OOF: John Durham HUMILIATES Fact-Starved Hank Johnson

special counsel Durham in March of 2019 before releasing the Mueller report to the public attorney general Barr released a statement mischaracterizing its findings and conclusions and shortly thereafter attorney general Barr announced that he was investigating the FBI for investigating Putin's interference in the 2016 presidential election and then in April or May of 2019 attorney general Barr appointed you to lead that investigation isn't that correct he

did appoint me to leave the investigation yes sir and then in October of 2020 uh attorney general Barr appointed you as an independent special counsel so that you could continue investigating the origins of the Russia Russia Russia investigation once Trump was out of office correct I support I was appointed special counsel in October yes and by that time your investigation had already caused the American taxpayers

over six and a half million dollars isn't that correct um at that point probably not no well at this point how much has it cost as I understand the figure having looked at it's around six and a half million dollars and and after three and a half years of investigation and six and a half million dollars of taxpayer money spent your investigation led to the indictment

of only three individuals correct that's correct well it's indictment and contrary to the fervent prayers of some on this panel uh former FBI director Jim Comey and former CIA director John Brennan were not among those three who were indicted isn't that correct that's correct and to the extreme disappointment of some on this panel your investigation failed to produce indictments against Hillary Clinton correct that's correct didn't

indict Barack Obama that's correct didn't but indict Joe Biden that's correct couldn't even indict Hunter Biden you didn't investigate Mr Hunter Biden and of your three prosecutions one ended with a guilty plea to an unrelated uh uh unrelated to the origins of the FBI investigation and that individual received a probated sentence with no jail time correct parts of that are correct and the other two men

you prosecuted went to trial on the charges uh charging they were accused of lying to the FBI and both were slam dunk acquitted isn't that correct they were acquitted and none of the individuals you prosecuted were ever charged with being part of a hoax or a fraud or a Witch Hunt or a politically motivated deep state conspiracy against Donald Trump isn't that correct I would not

say that that's accurate you mean you did charge somebody with being a part of a hoax we charged Mr Sussman with having knowingly provided false information to the FBI regarding Alpha Bank he was acquitted though right after that wasn't your question well he was Mr Sussman was acquitted after you charged him correct grand jury he was found innocent by a jury of by a unanimous jury

of 12. that's not true well what's true is the grand jury found probable cause to indict Mr susman a jury of his childhood has acquitted him though correct and a trial you're not you're not gonna disagree on that are you uh Mr Durham I'm going to try to answer your question as well let me ask you this because in your report you uh related or alluded

to allegations of misconduct against Mr Sussman and Mr danchenko as if those allegations had been proven have been proven true at trial when in fact both those individuals had been acquitted and your allegations disproven do you believe that it's ethical to State something as a fact in an official government report when the court system found that you could not prove those allegations well I think if

you read the report you'd see that we talked about the results of the trial and we included all of the evidence that we had available unfortunately not all of which was admitted to trial well let me ask Mr Durham you closed your investigation after you failed to find that the FBI investigation into Putin's interference in the 2016 election was politically motivated and was a deep state

allowed to answer the question someone can respond time the gentleman from George expired the witness can respond saying if you if you read the report we lay the facts out in the report as of these matters I'm not here to talk about Mr Trump I'm not here to talk about um deep state or whatever other um characterizations you made this report is factual nobody's raised any

issues as to whether it's factually inaccurate uh in any way people can draw the right own conclusions based on those facts yep