Durham Revisited

That doesn't mean that Durham is a bad lawyer or that his team has bad lawyers.

It more likely means that the goals of supporting a narrative and the goals of investigating and prosecuting winnable cases are not consistent.

— IEndorsePopehat (@Popehat) October 18, 2022

I dunno; when you let the narrative control the prosecution, you really aren’t doing the job of a prosecutor.

Many federal prosecutors have lost fewer trials in their entire career than John Durham lost in the past year alone.

It is apparent that his judgment is poor and that he overcharged these cases. His use of the legally meaningless “no collusion” phrase at trial betrays his bias. https://t.co/L05tkm8CNz

— Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) October 18, 2022

"No collusion” is not a legal term of art.

The fact that Durham repeatedly used the term “no collusion” during his close — a legally meaningless phrase that Trump inserted into the public discourse — tells you everything you need to know about his worldview. He’s pursuing a political vendetta, not a prosecution. https://t.co/r14gAgPcPH

— Secrets and Laws (@secretsandlaws) October 18, 2022

Durham: "The Mueller report had come out, and there’s no collusion that was established".
Mueller: "In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of “collusion.”

— Max (@Max90586793) October 18, 2022

It's pretty unusual for DOJ to lose a jury trial. A study by Pew using 2018 data found that 86% of defendants tried by DOJ are convicted. https://t.co/672D8cSKeq pic.twitter.com/nE58iMWNSz

— Brad Heath (@bradheath) October 18, 2022

DOJ administrative oversight helps insure cases don’t go to trial which are unlikely to succeed. It’s like the FBI “Ten Most Wanted” list was said to be. People who made the list were about to be arrested. Why publicize the cases where you don’t know where they are or if you’ll catch them? That’s not the point of the list.

Prosecuting cases you might not win doesn’t make you look like you’re winning against crime. Something Durham actually knows something about:

Poor John Durham.

Leads investigation into CIA's destruction of interrogation tapes. Brings no charges.

Leads investigation into CIA enhanced interrogation techniques. Brings no charges.

Leads the "make Trump feel better" investigation. Gets laughed out of court twice.

— Bradley P. Moss (@BradMossEsq) October 18, 2022

The next time I hear that an obviously incompetent partisan hack is actually “a very good lawyer” (my memory runs back to Ken Starr), I’m going to ask: “Says who? The usual gang of idiots?”

And then I’ll retire to Bedlam.