In a previously undisclosed branch of his probe, John Durham, the special prosecutor appointed by Republican Attorney General Bill Barr to poke holes in Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russia’s disruption of the 2016 election and its assistance to Donald Trump’s campaign, started in 2019 to follow a trail of money streaming to Trump from Italy, but abandoned the investigation without resolution or indictments, the New York Times reports.
The fact that Durham’s investigation identified questionable actions by Trump that spurred a DOJ inquiry was not released by the Durham team, and the NY Times account details a number of other problems with the Durham probe, largely regarded as an attempt to deflect attention from Trump’s malfeasance and feed some meat to rabid conspiracy theories from the far right of the Republican Party.
Durham and Barr would meet at least weekly at Barr’s office over the course of the probe, sometimes supplementing those discussions with other meetings over dinner or a glass of scotch at a local establishment, an unusually close relationship for two people who were supposed to be acting independently of one another. The NY Times reports that Barr pushed Durham to find holes in Mueller’s report, but Durham could find none of any significance.
Barr pressured the National Security Agency to cooperate with the Durham probe, telling NSA Director Paul M. Nakasone he believed the NSA’s “friends”–referring to foreign intelligence agencies as well as the US’s own CIA–had helped push the Trump-Russia narrative for their ends. The implication was clear: Barr thought the US intelligence agencies were conspiring with foreign governments to undermine Trump, an incredible belief that was not supported by any evidence.
During a trip to Italy in 2019 where Barr asked the Italian government to provide evidence to discredit parts of Mueller’s investigation, Italian officials instead told Barr and Durham that Trump was tied up in unsavory financial dealings, something that reportedly displeased Barr because it required an investigation into an official claim of potential wrongdoing by the President. Even though the subject was far different than the brief Durham had been handed to investigate the Mueller investigation, Barr secretly expanded Durham’s probe to include the Italian affair and also empowered Durham with criminal prosecutorial powers for the first time. After shutting the incomplete line of investigation, Durham dropped the line of inquiry entirely, reportedly failing to follow up on open leads. It’s unclear what information Durham collected and whether he or Barr had any contact with Trump or the White House about the Italians’ accusation.
Further complicating Barr’s desire to shield Trump: the DOJ’s Inspector General released a report in December 2019 finding that the basis for the Russian investigation–an Australian diplomat contacted US authorities after being told by a member of Trump’s campaign, George Papadopoulos, that Russia was helping with the election effort in 2016–was sound and legal. Durham didn’t like those conclusions and pressured the Inspector General, Michael E. Horowitz, to delete that finding from his report. Horowitz kept the statement in.
Durham’s team was also rife with discontent as senior lawyers and investigators found Durham’s and Barr’s stated aims and tactics questionable legally and ethically. When long-time Durham associate Nancy Dannehy quit abruptly in 2020, there was no official public acknowledgment at the time about why she left; the Times reports she left because she had doubts about the investigation adhering to accepted professional ethics. Two other lawyers left the team in early 2021, concerned about the push Durham was making at the time to implicate Hillary Clinton, who was not suspected by the team of any illegal actions relating to the Mueller probe or Trump’s involvement with Russia. Another lawyer quit shortly after the other two when Durham continued to pressure his team to frame implicate Clinton.