Kash’s Corner: A Blueprint for Durham and Accountability for the Crossfire Hurricane Scandal

In the investigation into the Crossfire Hurricane scandal, what powers does Special Counsel John Durham have that the inspector general did not? What might come out of Durham’s investigation—which is still ongoing?

If Kash Patel were special counsel, what would he do?

And what declassified materials have still not been released?

Jan Jekielek: Hello everyone, welcome to this week’s episode of Kash’s Corner. Kash, we have something that’s very much up your alley to talk about this week. I know both of us read this, what Glenn Greenwald calls a mega-viral thread. And indeed, it was mega-viral thread done by Daryl Cooper.

It explores how the Russia collusion hoax or operation essentially changed the perception of MAGA voters, or perhaps of a lot of conservatives in America on a whole set of institutions that are part of the U.S. government.

One of the things that Darryl observes is that people were following all the information that was coming out of the corporate media about Russia collusion. These are people that would have eagerly supported any sort of prosecution that might have happened at the time.

But because of the work that you and Congressman Nunes did at the House Intelligence Committee, and the IG [Inspector General] Report that came out subsequently, they increasingly realized that the system really wasn’t working, and in the process they became incredibly disillusioned.

This is something that I’ve heard from many people that I know who were MAGA voters over the past few years. Let’s talk a little bit about Durham. Because Durham, to this day is acting as special counsel looking into the origins of this whole Russia collusion investigation.

Today, what we’re going to ask you to give us some insight into what he might be doing, because a lot of people might not even know that he’s even on the job right now.

Kash Patel: Jan, it’s great to be back and I’m looking forward to another exciting episode with you. And just as a simple reminder to our fan base, we’re going to give a very special shout out to an inspirational fan of Kash’s Corner at the end of the show.

Backing it up a little bit, I would say the American people, the majority have felt that accountability is something that should be applied equally to those in government, as it is to those outside of government, when they break the law.

Now, it’s been proven beyond any doubt, as you said, that the Russiagate narrative, the Russia collusion narrative was a total fraud— a fraud upon a federal court, on federal judges, on the attorney general, on the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and most importantly, on the American people. That is why there’s such energy and drive to understand why accountability is lacking.

Now with John Durham, you have to remember, there’s John Durham, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut, with almost 10 years in that role. Bill Barr, in the spring of 2019, brought him in, while he was the U.S. Attorney in Connecticut, to look at all of the things related to the Russiagate hoax that we had uncovered on the House Intelligence Committee with Chairman Nunes and that were subsequently validated by the IG’s independent report.

So Darryl was going for a year plus on that matter. Then towards the end of the Trump administration, Bill Barr appointed John Durham to another roll, special counsel.

Mr. Jekielek: Now, let me stop you for a second. So one thing about the IG report, and this was paraded a lot in the corporate media, the IG report didn’t find there was an issue with the predication, or the origins of the whole Russia collusion operation.

Mr. Patel: Let’s just remind everyone of the limited powers of an inspector general. One, they do not have subpoena power. And only people employed in government at the time of the inspector general’s report are required to sit down with them and answer questions if they want to.

They have no authority outside of that, they do not have a grand jury power, and they do not have subpoena power. So a lot of the individuals in question, the Comeys, the McCabes, the Strzoks, the Lisa Pages, they were all fired or resigned or retired early as a result of our HPSCI, [United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence] House Intelligence Report.

We were able to show the American people the ways in which they abused their authority. So an inspector general’s report is limited. But I would say this, and I know most of the media wanted to ignore this, he found 17 errors in the four federal warrant applications against the Trump campaign.

Any one of which, he said, was sufficient to overturn each individual warrant. And that was the Inspector General. And two warrants eventually were entirely reversed by the Department of Justice.

So that is a significant finding by the inspector general. But if you want to know what actually happened, you need to have criminal investigative powers, which the IG does not have, but a John Durham would.

Mr. Jekielek: So John Durham is still around as special counsel now. Actually he’s left his role as a U.S. Attorney for Connecticut. But we really haven’t heard anything from him.

Mr. Patel: So a quick reminder on special counsels. He’s in place and the special counsel regulations outlined by the attorney general at the time of the appointment say what John Durham is allowed to investigate.

Essentially, he’s allowed to investigate the entire origins of the Russia collusion narrative, and all the individuals involved. He has all the authority that a Department of Justice prosecutor has— grand jury, petit jury, subpoenas, national security letters, and the like.

So it’s a tremendous amount of power, and he has the investigative capability of FBI agents, federal law enforcement and local law enforcement to help him.

He’s still in place because the special counsel’s role has not ended. It can only end when he finishes his submission to the attorney general as to recommend charges, and/or submit a written report for the public to read once the attorney general has signed off on that report as well.

So neither of those things have happened. Obviously, John Durham has not been removed as special counsel. He’s still there. I don’t know what he’s doing. But I know what I would do.

Script Continued: July 16, 2021 https://www.theepochtimes.com/kashs-corner-a-blueprint-for-durham-and-accountability-for-the-crossfire-hurricane-scandal_3905522.html

Also the John Durham Indictment of Michael Sussmann – FULL Report & Attachments https://www.justice.gov/sco/pr/grand-jury-indicts-dc-attorney-making-false-statements-fbi-2016-regarding-alleged

Excerpt Below

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEThursday, September 16, 2021

Grand Jury Indicts D.C. Attorney with Making False Statements to the FBI in 2016 Regarding Alleged Communications Between Trump Organization and Russian Bank

Special Counsel John Durham today announced that a federal grand jury returned an indictment in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia charging Michael A. Sussmann, 57, a Washington, D.C.-based attorney, with making a false statement to the FBI on Sept. 19, 2016. The charge in the indictment stems from a set of allegations brought by Sussmann to the FBI related to an alleged secret channel of communications between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank.

Sussmann is expected to make his initial appearance in the D.C. federal court as soon as tomorrow. The court will schedule the appearance.

As alleged in the indictment, on Sept. 19, 2016, Sussman, a lawyer at a large international law firm, met with the FBI General Counsel at FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C. Sussmann had requested the meeting to provide the General Counsel with certain data files and “white papers” that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russia-based bank. Sussmann, who had previously represented the Democratic National Committee in connection with a cyber hack, falsely stated to the General Counsel that he was not bringing these allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client. This false representation led the General Counsel to understand that Sussmann was providing information as a good citizen rather than a paid advocate or political operative. In fact, Sussmann assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two clients, including a U.S. technology executive and the Clinton Presidential Campaign.