The Durham Report Cites FBI Eels - But Where Are They Now?

P. Gardner Goldsmith | May 21, 2023
Text Audio
00:00 00:00
Font Size

In the time-honored tradition of “Golden Era” TV's "This Is your Life," Washington Examiner Investigative Reporter Sarah Bedford has done an exemplary job collecting some of the most prominent culprits cited for offensive activity in Special Counsel John Durham’s May 12 “Report on Matters Related to Intelligence Activities and Investigations Arising Out of the 2016 Presidential Campaigns,” and she has shown us that the baddies seem to have fared quite well, thanks to pals in pop media and academia or to effusively-forgiving judges.



Durham focused on the invalid FBI push of its “Russian Collusion” narrative, directed at Donald Trump and his Presidential Campaign, and Bedford quickly reminds us that mortal men cannot expect justice in the material world ruled by mortal men.

In fact, some still are employed with the FBI. Let’s take former Deputy Director for Counterintelligence (has anyone questioned the existence of such a post during a time of non-war, or even questioned the dubious constitutionality of the FBI, itself?) Dina Corsi…

“(I)n spring 2017, Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Dina Corsi told FBI analysts not to put in writing any of their findings about how little evidence they’d found to support the allegations of Russian collusion. An FBI analyst present for that meeting called the request ‘highly unusual,’ according to Durham, and an attorney who heard Corsi give that directive recalled feeling ‘shocked’ that the agents had been told to relay their findings ‘orally’ without a paper trail.

Corsi appears to be still employed by the FBI, according to her LinkedIn profile, on which she had been active as recently as Wednesday. She lists her title as a deputy assistant director in the FBI’s intelligence branch, working on the Strategic Intelligence Issues Group.”

But, of course, upholding the recent “standard” for veracity of the FBI, Corsi might not be hewing to truth on LinkedIn...

Then, like the Wizard of Oz, there’s Andrew McCabe, the "Great and Powerful":

Andrew McCabe, the former deputy director of the FBI, ordered the Russian collusion investigation opened and was accused by the Department of Justice inspector general of lying to investigators about leaks to the media.

Durham found that Peter Strzok, an FBI agent later fired for explicit anti-Trump bias, opened the Russia investigation ‘at the direction’ of McCabe on the basis of ‘unevaluated intelligence.’ (That puts it mildly.)

McCabe also ordered FBI field offices to close their investigations of the Clinton Foundation in 2016, Durham found, and was ‘annoyed’ and ‘angry’ when other FBI agents objected to his order.”

Where is he now?

“Trump fired McCabe in 2018 over the inspector general’s findings. McCabe is now a CNN personality, regularly appearing on air to give legal analysis, including, this week, of the report that found fault with his own behavior.”


And on the subject of “charm,” who can forget Strzok, the smirking, adulterous, tax-sucking agent mentioned above?

“Strzok was fired after text messages between him and another bureau employee, who was also fired, showed he held a deep animosity toward Trump and a desire to prevent Trump from becoming president.

Strzok went on to become a professor at Georgetown University and a bestselling author after landing a book deal.”

And what of Strzok’s main text-pal, with whom he engaged in his affair, Lisa Page? Bedford doesn’t dig into this facet of the FBI soap opera, but we can recall that, after showing such great judgement as to have an affair with Strzok and exchange text messages that exposed their avaricious political poisoning of the proverbial FBI well, NBC offered here a plum position as “National Security and Legal Analyst” in 2020.

Related: Rep. Ratcliffe: Page Admits ‘Text Messages Mean What They Say’ | MRCTV

Evidently, engaging in activity that typically is seen as undermining “national security” is a big resume-booster when one wants a job at NBC.

Bedford does, however, remind us of the Clintonista who appeared to have been so well liked by the FBI as it pushed the “Russian Collusion” myth:

Michael Sussmann, the Clinton campaign lawyer who gave false information about Trump to the FBI and then lied about his ties to the campaign, was indicted on a charge of making false statements to the FBI.

Durham said Sussmann lied to top FBI officials in 2016 when he approached them with allegations about Trump’s ties to Russia, professing to be uninvolved with any third party despite being on the opposing campaign’s payroll.

He was acquitted by a jury when Durham brought the case to trial and is now a partner at a major law firm, Fenwick & West, still practicing law, according to the firm’s website.”

Well, ya gotta give him his acquittal…

Adds Bedford:

“Kevin Clinesmith faced perhaps the most serious allegations of any raised by the DOJ inspector general or Durham: falsifying a document in pursuit of a (FISA) surveillance warrant on a Trump adviser.

Clinesmith pleaded guilty to altering an email while applying for the surveillance warrant, stripping out language that would have shown a judge that the Trump adviser had in fact been helping the CIA gain information about Russia rather than engaging in suspicious activity with Russia.

But a judge said Clinesmith had suffered enough by facing public scrutiny over his actions and losing his FBI job and sentenced him to just one year of probation, sparing him the jail time Durham requested.”

Thank goodness. That “public scrutiny” can be rough. We sure wouldn’t want to exercise the “law” on former members of “the nation’s top law-enforcement agency.”

And Bedford notes that Clinesmith is back to “legal” practice… in the appropriate place: Washington, DC – “District of Criminals.”

“Clinesmith also got to hold on to his law license, receiving only a temporary suspension of his law license in Washington, D.C., and Michigan, where he is from.

By December 2021, he was restored to the status of a lawyer in “good standing” by the District of Columbia Bar Association.”

The Durham report is full of soft language. But it also is full of revealing information that helps us recall who these figures are. Thanks to Bedford, we also can remember where they have gone – after engaging in one of the most egregiously devious and political plots to manipulate an election in many decades.

We might not see real justice emerge from this, but we can remember, and pass on the knowledge to friends and future generations.