John Durham

The gas prices go up and everybody freaks out.

All right, so we do have some new information on John Durham.

Came out yesterday from Just the News.

Now, of course, last week we got confirmation that former CIA Director John Brennan had received a brand new subpoena to testify in that ongoing grand conspiracy weaponization probe taking place in the Southern District of Florida.

He's a senior national security and intelligence analyst, and his speaking fees typically range from $50,000 to $75,000.

His security clearance, of course, however, was officially revoked by President Trump in January of last year.

Did I say John Durham? I meant to say John Brennan.

Sorry about that.

It's the, it's the kind of thing that you would expect.

He's the same judge, by the way, that was on John Durham's trial against what was that guy's name? Silman Sullivan, whatever his name was in the, the investigation of the genesis of Russiagate.

So that was the case where that guy got acquitted.

That's yet another reason why Trump can't stand this judge.

was non-composimentous in an illicit and illegal investigation run by former U.S. attorney and former FBI general counsel Andrew Weissman, the same man who ordered the Mueller investigators to destroy the memory in their cell phones when those cell phones were being sought by special counsel Weissman.

John Durham, investigating the origins of the Russian collusion hoax.

And it appears this investigation in Florida is aimed at assessing whether the president's civil rights were violated.

Prosecutor reported told Brennan's lawyer that he was also the subject of a separate investigation for alleged false statements to Congress.

Now we know why.

the head of CrowdStrike, a man named Sean Henry, who just happened to be Robert Mueller's deputy at the FBI years before, testified under oath to the House Intelligence Committee, in which he admitted that his report had no proof whatsoever that the Democrat National Committee had been the target of an online hack by Russian intelligence or anyone else.

There have been other investigations into the Russian collusion hoax, There was one by Special Counsel John Durham.

But did you know that John Durham was never granted subpoena power by Attorney General Bill Barr so that any of the perps in this cabal could simply refuse to be questioned by him and refuse to hand over any documents? That's precisely what happened.

Well, the investigation is an extremely broad probe into multiple actions that were taken at the end of the Obama administration and during the Biden administration, ranging from the investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election, and whether the Trump campaign had any involvement in that, ranging all the way through to the investigation that was done under the Biden administration into Trump's activities, including his efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his taking of classified documents down to Mar-a-Lago after he left office.

I mean, it sounds like especially the allegations involving Russia have been investigated over and over again, including by John Durham, who was appointed by Trump, right?

One of the things that's so bizarre about what the Justice Department is doing is that they're retreading ground that has already been well plowed by other investigations.

There's been multiple investigations into what happened in 2016 with regard to the Trump-Russia investigation.

There was an Inspector General investigation yesterday.

into all of the activity that took place.

And then there was a special counsel appointed during the first Trump administration, John Durham, and he took a deep dive look into whether there were any crimes committed during the Trump Russia investigation.

And he was only able to find one low-level FBI lawyer who lied on a document.

But this to me is sort of the pinnacle of Trump political prosecutions, this conspiracy thing, because it really is like an actual, I mean, obviously the statute is conspiracy, but they're talking about the kind of conspiracy that just involves everybody.

This was the whole thing that John Durham was already appointed to look into, and he could bring no conspiracy charges after four years.

You have to be able to prove some kind of specific intent among people across two administrations, people that never even worked with each other, you know, maybe never even talked.

Potentially going back to 2016 and all the stuff that Trump keeps talking about with Russia, the Mueller investigation and...

Like so many things, like the election stuff, right? As soon as it hits the courts, it's a different thing.

You can talk all day on Newsmax about your conspiracies, but you actually have to prove this to a grand jury.

And I don't think it's going to happen, especially because the John Durham thing, it was like that guy was really trying and he'd got nothing, came up with nothing at all.

No conspiracy.