Nunes: Durham Needs to Investigate the Whole Democrat-Dominated Mueller Russia Probe
Former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes wants special counsel John Durham to investigate not just the origins of the Russia probe, but the “dirty cops” on former special counsel Robert Mueller’s team.
Nunes — now CEO of Trump Media & Technology Group — recounted to Fox News on Wednesday that when he questioned Mueller in 2019 about the Steele dossier, the former FBI director’s response was that he didn’t remember it.
“Look, I don’t know if he had cognitive issues at that time, but the whole Mueller investigation should be investigated, and I hope that Durham is looking at that because you had all kinds of Clinton campaign operatives and dirty cops who were in that Mueller probe,” Nunes said.
The dossier, written by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele, was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee and was used by the FBI in warrant applications to surveil 2016 Trump campaign adviser Carter Page. It played a key part in the FBI justifying the Russia probe.
PolitiFact confirmed in March 2018 that at least 13 of the 17 lawyers on Mueller’s team were Democrats, six of whom had contributed to Clinton. The fact-checker could not determine the party affiliation of the four other attorneys. However, PolitiFact noted that Mueller himself is a registered Republican, the only known one on the team.
According to The Wall Street Journal, one of Mueller’s top prosecutors, Andrew Weissmann, attended Clinton’s election night party in November 2016. Additionally, Fox News reported that Russia probe attorney Jeannie Rhee represented the Clinton Foundation in 2015 and donated to Clinton’s 2016 presidential run.
In June 2019, about a month before Mueller testified before the House Intelligence Committee about his team’s findings, former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos told The Western Journal the investigation was really a cover-up.
“[The investigators] were simply looking to cover up surveillance abuse of the Obama administration upon the Trump team,” he said.
Papadopoulos was a subject of Mueller’s probe and pleaded guilty in October 2017 to making false statements to federal agents about contacts he had with Russia-linked officials, The Hill reported. He served 12 days in federal prison.
Papadopoulos has been a fierce critic of Mueller’s investigation since, frequently posting about it on social media.
I NEVER flipped against the president. What I did do, however, is expose the corruption of this “investigation” for the world to see. The legacy is what matters now, how history remembers these days. Silence during these critical days was never an option. All must be exposed.
— George Papadopoulos (@GeorgePapa19) November 21, 2018
Papadopoulos responded to the most recent Durham allegations of Clinton campaign wrongdoing, tweeting, “It wasn’t about ‘collecting’ dirt on Trump and his team, it was about ‘planting it.'”
On Wednesday, Nunes praised the work of Durham’s team to date, especially when contrasted with Mueller’s investigators, who leaked information regularly to the media. The media promoted the “hoax” of Trump colluding with the Russian government, the former congressman noted.
“With Durham, he’s doing it by the book,” Nunes said. “There’s been zero leaks. So I think Durham has a lot of credibility moving forward here.”
“I think Durham’s building a larger conspiracy case here,” he added, “and hopefully he’s going to be able to build enough evidence to bring all of these people to justice.”
A version of this article originally appeared on Patriot Project.
CORRECTION, Feb. 28, 2022: As originally published by Patriot Project, this article included the following sentence: “In the summer of 2016, the Clinton campaign hatched a plot to infiltrate computer servers at Trump Tower and later the White House in order to establish an ‘inference’ and ‘narrative’ linking former President Donald Trump to Russia, according to a Friday court filing by Durham.” Durham’s court filing did not, in fact, say that, so we have deleted that sentence from the article, as well as a related tweet and one additional sentence that provided some context to the originally deleted sentence but was unneeded without it. The removal of this material does not materially impact the other information contained in this article, which remains as originally published except as noted above.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.
