The Immunity Option: How Congress Could Have the Final Say on the Russian Collusion Scandal - JONATHAN TURLEY
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
For those interested in the truth about the Russian collusion investigation, the Durham Report has hundreds of pages of details of the alliance of political, government and media figures behind arguably the greatest hoax in U.S. history. The only thing it does not have is an actual indictment or true accountability for the critical players in an effort to derail an American presidency. Indeed, some witnesses associated with the Clinton campaign appear to have refused to cooperate with the investigation. Congress could change that.
Buried in the detailed account is a little noticed footnote stating that Clinton General Counsel Marc Elias "declined to be voluntarily interviewed by the Office." Likewise, Durham noted that "no one at Fusion GPS … would agree to voluntarily speak with the Office" while both the DNC and Clinton campaign invoked privileges to refuse to answer certain questions.
It is not clear whether Durham was able to get a full account from these sources, but he was still able to establish the details on how this unprecedented political hit job succeeded despite a lack of evidence. In the course of that account, Durham demolished the prior claims of Democratic members like Adam Schiff and many in the media. Durham concludes that the investigation should never have been launched and that the whole effort was based on "raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated" information.
It turns out that the "pee-tape" was the creation of a Clinton operative without any factual basis despite years of the media (and former FBI Director James Comey) referencing the false salacious claim.
It turns out that Trump was correct that the FBI did spy on his campaign despite years of mocking denials in the media.
Indeed, Trump was right that this was a manufactured hoax engineered by the Clinton campaign, weaponized by the FBI, and then promulgated by the media.
As expected, the media has imposed another virtual blackout on coverage of the report other than to deny that there is anything new for the public to see. For those of us concerned about the rise of a type of state media in the United States, the report and its coverage has only magnified those concerns.
So is that it? Just a shrug and spin?
Not necessarily.
In a recent Fox interview, former Attorney General Bill Barr indicated that he always viewed Durham's primary mandate as establishing what occurred in the Russian collusion investigation and making that information public.
Congress can now use that foundation to compel cooperation from key figures in this scandal, if necessary, under a grant of immunity. The witnesses could still be prosecuted if they lie or mislead congressional investigators or commit perjury.
They could start with Marc Elias, who features prominently in the Durham Report. It was Elias who managed the legal budget for the campaign. We now know that the campaign hid the funding of the Steele dossier as a legal expense. (The Clinton campaign was later sanctioned by the FEC over its hiding of the funding).
New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said that Elias denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias "pushed back vigorously, saying 'You (or your sources) are wrong.'" Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, "Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year."
Elias was also seated next to John Podesta, Clinton's campaign chairman, when he was asked about the role of the campaign denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Even assuming that Podesta was kept in the dark, the Durham Report clearly shows that Elias knew and played an active role in pushing this effort.
Elias is now ironically advising Democratic campaigns on advising people of election ethics and running a group to "defend democracy." He is still counsel to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) headed by Rep. Suzan Kay DelBene, D-Wash.. Elias was recently severed by the Democratic National Committee from further representation and has been previously sanctioned in federal court in other litigation).
Elias testified at the criminal trial of his former partner Michael Sussmann, but the scope of that examination was strictly limited by the court. Congress could compel his testimony on the full range of conduct leading to the scandal.
Likewise, other figures from Steele to Comey could becompelled to give full accounts in light of this Report. Congress has an interest in hearing from these witnesses as it explores how to make real reforms at the Justice Department and the FBI.
The need for congressional action was made clear by the FBI itself in its immediate response to the Report. It insisted that it has reformed itself after what it described as "missteps identified in the report."
There are many ways to describe an investigation into false allegations raised by an opposing political party to derail a presidency. Calling that a "misstep" is like calling the explosion of the Hindenburg a "mislanding." The FBI has now gone through regular cycles of scandals followed by assurances of self-reform.
Even if one is willing to suspend disbelief over the latest "trust us were the government" press release, it ignores that fact that the FBI was accused again in 202o of playing a role in burying the Hunter Biden laptop scandal.
If Congress wants to reform this system, Durham has given it a blueprint for how to do it. After the Report, there is now an undeniable right of Congress to seek this testimony as part of its legislative and oversight functions under Article I. While figures like Elias may "decline to be voluntarily interviewed," this does not have to be voluntary exercise.
In speaking with many witnesses, Durham was dealing with some potential crimes with expired statutes of limitation. If witnesses lie to Congress, they could also face charges under a new statute of limitations.
If history is any measure, nothing concentrates the mind as much as a subpoena and immunity grant . . . and it may be time to concentrate some minds in Washington.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and a practicing criminal defense attorney. He is a Fox News contributor. This column appeared earlier on Fox.com
Tags
Who is online
528 visitors
There should be consequences
declassifying the mueller report would torpedo this pathetic hail mary effort, with even more of trump's obstruction of justice revealed.
LMAO!
It's been classified?
How about we regain the contents of Weissmann's cell phone, which he erased?
Obstruction of an investigation that never should have been launched?
Remind us all again how that bullshit works?
Lol....
The "classified" portions have been available to prosecutors and congress since publication. It details sourcing and identities. There's no secret evidence. Ask the Democrats in Congress who've seen it. There wasn't even enough there to impeach Trump with, even with their incredibly low bar for impeachment.
It shows how little progressives have that they have to project their hopes and dreams "this time they've got really got him" onto "hidden" evidence they have had access to for years.
What would declassifying the Mueller report do? According to the Durham there was no justification to open an investigation in the first place. With that, it would make the Mueller report moot as it stemmed from the improper investigation.
please link all of the barr redacted portions of the report.
That's your job. You made the claim.
No, there won't be.
Even if Republicans drag the entire Clinton Campaign, Fusion GPS, and all external parties involved through questioning- the media will just claim Republicans are launching a "retaliation investigation". They will continue to spread lies; and try to taunt Republicans into coming after them as well.
The Establishment Republicans will fall in line; and not press questioning. Knowing that it is better to stay in power; and not burn bridges with those who will employ them once their political career is over. Republican career politicians care more about their own asses than this country.
Even if they catch anyone in a lie; who is going to prosecute them? Garland and the DOJ have no damn interest; and won't even sniff any request from the House. If Brandon loses; he can just blanket pardon everyone involved. What does he have to lose? He and his entire family are already set for the rest of their lives financially. The Establishment will have a place for any younger Bidens that want to run for office- and continue their pay for play practices.
Meanwhile those involved will use every avenue to fight this in the courts. The DOJ has no interest in forcing testimony will leave it up to Republicans to foot the bill.
Best Republicans can hope for is to bring the truth to light- it has already been repeatedly exposed; and the Establishment doesn't give a shit. Since they run things they know nothing will get done. So the next time around everyone can act shocked; and the same pro big government assholes and Establishment tit suckers can throw up road blocks and obscure the truth.
This country is done. Just a matter of time before we turn into a more dysfunctional version of China.
All they can do, which is what Barr said, is make the historical record. People need to know what happened and the books written in 50 years (assuming we have a free press) are not going to be kind to the FBI/media for creating a hoax to try and bring down a President..
One thing McCarthy can do is to expell them. Schiff will naturally be replaced with another democrat, but it might spoil his chances at getting Feinstein's job, which he seeks. He is an evil human being as well as a compulsive liar. McCarthy should expell at least two, because the dems wanted to get Soros out to reduce the Republican's slim majority, Therefore Eric Swalwell should also be expelled for compromising US security by sleeping with a Chinese spy. That way it will be a 2 for 1 deal.
I think being a serial liar who will do anything to attack Trump helps him in California. Unhinged zealotry is a selling point in the democratic primary. Schiff seems to think so, he's advertising it.
You may have something there!
[deleted]
Schiff won't be expelled, there's no way in this partisan Congress that McCarthy can get a two-thirds vote to expel. This does all need to be brought out into the light but nobody will be expelled and nobody will be punished.
Now the mindless are going to bleat trump for 3 hours.
You mean democrats will all say seig heil and march together as they always do? I'm afraid on Schiff you may be right, but on other matters such as the debt ceiling negotiations I'm seeing some signs of objectivity from moderate democrats.
ess can now use that foundation to compel cooperation from key figures in this scandal, if necessary, under a grant of immunity. The witnesses could still be prosecuted if they lie or mislead congressional investigators or commit perjury.
The problem with this is it requires a DOJ that's acting in good faith.
There is zero chance the Garland DOJ will prosecute someone "playing ball" no matter how egregiously they lie.
Congress can now use that foundation to compel cooperation from key figures in this scandal, if necessary, under a grant of immunity. The witnesses could still be prosecuted if they lie or mislead congressional investigators or commit perjury.
They could start with Marc Elias, who features prominently in the Durham Report. It was Elias who managed the legal budget for the campaign. We now know that the campaign hid the funding of the Steele dossier as a legal expense. (The Clinton campaign was later sanctioned by the FEC over its hiding of the funding).
I hope you read that Jim Jordan
It has been painful watching the degeneration of Jonathan Turley's arguments , and , well, thinking over the past half dozen years or so. He has reduced himself to regurgitating MAGA talking points.
That is exactly what this article is, a spewing of MAGA's greatest hit imaginings of what happened in the "Russia probe".
By the way if you think Turley is not simply a MAGA mouthpiece, take a look at his website.
The topics he bloviates on are literally nothing but one MAGA concern after another. The idea that this guy is some sort of objective analyst of legal issues is beyond laughable.
I go to you for objective analysis / S
Rachel too / S
Do you ever look at Turley's website? It is MAGA from top to bottom. He has as much overall credibility as Jim Jordan or James Comer do.
MAGA?
Did you recieve the same talking points that Biden got from the democrat party orthodoxy?
Turley nailed it. Why don't you admit that it was a hoax and that the FBI & media aided in that hoax?
What was a hoax?
I honestly wish that someone in the FBI would have been indicted for something so the nation could see all this adjudicated and the facts laid out for all to see.
The FBI investigation of the Trump campaign did NOT begin because Hillary Clinton either demanded it or because she fed the FBI false information. It began because , after the hacking of the DNC by Russia, the FBI realized they had information that a Trump campaign official, Papadopoulos , had told an informant that Russia had dirt on Clinton.
The opening of the investigation into the Trump campaign was totally justified. Durham doesnt even dispute this, he just says it should have been a "preliminary" investigation and not a full one. That distinction is probably just a matter of opinion.
What was the hoax? I dont get it.
Do you want to go over everything that would lead a halfway intelligent person to believe there was "fire" behind the smoke emitting from the Trump campaign?
If you want I can list the last 20 topics Turley writes about on his website. They are all, and I mean all, stories that align with MAGA concerns.
I wont do it because overall it would be a little off topic but I am perfectly willing to do so.
THAT TRUMP COLLUDED WITH RUSSIA! You remember John, you yourself said after endless months of the Mueller investigation, you stated that Trump probably didn't collude with Russia, BUT you didn't care as long as he got taken out. Remember John?
I honestly wish that someone in the FBI would have been indicted for something
You don't think there can be wrongdoing by the FBI, without them leaving evidence of criminality? You did have the confession of an FBI lawyer who fudged/forged a FISA application. What happened to all the serious penalties for doing exactly that?
The FBI investigation of the Trump campaign did NOT begin because Hillary Clinton either demanded it or because she fed the FBI false information. It began because , after the hacking of the DNC by Russia, the FBI realized they had information that a Trump campaign official, Papadopoulos , had told an informant that Russia had dirt on Clinton.
That was the silly excuse the FBI used. That would not equate to being a reasonable predicate for the Crossfire Hurricane investigation. That is Strike 1. Then is the other investigation you conflated it with. The one where the FBI used Clinton campaign generated information that the FBI knew was false as a predicate. Remember John the CIA reported to Obama & Comey before the 2016 election that Hillary's campaign was going to promote the Clinton generated Steele Dossier to deflect from her server issue and smear Trump. Comey knew before any of the investigations what the Clinton campaign was doing and he was a key player in everything that followed.
The opening of the investigation into the Trump campaign was totally justified. Durham doesnt even dispute this,
That is not true. Neither you nor Joe Scarborough can down-play it.
Donald Trump was never qualified to be president, dating back to 2011 where he endlessly lied about Obama through his conspiracy soaked "birther" campaign. He even lied about sending investigators to Hawaii.
So of course I never thought he was fit to be president, and should be "taken out" of American politics. I make no apologies for thinking that. I wish more people had thought that way in 2016.
There is and was a lot of smoke concerning possible Trump collusion with Russia. He did an idiotic thing when he asked Russia to "find" Hillary's emails , especially just after it was revealed that Russia had hacked the DNC. Then his son meets with a Russian government connected lawyer who offered "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. That was "collusion". In the mueller report it says that Trump Jr could not be indicted because he wasnt aware what he was doing was illegal. That is hardly a confirmation of innocence. And on and on. Close trump friend Roger Stone clamed to know when Assange would release another batch of damaging information about Clinton, implying co-ordination between the Trump campaign and the sources of the "dirt". Wikileaks timed the release to counter negative stories about Trump. And there was Trumps numerous lies about not having any business dealings with Russia when he was attempting to get Russia to permit a Trump hotel in Moscow.
The idea that the Trump campaign was as innocent as driven snow is ridiculous.
Take the lies argument and cram it.
Brandon the Human Fuck Up Machine has matched Trump lie for lie and he has been in office far longer.
The only reason you will never call Brandon out about it is because of the all mighty D behind his name.
Also,
Trump has done many things wrong. Trump did nothing wrong with Russia, period. The entire Mueller investigation was Democrat bullshit; and never should have taken place, period. Only TDS driven morons still try to make it out that he did.
Looking forward to the day that you and all Democrats/leftists hold Brandon the Human Fuck Up Machine to the same standards as Trump. Brandon is easily as guilty as Trump.
I havent read the report but from what I have heard in the media the above claim is not true.
What media? The same media that promoted the hoax? The same media that hired Strzok, McCabe and Weissmann?
Even CNN's Jake Tapper was able to admit it:
But you still can't?
I think we're going to have to keep this topic alive on Newstalkers for awhile to fumigate the accusations being made by the irresponsible right wing media.
CB put up a video on another seed made by Dan Abrams about the right wing media reaction to the Durham Report. You should watch it.
I think so too. You see, the DOJ along with the media that covered & promoted the hoax effectively shut down a duly elected presidency, based on a politically engineered hoax.
So instead of talking fact you are spouting off with the normal bullshit you heard from somebody who heard from somebody. Read the report.
That would be a good idea!
Better than the childish acts of going after the source instead of the actual information being discussed.