The weaponization of the Justice Department
Despite the lack of evidence, Barr and Durham's investigation has been used by Trump and his allies to spread a false narrative, which has been used to undermine public trust in law enforcement.
Trump allies accuse “the Left” of weaponizing the DOJ to pursue a political agenda. In fact, in 2016, both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump were under investigation by the DOJ. However, the FBI only publicized the investigation of the Democratic candidate, arguably impacting her loss to Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. The studiously kept the investigation of Donald Trump confidential so as not to interfere with the election.
In contrast, Critics have accused Bill Barr and John Durham of weaponizing the Justice Department to pursue a political agenda. They point to the fact that Barr appointed Durham just weeks before Trump was defeated by Joe Biden, effectively ensuring that Durham's work would continue even after Trump left office. They also note that Durham's investigation has been focused on finding wrongdoing by the FBI, rather than on investigating Russian interference in the election.
Barr and Durham were both key figures in the Trump administration's efforts to discredit the FBI's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Barr, who served as attorney general from 2019 to 2021, appointed Durham as a special counsel to investigate the origins of the FBI's investigation. Durham's investigation has been ongoing for over four years and has resulted in only one conviction, that of a low-level FBI lawyer who pleaded guilty to altering an email used in one of the FISA applications used to authorize surveillance against Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
The Meeting Between Barr and Durham to Achieve a “Success” for Trump
According to a report by The New York Times, Barr and Durham met over drinks at a Washington, D.C., restaurant in October 2019. During the meeting, Durham told Barr that he had uncovered evidence of possible criminal wrongdoing by the FBI in its investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Barr was reportedly "stunned" by the news, and he authorized Durham to expand his investigation into a criminal probe.
The Times report also said that Barr and Durham discussed the possibility of using the investigation to discredit the FBI and to undermine public trust in law enforcement. Barr reportedly told Durham that he wanted the investigation to be "a thorough and professional look at what happened," but he also said that he wanted the investigation to be "a success" for Trump.
Investigators Are Not Supposed to Speak Publicly About Ongoing Investigations
The fact that the details of an ongoing investigation were leaked to the New York Times at all is a big problem. Investigators are not supposed to speak publicly about ongoing investigations. There are a few reasons for this. First, speaking publicly about an ongoing investigation can jeopardize the investigation by tipping off suspects or witnesses. Second, it can prejudice the public against the accused, even if they are later found not guilty. Third, it can damage the reputation of the investigator and the agency they work for.
Investigators who speak publicly about ongoing investigations can be disciplined or even fired. This is because speaking publicly about an ongoing investigation can damage the integrity of the investigation and the reputation of the investigator and the agency they work for.
Further Weaponization of the Investigation
The meeting between Barr and Durham is significant because it provides further evidence of the Trump administration's efforts to weaponize the Justice Department for political purposes. The fact that Barr authorized Durham to expand his investigation into a criminal probe, even though there was no evidence of any wrongdoing by the FBI, suggests that Barr was more interested in discrediting the FBI than in conducting a fair and impartial investigation.
The meeting between Barr and Durham also raises questions about the independence of the Justice Department. The Justice Department is supposed to be a neutral arbiter of the law, but the meeting between Barr and Durham suggests that the Justice Department was being used by the Trump administration to pursue a political agenda.
The Final Report Contained Allegations, but no Evidence or Indictments
In his final report, Durham condemned the FBI for its handling of the Russia investigation, but he did not find any evidence of a conspiracy by the FBI to frame Trump or his campaign. Durham's report also did not find any evidence that the FBI's investigation was motivated by political bias.
Despite the lack of evidence, Barr and Durham's investigation has been used by Trump and his allies to spread the false narrative that the FBI was biased against Trump and that the Russia investigation was a "witch hunt." This narrative has been used to justify Trump's attacks on the FBI and to undermine public trust in law enforcement.