Durham report challenges FBI's actions in Trump-Russia investigation

Special Counsel John Durham, who was appointed by Attorney General Bill Barr to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia probe, released a 300-page report accusing the FBI of negligence in opening the investigation based on vague and insufficient information. 

Durham's report criticised the FBI for failing to uphold its mission and displaying a lack of analytical rigor, particularly when receiving information from politically affiliated sources. The FBI responded by stating that the identified missteps had already been addressed through corrective actions implemented by current leadership.

Durham's report seemed to be an appeal to the court of public opinion, aligning with claims made by Trump and his allies that the FBI unfairly targeted his campaign. However, Durham's central conclusions contradicted a 2019 report by the Justice Department's internal watchdog, which found that while the FBI made mistakes, the decision to open the investigation was justified and untainted by political bias.

The report delves into the FBI's investigation called "Crossfire Hurricane," which led to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. While Mueller did not establish coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia, he found numerous contacts between campaign officials and Russians. 

A bipartisan Senate intelligence committee report further suggested that the Trump campaign posed a counterintelligence risk to the United States.

Durham argues that the FBI acted hastily in opening the investigation based on uncorroborated information after a Trump campaign aide mentioned receiving an offer from Russia. He highlights the contrasting approaches taken by the FBI in similar counterintelligence matters involving the Clinton campaign, suggesting bias in their handling of the investigations.

The report also addresses the credibility of the Steele dossier, which the FBI relied on to obtain a surveillance warrant for Trump aide Carter Page. Durham reveals that the FBI was unable to substantiate most of the dossier, which was largely compiled by a Russian named Igor Danchenko. Durham prosecuted Danchenko on charges of lying but failed to secure a conviction.

In another case, Durham charged an FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, with falsifying an application for a national security warrant, resulting in a guilty plea and probation. The FBI subsequently revamped its procedures for dealing with FISA warrants.

While Durham's report presents sweeping conclusions, much of it covers well-known historical events. The release of the report without changes suggests that Attorney General Merrick Garland agreed with its findings. However, it remains a matter of debate and interpretation within the political landscape.