On Wednesday, Rep. Jim Jordan revved up the engine of his clown car and held a House Judiciary Committee hearing on the infamously wasteful hot air balloon known as the Durham report, i.e., the investigation into the investigation of Donald Trump, which wasted three years and millions of taxpayer dollars while revealing nothing new except how corrupt John Durham and Trump’s Attorney General Bill Barr were.
Unfortunately for Jordan, even his grating voice could not protect Durham from being dissected by the Democratic representatives on the committee. The highlights were worth watching.
RELATED STORY: No one should be shocked, because everyone knew Barr and Durham were crooks all along
Democratic Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee took Durham on a tour of how compromised his own investigation was–specifically the clear conflict of interest Durham’s former boss, then-Attorney General Bill Barr, had with the supposedly “independent” special counsel investigation.
Rep. Steve Cohen asked Durham if he believed “Mr. Trump has pretty good judgment on people and their abilities and their character.” Durham clammed up, saying he wasn’t going to “characterize Mr. Trump or my thoughts about Mr. Trump.” It lead to this beauty of an exchange:
REP. STEVE COHEN: Mr. Trump has called Mr. Barr a gutless pig, a coward, and a rhino. Which of those is correct? Which isn't?
JOHN DURHAM: In my experience. None of those are correct.
COHEN: So, Mr. Trump isn't that good of an expert on character and judging people.
Hehe. That was fun. Next up was Rep. Hank Johnson, who detailed how long and wasteful Durham’s investigation was, and more importantly, how his investigation revealed none of the claims made by Trump that some deep state actors were perpetrating a witch hunt against him were true.
In fact, Johnson explained, of the three measly indictments the Durham report brought forward, two were “slam dunk acquitted,” while the one guilty plea was for something “unrelated to the origins of the FBI investigation.” Johnson further noted that the investigation did not reveal any criminal undertakings to perpetrate a hoax in the hopes of taking down Trump. Durham attempted to spin this by saying he wouldn’t “characterize” it that way, to which Johnson innocently asked, “You mean you did charge somebody with being a part of a hoax?” (Spoiler alert: He didn’t.)
Rep. Eric Swalwell followed up by stating that while Biden could have fired Durham, he didn’t. Biden Attorney General Merrick Garland could have directed Durham, but he didn’t. And with all of that leeway and no restriction on who he could bring charges against, Durham didn’t bring any charges against the pretend culprits of this “witch hunt” against the twice-impeached Trump.
Finally, Rep. Pramila Jayapal summed up everything wrong about Durham’s investigation: It was a waste, it proved nothing, and the charges brought against three people were a joke. “In fact, in one case, the trial judge threw out one of your charges because the claim you were charging as false was, as he put it, ‘literally true.’”
Jayapal also used her time to contrast this investigation with Robert Mueller’s investigation, with its 37 indictments and zero acquittals, to describe what constitutes a real criminal investigation versus a bogus propaganda mission. Durham looked like he could use a few stiff drinks.
RELATED STORIES:
The ever-humiliating Durham investigation gets humiliated again as jury acquits Sussmann
Republican attempt to censure Adam Schiff fails
We are joined by Christina Reynolds of Emily’s List. Reynolds is the Senior Vice President of Communications and Content at the progressive organization that works on getting women elected to office. Reynolds talks about what she is seeing up and down the ballot this election cycle on the anniversary of the outrageous Supreme Court Decision to take away the reproductive protections of Roe v. Wade.