In 2019, Attorney General William Barr appointed prosecutor John Durham to lead an investigation much desired by then-President Donald Trump, tasked with proving that the Justice Department’s inquiry into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election to demoralize Democrats and boost Trump was itself the product of a “Deep State” conspiracy by “Never Trumper” federal officials egged on by Democrats. While Trump has been beset since leaving office by investigations into his role in the violence on January 6th, Trump’s business empire found guilty of criminal tax fraud, and the possibility looming of charges against Trump personally, MAGA loyalists like Rep. Lauren Boebert clung to the Durham inquiry as their impending counterstroke that would “whatabout” everything back into perspective.
But as the New York Times reported a few days ago, the Durham probe has itself become the closest thing to “Deep State” treachery Democrats are accused of in the “Russiagate” investigation that has been proven to actually exist:
Egged on by Mr. Trump, Attorney General William P. Barr set out in 2019 to dig into their shared theory that the Russia investigation likely stemmed from a conspiracy by intelligence or law enforcement agencies. To lead the inquiry, Mr. Barr turned to a hard-nosed prosecutor named John H. Durham, and later granted him special counsel status to carry on after Mr. Trump left office.
But after almost four years — far longer than the Russia investigation itself — Mr. Durham’s work is coming to an end without uncovering anything like the deep state plot alleged by Mr. Trump and suspected by Mr. Barr. [Pols emphasis]
Moreover, a monthslong review by The New York Times found that the main thrust of the Durham inquiry was marked by some of the very same flaws — including a strained justification for opening it and its role in fueling partisan conspiracy theories that would never be charged in court — that Trump allies claim characterized the Russia investigation.
Not only has Durham’s investigation failed to uncover evidence that federal law enforcement officials conspired to persecute Trump over Russia’s admitted efforts to interfere with the 2016 elections on Trump’s behalf, Durham appears to have been presented with further evidence of unrelated criminal activity by Trump–evidence that Durham appears to have never followed up on. Durham lost the only court case brought to trial under the original scope of his investigation, and despite constant hype of shocking revelations just around the corner from Barr then regurgitated by Boebert and other MAGA-bubble distribution channels, there is no dramatic finale coming.
Back in the spring of 2021, Rep. Boebert was so confident that the Durham investigation was going to collect heads, she told an audience in Delta there was a good possibility that Republicans would retake Congress before the 2022 midterm elections:
This is my opinion with that information that I have. I believe we’ll see resignations begin to take place and I think we can take back the majority in the House and the Senate before 2022.
That never happened, and now the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate has the duty of (stay with us) investigating the Durham investigation of the “Russiagate” investigation. The thing to keep in mind, and of course the thing partisans can never agree upon in the moment, is that not all investigations are created equal. Some are based on evidence, others in pursuit of their own confirmation bias. Still others are simply meant as a distraction from the inquiries that matter. On the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Lauren Boebert is set to be one of the principal mouthpieces of the next two years of tit-for-tat retaliatory investigations of the Biden administration.
If you believed Boebert’s hype about the Durham investigation, you’re about to be sorely disappointed.
In a perfect world, that would make it harder to believe Boebert next time.
I never believed Boebert the first time, so no problem.
Inside that head of hers is two beavers chewing on a log. Any chance she’d donate her encephalon to science when she’s done with it?