the events that led up to Mueller’s probe—and, as part of that, to reportedly hear a taped deposition Mifsud gave on the subject months ago.
Tags
Who is online
97 visitors
So we have our own AG running around the world only trying to dig up dirt to discredit any findings against trump....
Discredit.... Truth …..Dirt …… Truth .....
Why not throw in a few Truths with the Dirt anyway !
It's a "Party" in "Political World"
..... Just Go for the gusto ! 
So you actually think that this supposed investigation that has not even interviewed the people involved, is trying to get truth?
You actually think the DOJ and another lawyer along with trump's blessing, ignoring key aspects of the supposed investigation and trying to discredit our intelligence agencies in the Russian probe is looking for truth?
Do you have a "Leaker" to back up that statement ?
After all…."Leakers" are the most trusted reporters.
Did you read the article? The key players said they have not even been asked to testify or give any information.
At least give 'em 2 years to get things together. Sheeeeesh !
The 3rd year is supposed to be the "Charm" !
Now....I know you probably know this....but anyone that "Wants' to be questioned, isn't someone you'd actually want to question.
You'd go to the "Real" source....wouldn't you ?
Who said they wanted to be questioned? They were asked and said no.
And what is this real source?
Trolls never do.
Saying it netted nothing is closing ones eyes.
So skip the key players and ask other governments to discredit our own intelligence agencies....
Just another Coward response !
It's a "Secret" !
Gotta keep the opposition "Blowers" confidential now.
The Sign of the times.
Except an honest one.
You chose ?
or
Have you already Chosen ?
It's a crocked con job.
So you've been told ?
I ask everyone this and never get an answer. With this DOJ, with all that is going on, would you just shrug it all off if the name at the top was Obama?
Now two of Giuliani's buds are arrested.
Good question.
Too bad Obama and wife is schmoozing in Martha's Vineyard in their new "High Dollar Classy Home" now.
So tell me, do you question the key players before you investigate? Or do you investigate first to get dirt on them; then bring them in for questioning so they can entrap themselves when they lie?
That seems to be a favorite tactic these days; so why shouldn't they use it against those that abused it?
If Mueller was flying around the world during his investigations trying to have other countries dig up dirt, you would have been ok with that?
Seems Mueller may have done it the lazy way (nothing came of it though):
Here’s how Mueller uses his power to gather evidence in the Russia probe
"Mueller can gather evidence is through a wire tap. In special cases, especially those involving potential national security risks, Mueller can obtain search warrants through the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, a law that allows physical and electronic surveillance of foreign agents or powers."
They did fly around the world, but was not transparent about it of course. Mueller sent his lackeys.
Why is it when Democrats ask questions it is called "investigating", but if a Republican does it is called "digging up dirt"?
Are you ok with that?
.
Lazy? Seems like he followed the law. Not exactly nothing came of it. Several things came from it.
Ukraine....Ukraine....and Ukraine ?
That's the New and Improved report? now anyway.
But Muller didn't report anything on that though.
"Seems like he followed the law."
Bob and John just prefer to fly and go face to face.
If this is an 'investigation', what are the parameters, what exactly are they looking for, why all the secrecy....
I can't believe you all are ok with this. Wanting the AG to fly to other countries, shrouded in silence, looking for what? A way to discredit our own intelligence people or wanting other countries to 'look into' things.
So you will stick up for trump to the point of belittling Mueller, a republican, and others.
That is the trump way. Call any investigation a sham and the ones doing the investigating crooked.
Seems like the former Ukraine ambassador had a few things to say.
So two people arrested after trying to flee the country...
Yep, nothing to see there...
[ deleted ]
Did you look at the link?
Who is hiding something?
What do you think Mueller's lackeys where doing abroad, sight seeing?
Why good for Mueller but not Barr?
So you think double standards are acceptable?
Who did those people …. belong to again ?
You do know Barr's history. He was involved in the Iran-Contra affairs. He also talked Bush 1 into giving those involved pardons. He thinks the office itself is above the law.
So no double standard. I would never trust him through his past actions alone.
Giuliani?
You have no proof of that...just conjecture.
Again, conjecture and spin.
Nothing wrong with Barr investigating wherever it may take him. That is his job. Just like it was Mueller's job. Mueller's past actions are also questionable, yet no one cares about that now do they?
I guess the no fly list only applies to Republicans. Shocker!
So Barr's own words are conjecture...
Now he had a meeting with the head of fox news. Wonder what that was about....
He has a meeting the same time it is announce Shep Smith will no longer be there.
He has a meeting the same time it is announce Shep Smith will no longer be there.
And that's how the BS rumors get started.
You do realize your link is an opinion piece, not Barr's words?
They were using Barr's words from a memo he wrote.
To spin and form the desired opinion for folks like you. You do realize it is an opinion piece?
Again, conjecture.
No matter how much you don't want it to be, it is his own words...
So why does this quote make Barr distrustful?
What made me distrust him was all his dealings at the end of Reagan's term and the beginning of Bush1.
Also, he basically said the president could declare any investigation to be false and put a stop to it.
Well you are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts. That quote was taken out of context in his hearing. Like I said, spin and conjecture not factual. You should read the entire testimony. But, I have feeling it still won't matter to you.
And soon to be a Giuliani Who?
You do realize that it is the exact argument trump lawyers are using in court...
The they think the president is immune from legal action, cannot be prosecuted....
What argument? There was no crime argument?
Geez...who would of thought a crime was needed to be prosecuted.
There are cases going through the court system. One of them involves congress and his tax returns.
There are several suits going through the courts.
Why is it always a righteous search for the truth when Trump is being investigated, but if Democrats or anyone opposed to Trump is being investigated, it's "digging up dirt?"
Earthworms are generally blind and deaf.
Maybe because trump more or less admitted it.
Sometimes I have to admit I am at a loss. The right spent at least half a decade investigating a Clinton.
Now get all bent out of shape when there is something worth investigating.
Willing to throw themselves on the tracks. For trump of all people....
Because the Clintons never did anything wrong.
Funny though, after years and years of investigations...no charges.
Funny thing though, after three more years of investigations, no indictments of Obama, Clinton, et. al..
Uranium One, Benghazi, Filegate, emails, "looting the White House", Monica, Whitewater, Travelgate, et al
too many to list. And yet the country, the government, the Congress functioned.
Lots, of scandals, one conviction for lying.........Bill acquitted on two counts of impeachment.
Big Yawn.
Targets go last
Seems clear to me, there is only one target...to protect trump.
Seems to me that those being investigated have nothing to fear, if they did nothing wrong.
That is the message the left always sends; unless it is one of their own being investigated. Then it is a vast right wing conspiracy. D's are always innocent.
Seems to me, they are wondering why this so called investigation is not even centered around them.
So much for looking for FISA abuse.
Jim Jordan is a pathetic walking talking point. He was on CNN and he all but ran around the studio with his hair on fire screaming, "BENGHAZI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
He's an idiot.
Jordan also has dirty Russian money that 'filtered' into his campaign coffers through the NRA.
This supposed investigation is of course to clear Trump, but far more importantly, it is to clear Putin. No Russian malfeasance--therefore no Russian sanctions.
Right... Keep dreaming.
This investigation is about the illegal spying on an opposition campaign using the US government agencies.
Wrong. That was and is not the purpose of the Giuliana investigations in Ukraine.
The congressional investigations are investigating the Giuliana/Trump/Barr/Pompeo actions in Ukraine.