Reporter explains why no Durham report pre-election


CBS News Senior Investigative Correspondent Catherine Herridge reported in tweets that there are reasons for the delay in reporting on Durham’s investigation.

For one, COVID slowed everything down. For another, Durham’s probe “expanded in recent weeks” and is now going “well beyond origins of FBI Russia probe.”

“This includes Sept 2016 CIA investigative referral to FBI over alleged 3rd party discussion of HRC approved plan ‘concerning candidate Trump + Russian hackers’ + Brennan notes,” Herridge added. “Separately, official told @CBSNews that if there is a probability of future prosecutions stemming from Durham then there cannot be a report released prior to that. The official would not comment as to whether potential prosecutions are in the works.”

However interesting that is, it does seem like we always have a carrot dangling with nothing happening.


Attorney General William Barr informed top Republicans that the Justice Department’s probe into the origins of the Russia investigation would not be released prior to the election.

To reveal nothing before this major election when the opposing party tried to unseat the President seems like professional negligence.

According to Axios, Barr said Durham is working in a deliberate and calculated fashion, and they need to be patient. The general sense of the talks, the source says, is that Durham is not preoccupied with completing his probe by a certain deadline for political purposes.”

It’s not political to let people know about a coup when people are at risk of voting for the corrupt party that orchestrated it.


This past two weeks, Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe released declassified documents detailing information that intelligence agencies procured in 2016.

“U.S. intelligence agencies obtained insight into Russian intelligence analysis alleging that U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had approved a campaign plan to stir up a scandal against U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump by tying him to Putin and the Russians’ hacking of the Democratic National Committee,” the document explained. “The IC does not know the accuracy of this allegation or the extent to which the Russian intelligence analysis may reflect exaggeration or fabrication.”

The document continued, “On 07 September 2016, U.S. intelligence officials forwarded an investigative referral to FBI Director James Comey and Deputy Assistant Director of Counterintelligence Peter Strzok regarding ‘U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning U.S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering U.S. elections as a means of distracting the public from her use of a private mail server.’”

The timeline of reports out of the Clinton campaign does coincide with the leaks of Russia-Trump collusion.

Ratcliffe later declassified information revealing that former C.I.A. Director John Brennan briefed then-President Barack Obama on the information they had obtained.

While one must not give up hope, there is reason to believe nothing will come of any of this. There is nothing much to the contrary to give us hope really.



  1. This is merely damage control disinformation. For example “According to Axios, Barr said Durham is working in a deliberate and calculated fashion, and they need to be patient”. All the DOJ offers is PR hearsay, with plenty of adjectives substituting for action. We don’t need to be patient, they need to follow their oaths. You can see by the very wording of the statement that the observer is the problem, not the investigator. If Durham stopped operations due to COVID, that was not needed, and was his or Barr’s decision. Did they ever start operations at all? Have there been any grand juries?

    Why expand the investigation if they cannot handle what they have? Why not assign it to another? That’s a stall, a diversion. Every step of they way they stall while promising more. It’s a con.

    Here is another reason why this is just another stall. The Hillary angle does not make sense, and has been presented as another diversion for public consumption. Whatever Hillary was doing was known by the agencies 4 years ago. It is improper to withhold that information so long then present it as some silly reason to delay. Most important is that Hillary had no official role at the time. She had no power to do anything. Her involvement does not relieve any official in DOJ & CIA of the major criminal activities they were involved in. To say that we are delayed because we must investigate Hillary though we are already aware of the major crimes of actual officials is invalid.

    Barr was defined the moment he threw away rock solid criminal referrals on Comey & McCabe, all verified by his department, nearly a year ago. At the time, there was no explanation, except the usual indirect hearsay that we normally get from Barr’s DOJ disinformation operation.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.