US Special Counsel John Durham’s report found that the FBI’s handling of the Trump-Russia probe was flawed, lacking evidence and relying on tips from Trump’s political opponents. The report emphasized the need for better analytical rigor and adherence to the law within the agency.
A recently released report by US Special Counsel John Durham has concluded that the FBI’s handling of the investigation into Donald Trump‘s 2016 presidential campaign was flawed. The report, which marks the end of a four-year probe launched in May 2019, found that the FBI lacked evidence to initiate the investigation and relied too heavily on tips provided by Trump’s political opponents.
The investigation, known as “Crossfire Hurricane,” was launched by the FBI to probe potential contacts between Trump‘s campaign and Russia. It was later handed over to Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who concluded in March 2019 that there was no evidence of a criminal conspiracy between Trump’s campaign and Russia.
Trump-Russia Investigation Raises Concerns
In stated that US intelligence and law enforcement did not possess any “actual evidence” of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russia prior to initiating the investigation. He also criticized the FBI for treating the Donald probe differently from other politically sensitive investigations, including those involving Hillary Clinton.
According to Durham, “Senior FBI personnel displayed a serious lack of analytical rigor towards the information that they received, especially information from politically affiliated persons and entities.” The report accuses the FBI of failing to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law in certain events and activities related to the investigation.
The report was released to Congress without redactions and is likely to become a political issue, particularly for Trump, who is considering running for re-election in 2024. Trump had hoped that the report would be released before the 2020 election to undermine President Joe Biden’s campaign, but it failed to produce a significant impact.
Acquittals Undermine Credibility of Trump-Russia Probe
Special Counsel Durham’s investigation faced setbacks when two separate juries acquitted defendants he attempted to prosecute in 2022. The failure to secure convictions in these cases undermined the credibility and impact of the investigation.
One of the cases involved Michael Sussmann, a former campaign attorney for Hillary Clinton, who was acquitted on charges of lying to the FBI. The other case involved Russian researcher Igor Danchenko, who was acquitted of charges related to providing information that became part of the controversial “Steele dossier.”
The report also highlighted the FBI’s improper reliance on unsubstantiated allegations from the Steele dossier when applying for court-approved warrant applications to monitor the communications of Carter Page, a former Trump campaign adviser. The inspector general’s report from the Justice Department had previously raised concerns about the FBI’s process for obtaining wiretap applications.
Adherence to Law in FBI’s Trump-Russia Probe
Following these revelations, the FBI has implemented numerous reforms to the process. The findings of Special Counsel Durham’s report align with the concerns raised by the inspector general, further emphasizing the need for improved rigor and adherence to the law within the FBI.
The report by US Special Counsel John Durham concludes that the FBI’s handling of the Trump-Russia probe was flawed. It highlights the lack of evidence to support the initiation of the investigation and the FBI’s overreliance on tips from Trump’s political opponents.
The report raises concerns about the FBI’s treatment of politically sensitive investigations and calls for greater analytical rigor and adherence to the law within the agency. The investigation’s failures and the acquittals in the prosecutions dealt a blow to the credibility and impact of the probe.
