John Durham’s meticulous investigation is skewering big fish, which likely will lead to even bigger fish, although not quickly enough for most of us.. From George Parry at knowledgeisgood.net:

Yesterday The American Spectator published my article regarding Special Counsel John Durham’s recent motion in the Michael Sussmann case. The motion, which seeks an inquiry as to whether Sussmann’s lawyers have a conflict of interest, contains an explosive factual summary of evidence gathered by Durham’s office establishing, among other things, that Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign conducted a full fledged electronic spying operation against candidate and then President Donald Trump. This operation included accessing the White House computer servers in an effort to gather derogatory evidence about Trump.

As I say in the article, compared to this nefarious scheme, the Watergate burglary was just good natured juvenile horseplay.

The article begins with the observation that, when Trump claimed he and his campaign had been spied on, the corporate media mocked him and called him a liar. In fact, the derision continued through the 2020 presidential campaign. For example, click on the picture below to see how Lesley Stahl of 60 Minutes condescendingly dismissed Trump’s assertion that the evidence of spying was available but that the news media would never report it because, to do so, would hurt Joe Biden’s candidacy.

Posted comments by AmSpec’s readers have trended toward characterizing Durham’s investigation as too slow, too little and too late. But the scope and complexity of Durham’s assignment are enormous. It’s one thing to spout conspiracy theories but quite another to assemble competent admissible evidence that will stand up in court to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Given the absence of leaks from the Special Counsel’s Office and the solid and workman-like content of its court filings, my impression is that Durham is a consummate professional carefully doing a very difficult job.

Continue reading→