Durham Has Weighty Decision Coming For Trial On Steele Dossier Lies

Special Counsel John Durham has a special decision to make in coming weeks — does he risk a second acquittal in a retrial of Igor Danchenko, or will he expose even more of the egregiously false allegations the Clinton campaign made about Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia in 2016?

Danchenko was charged last year with five counts of making false statements to the FBI concerning his role in the fake dossier spread by the Hillary Clinton political team.

The indictment claimed that he first lied when he gave false information for Christopher Steele’s thoroughly debunked intel, and then lied to the FBI in a series of interviews.

Steele’s final product, for the record, is riddled with false rumors, innuendo, dots that do not connect, and utterly unverifiable myths from “sources” that Steele claimed provided him with evidence.

Danchenko is now seeking dismissal of the five counts, arguing that his statements to the bureau were to questions that were impossibly vague.

His lawyers also believe that the FBI was already investigating other avenues that made his testimony immaterial.

Crossfire Hurricane was the code name given to the FBI’s investigations into links alleged between the 2016 Donald Trump presidential campaign and Russia. Despite what was purported to be evidence in the Steele dossier, the operation turned up nothing of substance.

The question for Durham is rather simple. Does he risk the chance of a second acquittal for Danchenko along with the likelihood of revelations that the deep state was even more involved in the Russia collusion hoax?

As more motions are made and revelations come forth, it is increasingly obvious that the tentacles of this investigation could pull out some very interesting information. The FBI treated tainted evidence as “explosive” and the truth when it was nothing of the sort.

It is clear that senior members of the Clinton camp in 2016 conspired to organize a vast team to compose false opposition research. Research of this nature is as old as politics, but the accusations made against then-candidate Donald Trump were patently and intentionally false.