“Special Counsel John Durham’s Investigation Reveals FBI’s Grave Misconduct”

According to a report compiled over three years by the Trump-administration appointee, John Durham, the FBI should not have launched a full investigation into connections between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia during the 2016 election. Durham’s 300-plus page report also states that the FBI used “raw, unanalyzed, and uncorroborated intelligence,” to launch the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation into Trump and Russia but used a different standard when weighing concerns about alleged election interference concerning Hillary Clinton’s campaign. However, Durham did not recommend any new charges against individuals or suggest any “wholesale changes” about how the FBI handles politically charged investigations.

The report also concluded that the FBI had a “predisposition to open an investigation into Trump,” and reveals that “at least on the part of certain personnel intimately involved in the matter” that there “was a predisposition to open an investigation into Trump.” Durham’s findings that the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign should not have happened contradict a previous Justice Department inspector general investigation into the FBI’s Russia probe, which identified problems with the investigation but concluded in December 2019 that there was sufficient justification to open the inquiry.

Philosophical Discussion

This report by John Durham and its findings have once again stirred up political tensions in the United States over the Russia-Trump collusion allegations. It is interesting to note that some of the issues outlined in the report reflect similar concerns that have been raised in the past over the FBI‘s handling of politically sensitive cases.

The report suggests that the FBI should not have launched a full investigation into connections between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia during the 2016 election. This conclusion raises questions about the FBI‘s impartiality and its ability to “uphold its important mission of strict fidelity to the law” during politically charged investigations.

Furthermore, the report calls for the creation of a career position for a nonpartisan FBI lawyer or agent who would be tasked with challenging steps taken in “politically sensitive investigations,” including surveillance warrant applications. This proposal represents an interesting new role for the FBI and could augment the organization’s internal checks and balances.

The report also highlights the overreliance of the FBI on the Steele dossier, an explosive document that contained unverified allegations about Trump’s connections to Russia. Durham found that the Crossfire Hurricane investigation “did not and could not corroborate any of the substantive allegations” contained in the controversial Steele dossier, which was used by the FBI to obtain a FISA warrant. This example demonstrates how the FBI‘s reliance on uncorroborated intelligence could lead to unjustified investigations.

Editorial and Advice

The findings of the report raise significant concerns about the FBI‘s ability to conduct politically sensitive investigations impartially and without prejudice. The FBI needs to earn back the public’s trust by upholding its important mission of strict fidelity to the law and by ensuring that all of its investigations are based on verified intelligence.

The FBI should also consider Durham’s proposal for a career position for a nonpartisan FBI lawyer or agent, tasked with challenging steps taken in politically sensitive investigations. This position would enhance the FBI‘s ability to maintain impartiality and foster greater confidence in its investigations.

Finally, the FBI should learn from its overreliance on uncorroborated intelligence. The Bureau should ensure that its investigations are always based on verified intelligence to prevent the unnecessary invasion of innocent individuals