Barr and Durham to investigate the CIA

It seems fitting that today is Sept. 11, or in holiday parlance: Patriot’s Day.  When I’d seen that on the calendar a few days ago, I almost threw up.

‘What spooked the spooks? What we still don’t know about Russiagate (by Stephen Cohen)’, 6 Sep, 2019,

“But the question remains: Why did Western intelligence agencies, prompted, it seems clear, by US ones, seek to undermine Trump’s presidential campaign? A reflexive answer might be because candidate Trump promised to “cooperate with Russia,” to pursue a pro-détente foreign policy, but this was hardly a startling, still less subversive, advocacy by a would-be Republican president. All of the major pro-détente episodes in the 20th century had been initiated by Republican presidents: Eisenhower, Nixon, and Reagan.” [snip]
“So, again, what was it about Trump that so spooked the spooks so far off their rightful reservation and so intrusively into US presidential politics? Investigations being overseen by Attorney General William Barr may provide answers, or not. Barr has already leveled procedural charges against James Comey, head of the FBI under President Obama and briefly under President Trump, but the repeatedly hapless Comey seems incapable of having initiated such an audacious operation against a presidential candidate, still less a president-elect. As I have long suggested, John Brennan and James Clapper, head of the CIA and Office of National Intelligence under Obama respectively, are the more likely culprits.

The FBI is no longer the fearsome organization it once was and thus not hard to investigate, as Barr has already shown. The others, particularly the CIA, are a different matter, and Barr has suggested they are resisting. To investigate them, particularly the CIA, it seems, he has brought in a veteran prosecutor-investigator, John Durham.

Which raises other questions. Are Barr and Durham, whose own careers include associations with US intelligence agencies, determined to uncover the truth about the origins of Russiagate? And can they really do so fully, given the resistance already apparent? Even if so, will Barr make public their findings, however damning of the intelligence agencies they may be, or will he classify them? And if the latter, will President Trump use his authority to declassify the findings as the 2020 presidential election approaches in order to discredit the role of Obama’s presidency and its would-be heirs?

Equally important perhaps, how will mainstream media treat the Barr-Durham investigation and its findings? Having driven the Russiagate narrative for so long and so misleadingly – and with liberals perhaps finding themselves in the incongruous position of defending rogue intelligence agencies – will they credit or seek to discredit the findings?

It is true, of course, that Barr and Durham, as Trump appointees, are not the ideal investigators of intel misdeeds in the Russiagate saga. Much better would be a truly bipartisan, independent investigation based in the Senate, as was the Church Committee of the mid-1970s, which exposed and reformed (it thought at the time) serious abuses by US intelligence agencies. That would require, however, a sizable core of nonpartisan, honorable, and courageous senators of both parties, who thus far seem to be lacking.”

Of course the Dems love the CIA; that agency’s been the McResistance’s bitch!  As does of the New York Times, of course.

‘UPDATED: Barr And Durham Are Focused On The CIA’, June 17 2019, mark mauk, meaninginhistory.blogspot

This is another Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride; you judge: conspiracy theory or a coincidence theory compilations of links, including, but certainly not limited to:

“…the interesting phenomenon of Obama meeting privately with former Italian PM Matteo Renzi in Italy at the same time that Matteo Salvini, Italian Deputy Prime Minister of Italy and Minister of the Interior, is in Washington for meetings with the Trump administration. As George Papadopoulos has tweeted, this surely has to do with Italian involvement in the Russia Hoax.”

“Despite the lack of leaks, there can be no doubt that this investigation has begun in earnest and that Brennan and the CIA are feeling the heat. We’re hearing about the Deep State’s increasing anxiety from their usual media outlets, and especially the NYT. I’ve covered some of all this in three posts (beginning with the most recent):

Assessing The Assessment
Brennan’s Task Force–The Heart Of The Russia Hoax
About that IC Assessment: Paul Sperry Has Good News

As further confirmation, I offer some extensive quotes from an article by a certified former Deep Stater, Jed Babbin–The CIA Is Running Scared: Barr’s bloodhounds are sniffing up Langley’s skirts. Babbin is very confident in the direction Barr is taking.
Babbin begins by noting the recent NYT article we discussed, in which “current and former American officials” expressed alarm and dismay that DoJ is seeking to question CIA analysts about their work on the ICA–why, they want to know, should their work be investigated? Well, we all know why. Babbin continues:

From the Times report, we can easily deduce the fact that those who ran the spy op — including CIA Director Gina Haspel — are running scared from the Durham investigation. 

Start with the sourcing: “current and former American officials.” That includes all of the people who were in the Obama White House, Comey’s FBI, Brennan’s CIA, and everyone else who’s ever held a government job in, for example, the Obama White House.

The reason the CIA’s “analytical work” is being subjected to a federal prosecutor’s scrutiny is that there is a lot of evidence of criminal conduct by the CIA and FBI. That’s one of the fundamental differences between the Barr/Durham investigation and the Mueller investigation into the imaginary conspiracy between candidate Trump and his campaign and the Russians.

Haspel and her people are going to drag their feet, and probably hide evidence and lie to protect themselves from the investigators. 

UPDATE: George Papadopoulos reminds us why Gina Haspel has every reason in the world to drag her feet rather than cooperate with Barr and Durham:

George Papadopoulos‏@GeorgePapa19

“America: do not forget that that current CIA director, Gina Haspel, was running the CIA desk in London in 2016 while Alexander Downer (Australia) Joseph Mifsud (Italy) Stefan Halper (CIA), Azra Turk (CIA) and the US embassy were spying on me and trying to sabotage Donald Trump.”
1:07 AM – 18 Jun 2019

File under: ya couldn’t even sell this as a ‘spy film treatment’ to a Hollywood producer it’s such a surreal comedy act:

‘New York Times: Main source for anti-Russia campaign may have been a “double agent”’, Andre Damon, 11 September 2019,

“In a further exposure of the concocted claims of the New York Times and the Democrats of Russian “subversion” of the US political system, the Times acknowledged Tuesday that the key source used by the intelligence agencies to claim Vladimir Putin’s direct involvement “could be a double agent.”

On October 7, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said they were “confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions.”

According to this narrative, amplified by the Democratic Party and the New York Times itself, Putin personally intervened to try to get Donald Trump elected by directing the Russian state to steal incriminating emails from the Clinton campaign and release them to WikiLeaks for publication.” [snip]

“Now, the main editorial outlet driving the Democrats’ anti-Russia campaign has admitted that serious concerns were raised within the US intelligence establishment about the primary source behind its hyperventilating denunciations of Russian “meddling.” The Times reported that the source, later identified by the Russian press as Oleg Smolenkov, gained an “influential position that came with access to the highest level of the Kremlin.”

Smolenkov “became one of the CIA’s most important—and highly protected—assets,” according to the Times. CNN reported that he was able to photograph documents on Putin’s desk and send them to Washington.

The Times wrote: “The Moscow informant was instrumental to the CIA’s most explosive conclusion about Russia’s interference campaign: that President Vladimir V. Putin ordered and orchestrated it himself. As the American government’s best insight into the thinking of and orders from Mr. Putin, the source was also key to the CIA’s assessment that he affirmatively favored Donald J. Trump’s election and personally ordered the hacking of the Democratic National Committee.”

There was just one problem. When the United States, concerned that media reports of Russian “meddling” might compromise their asset in the Kremlin, offered to exfiltrate their spy from Russia, where he risked a life sentence or execution if caught, he at first refused, leading to the conclusion that he might be a double agent, feeding false information to the Americans on behalf of elements within the Russian state.” [snip]

“Ultimately, after the Times, the Washington Post and other major media outlets published reports about the unnamed source, the US exfiltrated the spy, who is now living under his real name in Washington.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Smolenkov did work for the Putin government, “but he was never a high-ranking official” and was fired two years ago.

In the name of combating “Russian meddling,” politicians pressured American technology firms to undertake the most onerous program of political censorship in the history of the internet in the US. Accounts with millions of followers were deleted overnight, while Google manipulated search results to bury left-wing viewpoints.

There was a massive effort to poison public opinion against Julian Assange, the courageous publisher and exposer of war crimes. He was slandered by the Democrats and the Times as a Russian agent who colluded with Trump, setting the stage for his imprisonment.

(cross-posted at

7 responses to “Barr and Durham to investigate the CIA

  1. Please, wendye, go to MoA’s latest piece on the impeachment move by Pelosi and seek out El Sid’s link @#26 to The Duran interview. Mercouri is claiming that your thread here is what the
    Zelensky phone call by Trump is all about. If he’s right, this is huge.

    One can only hope, and I do.

    • ay, yi; thanks for tip, juliania, but it’s 25+ minutes! i did look at the duran to see if there might be a transcript, or a blurb that might give major hints. not really. but i’ll try to make some time to watch. i’d reckoned that this investigation would be more whitewash on aunt polly’s fence on another of my threads over yonder.

      thanks again.

    • scoooore! i listened while i was doing chores, great stuff. the barr-durham part begins about 13:07. i’ll take to alligator ed’s thread; he’ll thank you, as do i.

  2. Thanks, wendye. The bit about Pelosi was interesting but I should have noted when in the piece the connecting stuff to your presentiment here occurred. I am assuming though that to really set the ball in motion there’s going to need to be something of the quality of the Nixon tapes as even with the missing bit what those did was shock folk into realizing that there was a lot of grit behind the facade. It’s amazing to me how truly uninformed educated folk in this country can be these days. Take NC for example… they seem to be in a fog about all of this.

    And not to forget part of my hopefulness is that there will be such an upheaval of information that Julian Assange will finally get the credit and good comfort he so well deserves, not to mention a whole lot of other figures you devote time and attention to. But it has to grab the public to such a degree that enough savvy legacy minders recognize how they could be shining lights for future generations and rise to the bait – er – occasion. Whether the fates will be kind and create such momentum remains to be seen – I really think it is up to them, the fates that is — and timing is all.

    C’mon Fates! Tear down this wall!!

    Shock and Awe, didn’t someone say sometime? This would be the mother of all shock and awe if and when it comes.

    • hoo, boy, ww; exhausted am i, so tomorrow. there are multiple issues here to address, not the least being that when i’d taken the duran video interview to the alligator’s post, he said he’d seen it…and yet my take and his were almost diametrically opposite, although i’d dragged in some of the info on my earlier posts on zeleskiy’s election.

      and now there are eleventy-seven posts about ‘ukraine-gate over yonder.

      i’ll bring my take, see if it matches yours, or i’m just a doddering old fool who should be kicked off the internet. (hint: it’s been comin’ since my.firedoglake days.) g’ night, pleasant dreams of you can manage it.


    • part II, and there may need to be a part III on your hopes for a cataclysm that results in julian being free…and lauded. but here’s what i’d taken from the duran interview (along with a few things i’d dug out on two diaries on zelenskiy’s election. see if it tallies with your take, okay? another heavy duty chore day here, but i’d also thought of posting how hypocritical nancy’s inquiry really has become.

      to the gator:
      “.i must say that your interpretation isn’t what i’d gleaned, though. i’m going to mix this up, as i’d watched all those hours ago…but i do remember, but couldn’t find, in my several reports on that election, that zelenskiy was a front man for the oligargch___ (zolomosky?) [on edit: Ihor Kolomoiskyi], and that he’d included him and several corrupt others left over from the US-approved list after the maidan putsch arranged by soros, obmama, omidyar, nuland, the atlantic council],

      all of which is short-hand for the fact that in order for zelenskiy to fight the Bear in the Ukraine, his cabinet would be helping to tank trump who campaigned on rapprochement with russia. so my take was that it’d the D team who’s terrified they’ll be caught in the vortex of the durham-barr investigation, not the Rs.

      but in the end, zelenskiy had campaigned on ‘peace in donbass’, go figure, after his earlier scathing indictments against the russian separatists. at least that’s the way i’d written it up, partially by way of again, the atlantic council. funny, as well, is that his heritage is jewish, and he speaks russian, not ukrainian.

      but as i said, given my propensity for lamus brainus, or brain bread, as you’d put it, i may have it all akimbo. i’l sure hope those two really do some good diggin’. another church committee? no, prolly not. ; ) “

  3. Thanks for helping me come back here, wendye – now I understand better. Sorry to have caused you extra work, not my intention! It’s definitely overload and not just us! Plus, don’t we have to compensate somehow for what all that CO2 is doing to us, not just the oceans? I mean, our shells need help too!

    Take care.

care to comment? (no registration required)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s