Bill Maher Nails Why Trump Connects With Voters...and Dems Won't Like It
CNN Host: There's No Evidence That Obama or Biden Went After Trump
Virginia Dems Might Want to Correct This Statement Over the Sign That Attacked...
So, That's Why the University of South Carolina Had an Active Shooter Alert
All the Right People in Media Were Mad About John Bolton's Home Being...
Democrats Seem To Love Black Death
And Stay Out!
Should Men Cry In Front Of Women?
Trump Wants Grassley to Tell Dems These Three Words Over 'Blue Slip' Tradition
A Disturbing Number of People Have Signed Petition Supporting Illegal Trucker Accused of...
The Woke Left Goes Lock, Stock, and Cracker Barrel
The Woke Left Goes Lock, Stock, and Cracker Barrel
When 'Woke' Businesses Betray Their Customers
Israel is Not Committing Genocide in Gaza, Despite Hamas Terrorists’ Claims
Rising Anti-Semitism: A Real Crisis Affecting Real People
Tipsheet

Durham's Investigation Asked These Questions and Found 'Sobering' Answers

AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

Special Counsel John Durham's long awaited findings of his investigation into Crossfire Hurricane, the probe launched by the FBI against President Donald Trump alleging "Russian collusion," were finally released Monday in a 306-page report

Advertisement

The lengthy document roundly condemns the FBI for interfering in the 2016 presidential election, breaking protocols and using politics to justify doing so. Durham's team asked the following questions and concluded, "Our findings and conclusions regarding these and related questions are sobering."

Was there adequate predication for the FBI to open the Crossfire Hurricane investigation from its inception on July 31, 2016 as a full counterintelligence and Foreign Agents Registration Act ("FARA") investigation given the requirements of The Attorney

General's Guidelines for FBI Domestic Operations and FBI policies relating to the use of the least intrusive investigative tools necessary? 

Was the opening of Crossfire Hurricane as a full investigation on July 31, 2016 consistent with how the FBI handled other intelligence it had received prior to July 31, 2016 concerning attempts by foreign interests to influence the Clinton and other campaigns?

Similarly, did the FBI properly consider other highly significant intelligence it received at virtually the same time as that used to predicate Crossfire Hurricane, but which related not to the Trump campaign, but rather to a purported Clinton campaign plan "to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by Russian security services," which might have shed light on some of the Russia information the FBI was receiving from third parties, including the Steele Dossier, the Alfa Bank allegations and confidential human source ("CHS") reporting? If not, were any provable federal crimes committed in failing to do so?

Was there evidence that the actions of any FBI personnel or third parties relating to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation violated any federal criminal statutes, including the prohibition against making false statements to federal officials? If so, was that evidence sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

Was there evidence that the actions of the FBI or Department personnel in providing false or incomplete information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court ("FISC") violated any federal criminal statutes? If so, was there evidence sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?

Advertisement

The FBI responded to the report, which showed the agency should have never opened the investigation and had zero evidence to do so, by claiming new rules have been implemented to avoid political targeting in the future. Legal experts are skeptical of that claim. 

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement