Durham Says He Forgot About Key Piece Of Evidence

U.S. Attorney John Durham, center, outside federal court in New Haven, Conn., after the sentencing of former Gov. John Rowland. Durham will continue as special counsel in the investigation of the origins of the Trump-Russia inquiry, but is being asked to resign as U.S. attorney. (Bob MacDonnell/Hartford Courant/Tribune News Service via Getty Images)
U.S. Attorney John Durham, center, outside federal court in New Haven, Conn., after the sentencing of former Gov. John Rowland. Durham will continue as special counsel in the investigation of the origins of the Trump... U.S. Attorney John Durham, center, outside federal court in New Haven, Conn., after the sentencing of former Gov. John Rowland. Durham will continue as special counsel in the investigation of the origins of the Trump-Russia inquiry, but is being asked to resign as U.S. attorney. (Bob MacDonnell/Hartford Courant/Tribune News Service via Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

In a late Friday-night court filing, Special Counsel John Durham made a strange admission: he had already seen a key piece of evidence, in 2018, that he claimed not to have known about until last week.

Durham said that during a 2018 investigation, he reviewed two FBI cell phones belonging to the bureau’s former general counsel, James Baker.

Last year, Durham’s grand jury indicted lawyer Michael Sussmann, charging that the attorney failed to tell Baker that he was acting on behalf of a client during a 2016 meeting in which Sussmann relayed information about a supposed link between a Trump organization server and a Russian bank. Baker was Durham’s chief — and only — witness.

The case against Sussmann was a head-scratcher. It has been criticized as minor, irrelevant to the broader question of the FBI’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, and a politically motivated attempt to follow Trump’s call to investigate the investigators.

It’s also been plagued in particular by disputes over evidence that Durham has gathered since securing a grand jury indictment against Sussmann in September 2021. Defense attorneys for Sussmann have argued that some of the evidence shows that Baker — the recipient of the alleged lie and the sole witness to the false statement — has had a shifting recollection of the event in question over the years.

Last week, Durham filed a document noting that his office had thought to seek reams of relevant evidence after Sussmann was indicted, notably information held by the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General, which probed the origins of the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe.

Among other things, that filing noted that the OIG office had transcripts of interviews with Baker that had been previously unobtained by Durham’s office, and that it had two cell phones belonging to Baker from 2016.

Durham wrote in the filing that all this was new to him. On Friday, he reversed that position.

The OIG, the filing reads, informed Durham that in February 2018, he discussed obtaining the very same cellphones in connection with a different investigation.

“Special Counsel Durham has no current recollection of that conference call, nor does Special Counsel Durham currently recall knowing about the OIG’s possession of the former FBI General Counsel’s cellphones before January 2022,” Durham wrote.

Durham’s apparent misremembering of Baker’s cell phones comes months after his office filed charges against Sussmann. The revelation raises serious questions about how far Durham’s team went in investigating the Sussmann case before bringing charges, as his team continues to admit in court filings that they have been buffeted by new, easily obtainable evidence post-charging.

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for jrw jrw says:

    And, the dog ate his homework.

  2. Durham’s apparent misremembering of Baker’s cell phones comes months after his office filed charges against Sussmann. The revelation raises serious questions about how far Durham’s team went in investigating the Sussmann case before bringing charges, as his team continues to admit in court filings that they have been buffeted by new, easily obtainable evidence post-charging.

    Durham never had anything because the FBI was playing by the rules. All he could hope for was some minor mistake that he could try to blow up into a case. Looks like even that is falling apart.

    Fuck him for being a puke.

  3. FFS, Garland, yank this clown and shut it down.

  4. I really don’t understand why this clown has been allowed to carry on his investigation. He needs to be shut down and folks at DOJ gotta stop worrying about political ramifications. His investigation is all about politics and everyone knows it. It’s intended to impose a chilling effect on those who would dare investigate the gov’t in power, especially when they are acting in their own self interest and against that of the US and aligning themselves with hostile foreign powers. In lay speak, we might call that disloyalty or ‘treason’.

  5. Durham is an embarrassment to the DOJ. Can we please stop pretending that he’s doing real work now?

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

349 more replies

Participants

Avatar for teenlaqueefa Avatar for dont Avatar for sniffit Avatar for psudawnc Avatar for lastroth Avatar for jkrogman Avatar for thebishop Avatar for fiftygigs Avatar for darrtown Avatar for tena Avatar for jonney_5 Avatar for dommyluc Avatar for castor_troy Avatar for brian512 Avatar for yoopertj Avatar for qwerty23 Avatar for seamus42 Avatar for timorwig Avatar for occamscoin Avatar for trustywoods Avatar for randome Avatar for Ethics_Gradient Avatar for SheSellsSeashells Avatar for Tanner4567

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: