John Durham’s testimony put a spotlight on Hillary Clinton’s potential involvement in the Russian-collusion hoax

Photo by Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 2.0, via Flickr,

John Durham has finally completed his investigation into the origins of the Russian-collusion hoax.

Although it did not receive much attention from the media, Congress asked the Special Counsel to testify. 

And John Durham’s testimony put a spotlight on Hillary Clinton’s potential involvement in the Russian-collusion hoax.

John Durham testifies under oath that Clinton was directly involved in the Russian-collusion hoax against Trump

America First Republicans have been waiting for Jon Durham’s report since well before Joe Biden took power. The investigation promised to shed light on the origins of the Russian-collusion hoax that the Democrats pushed against former President Donald Trump.

Now, weeks after the release of his final report, Durham has made an appearance on Capitol Hill to give members of Congress an inside look at his investigation and an opportunity to ask him questions about his findings. The Special Counsel held no punches in his public testimony on Wednesday.

He testified under oath that the CIA had known about a plot by Hillary Clinton since 2016. He said they were given intel that proved Clinton gave the go-ahead to implement a plan that would falsely link Trump to Russian government agencies.

Durham then told Congress what federal agencies did with the evidence that would exonerate Trump.

FBI failed to “sufficiently scrutinize” information from Clinton despite warnings from the CIA

“The FBI was too willing to accept and use politically funded and uncorroborated opposition research, such as the Steele dossier,” Durham told Congress, before adding that the agency instead “relied on the dossier and FISA applications, knowing there was likely material originating from a political campaign.”

The Special Counsel went on to explain to Congress that the FBI impeded his progress during his investigation into the evidence. He said that not only did the agency neglect to “sufficiently scrutinize information it received,” but it also used different “standards” to assess allegations from each side.

When pressed by Jordan to explain the response from intelligence agents, he slammed the Bureau for its politicization and its wanton disregard for the facts of the Trump case. Durham described the lack of interest and emotional response from agents at the FBI.

Durham then appeared to offer a defense of one FBI agent, Joe Pientka.

One agent was “ticked off” that he had information withheld from his investigation

Jordan asked Durham what happened when Special Agent Pientka was presented with the “referral memo” that would have warned him about Clinton’s involvement. Durham said when they interviewed him about his involvement in Operation Crossfire, he claimed “he had never seen” the memo.

Durham then explained that Pientka “immediately became emotional, got up, and left the room with his lawyer.” Jordan pushed Durham to explain what “ticked off” the special agent enough to leave the room in the middle of an interview.

Durham said Pientka was angry “the information was kept from him.” Jordan agreed that to be the logical assessment. “He was ticked off because this is something he should have had, important information that the director of the FBI kept from the people doing the investigation,” Jordan said.

Patriot Political will keep you up-to-date on any developments to this ongoing story.