Did Durham Just Lure Brennan into a Perjury Trap?

Welcome to your perjury trap, Mr. Brennan. – In a very interesting piece at RedState.com, a former prosecutor who writes under the pen name “Shipwreckedcrew” lays out a strong argument detailing his belief that Friday’s 8-hour-long interview of former Obama CIA Director John Brennan by U.S. Attorney John Durham and his investigators amounted to a classic perjury trap by the Department of Justice.

The author points to the fact that, instead of holding the interview at the more logical location at DOJ headquarters or the Hoover Building in Washington, DC, Durham chose to conduct it at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia:

Second, conducting the interview at the CIA facility is an interesting decision.  Why not question him at DOJ or FBI HQ?  The CIA is not a law enforcement agency.  John Brennan no longer works for the CIA.  Any CIA records that may have been needed over the course of the interview could have been made available in a secured facility at both those locations.

But that “records” excuse may have been the very justification given for the selection of the CIA HQ as the location for the interview.

DOJ and the FBI HQ are in Washington DC.  CIA Headquarters is in Langley, Virginia.

If you are geographically challenged, you can read the distinction as “United States District Court for the District of Columbia” v. “United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.”  If John Brennan offered any false answers to the investigators during the interview, the venue for that “false statement” crime is in the EDVA, not in DC federal court.

[End]

Pretty clever, if true. This would solve Durham’s conundrum about trying to get a conviction of Brennan from DC jury, which would be overwhelmingly made up of Democrats.

The former prosecutor also points to the interesting fact that Brennan chose to speak through his lawyer, Nick Shapiro, in a written statement, rather than just blast stuff out on his Twitter account, as he does on a regular basis:

First, it’s not Brennan’s statement.  Shapiro issued the statement to Obama Administration scribe Natasha Bertrand at Politico — guaranteed to dutifully publish anything requested of her by a former Obama era intelligence official now living in fear.  Shapiro then posted a string of eight Tweets on Twitter with the same text.

Both are devoid of any words actually spoken by Brennan — there are no quotations — nor is there any support offered for Shapiro’s claims by anyone actually in the room, such as Brennan’s attorneys.

Since when has Brennan been shy about saying anything on Twitter?  Why would Brennan go “third person” and have his thoughts about the interview expressed only in the words of someone else?  The most obvious reason is the statements are not going to be exactly accurate.  Running them through a third person builds in a level of “deniability” on Brennan’s part.

[End]

As I pointed out yesterday, Brennan has spent his entire adult life lying for a living and protecting himself from being held accountable for those lies by building walls of plausible deniability. Here, we see that lifelong habit in action.

The author also expands at length on the meaning of Shapiro’s claim that Brennan is not a “target” of the Durham investigation at this time. Here is a key passage:

So if you are not a “target” — meaning there isn’t sufficient evidence at this time to charge you with a crime — then by default you are a “witness.”

But “witnesses” can, and often do talk themselves into being “targets” during such interviews.  That was the purpose of the interview, Mr. Brennan, not because you have some wonderful insights to provide Mr. Durham and his investigators to make their job easier.

One important distinction between “target” and “witness” that is not well understood, but might be in play here, is that it is against DOJ policy to issue a grand jury subpoena to someone who is already a “target”.

A grand jury subpoena is a court order, under threat of contempt, to appear and answer questions under oath without the presence of counsel.  If a person is already a “Target”, the subpoena intrudes upon their Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and to be represented by counsel while undergoing “custodial” interrogation — they are under subpoena after all.  Witnesses before the grand jury are allowed to assert their Fifth Amendment right, but it forces them to assert that right before the grand jurors considering charges against them.  The government is not allowed to call a criminal defendant to take the stand in his trial and force him to assert his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent in front of the jury.  It is deemed prejudicial, and suggest to the jury that the defendant has something to hide.  The same principle applies to calling a “Target” in front of a grand jury and forcing them to assert their right to remain silent in front of the grand jurors without counsel present.

[End]

Oh. Again, as I pointed out yesterday, just because someone is not a “target” of an investigation today does not mean he will not become a “target” of that investigation tomorrow.

Isn’t all of that interesting?

There is much more in this piece, and you would to well to go read it in its entirety.

Now, this analysis may or may not be accurate. But if it is accurate, it is fair to point out that it would be entirely consistent with common DOJ practice in this kind of an investigation. These are the kinds of tactics that U.S. attorneys and other prosecutors deploy all the time.

What we have seen from both Durham and William Barr over the past year and a half is a consistent dedication to conducting this and other DOJ functions strictly by the book. Durham’s investigation has not employed the Gestapo-like strong-arm tactics or serial leaking of misleading or false information to the media, like we saw from the Mueller special counsel outfit.

Take it for what it’s worth, but this take on Friday’s meeting would be exactly the kind of thing we would expect to see from a by-the-book prosecutor like John Durham.

That is all.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever. Whatfinger.com is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time.

40 thoughts on “Did Durham Just Lure Brennan into a Perjury Trap?

  1. brian - August 23, 2020

    An article connected to the whole of the Russia rRussia Russia coup attempt… Speaks more to Barr’s ‘by the book’ efforts to mitigate damages to deep state. I so do hope those of us who questioned Barrs role are wrong and he does come out of the dugout and hits a grand slam.

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/08/22/my-discussion-with-john-durhams-lead-investigator-william-aldenberg

    Time will tell… Its a political war… disgusting at every level

    1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

      Moreover, in the bottom of the ninth.

      1. Philly Smith - August 23, 2020

        You are right. It’s the bottom of the ninth with two outs and the batter, Barr has two strikes. If these traitors aren’t brought to justice and Trump loses, the game is over and evil wins.

        1. marty lopez - August 23, 2020

          Correction, Trump doesn’t lose. America loses and Barr and Durham are the establishment losers who inflicted the defeat upon our republic

    2. conway poppa - August 24, 2020

      The world will know relatively soon whether AG Barr is an American deserving of his post or whether he is a traitor puppet. The fate of America pretty well depends on his veracity.
      This is a tremendous weight for one man to bear, especially with the pressure from communists, Dims, RINOs and the Deep State combining against the AG.
      I have faith in the President’s judgement in selecting a man who cannot be disparaged because of political views, he has served under both party’s regimes. Therefore I will trust and support the Barr/Durham team until such time as the fail to prove themselves to be without integrity.

  2. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

    ‘These are the kinds of tactics that U.S. attorneys and other prosecutors deploy all the time.’

    You are correct that Durham has been scrupulous and by-the-book, but it would be ironic if Brennan gets taken down by a similar process crime that the SC cabal tried to use to railroad Michael Flynn.

    1. marty lopez - August 23, 2020

      Ironic, if it were the only crime.

  3. jack johnson - August 23, 2020

    Interrogating Brennan was a formality, we all know Barr is not going to indict the former Director of the CIA….never going to happen. Barr has spent his life in the swamp and is just a different form of a swamp rat.

    A few will be indicted….plead to lesser charges and pay a large fine. Some may get prison time which won`t be served due to the China Flu. It`s a great time to commit a crime in America.

    1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

      How do ‘we all know’?

      As far as I can see, the only accurate statement is ‘we all don’t know’

      1. brian - August 23, 2020

        an opinion based of whats been observed and history. I don’t think its an unreasonable assumption. Everyone here makes assumptions based on the information they’ve taken in and processed. Are they right… don’t know, are they wrong… don’t know. Only two things are certain, Gods word and the events that have pasted.

        1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

          What has been observed is almost nothing. There have been virtually no leaks at all from the Durham team.

          sundance posts that Barr has given a firm directive that nothing overtly political–only directly criminal– can be used in the investigation. If so, that certainly limits Durham’s purview.

          1. brian - August 23, 2020

            Whats been observed about Barr is his long history and career in the swamp. I think that has to be taken into account as well. What else is notable is the prosecution disparities surrounding the DoJ of which Barr is the helmsman. Put this all together and its not unreasonable to make the assumptions that little to nothing will take place.

            Like the article (sundance) stated too… Its ALL political in DC. Its also why I maintained my distrust in Barr as well, and see that as a way to mitigate damages to the swamp. By tossing that requirement into the mix then a lot of ‘evidences’ can be eliminated. Valid questions arise, like why did Barr hire a RICO lawyer and then stated there were no rico cases opened or investigated?? IMO… mitigation. your take will likely be different but then thats what political discussions are all about.

            Like most here state we want to be wrong about Barr. But its hard to just wave the hand and ignore whats in front of our eyes and Barrs history. Its nearly akin to putting a fox in charge of the hen house. I did say nearly.

          2. Gypo O'Leary - August 23, 2020

            Barr has clearly said in public he believes there is evidence of a conspiracy against Donald Trump. It will be hard to square that circle if he starts letting people off because of unclear intent.

            It seems a number of people possibly including Brennan and Clapper have lied to the Senate and House.

            If the standard of evidence is what was used against Roger Stone, then all these people will be in a court room.

      2. marty lopez - August 23, 2020

        Well I’ve been listening to your excusing and excuses for non action every timne I dial in this page. We don’t know, if we don’t want to know. Everyone who wants to know, already knows.

      3. Webjammer1 - August 23, 2020

        Those who speak don’t know. Those who don’t speak know.

  4. Ben Colder - August 23, 2020

    Brennan thinks he is sooo much smarter than Durham what could possibly go wrong they can’t catch him in a lie after all he is a pro liar he has made a career out of lying.Time will tell if this is a real investigation or if they are in one of the biggest coverups ever tried.I do not trust Barr hope I am wrong but nothing so far gives me any hope .These guys cover for each other all the time that is what makes me wonder if Barr is not just another swamp snake.

    1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

      So, essentially, Barr is guilty until proven innocent?

      1. brian - August 23, 2020

        Thats not what he is saying….

        1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

          He’s saying he doesn’t believe him or trust that he is not a deep state hack until given evidence otherwise.

          I’m not criticizing him, just clarifying.

          1. marty lopez - August 23, 2020

            No needs to clarify anything for me. I’ll tell you exactly what it is that everyone in America already knows. Barr’s slow walk is prelude to the fix, which has many in and outs, a whole profession full of wherefores and whereby’s which scribes such as yourself and those who are better educated and more experienced will explain to us as we go home empty handed again.

            Barr hasn’t done schit because he isn’t going to do schit. America knows it. Trump knows it and has said just about as much lately and now, you need to be informed, If Barr isn’t at fault, then it is the law itself, which isn’t worth the parchment itis written on. You can’t expect to keep playing this game of monkey in the middle with Barr on one end, the law on the other end and the American people in the middle.

            Allow me to rephrase all this. What the hell is it that you’re trying to sell anyway. Everyone knows what happened. You seem to admit to same. Is Barr inadequate? Or is the law inadequate? Or are we then, the monkeys in the middle, the Charlie Browns always trying to kick the ellusive football?

    2. marty lopez - August 23, 2020

      Nothing would indicate that he isn’t and everything indicates that he is. I wouldn’t trust him any firther than I could throw his bag pipes

      1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

        What would that ‘everything’ be?

        I certainly respect your opinion.

        I’ll be here like every day to take the heat if nothing happens.

        Where will you be if major indictments come down?

        1. marty lopez - August 23, 2020

          I’ll be here and very happy to apologize, to admit to my inferiority, but neither my admonishment, or your gracious sense of chivalarous honor will save, or serve America, or address much less serve to rectify Millie Deaver’s documentary “Shadow Government” the military industrial complex, which Obama at Brennan’s knee weaponized against our republic. I want it fixed and I don’t care a wit about some priveleged, wodd pannel, establishment Barr’s sense of properity. He either delivers, or decieves and he isn’t fooling me any. I don’t know, if he is fooling you, or if you are trying to fool us, or yourself. Frankly, I don’t care. Let’s hope we both live long enough to see the truth.

          When peaceful change becomes impossible, violent change becomes inevitable. I wonder how all the establishment, white shoe boys are going to process that, all those innocent bodies, children caught in cross fire. Wait, that’s right. They never do. They’re never there when it gets real.

  5. Gregg - August 23, 2020

    “…distinction as “United States District Court for the District of Columbia” v. “United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.” If John Brennan offered any false answers to the investigators during the interview, the venue for that “false statement” crime is in the EDVA, not in DC federal court.”

    and

    “Pretty clever, if true. This would solve Durham’s conundrum about trying to get a conviction of Brennan from DC jury, which would be overwhelmingly made up of Democrats.”

    Hate to break it to everyone, but Northern Virginia (NORVA) is almost every bit as infested with lib. Dem voters as DC. Not quite as bad as DC, but pretty close. Thanks to Bush Jr. creating two (2) cabinet level positions in the wake of 9-11, VA’s population grew by over a half million between 2000 and 2006 – most of whom were imported National Capitol Region (NCR) bureaucrats and their families and are 90+% blue voters.

    George (no coattails) Bush Jr. lost five GOP contested senate seats in his 2000 election, the only one that wasn’t lost was Senator Allen of VA which was a Red state at the time. This gave Bush a 50-50 senate tie.

    Allen’s seat, along with the house and senate was lost in 2006 and VA was trending Blue – Bush did carry it in 2004 – but it has been Blue with few exceptions since thanks largely to the extreme influx of gubmint workers and immigration resettlement under his presidency.

    One other note about changing the trial venue, the Feds also chose VA over DC and MD to try the 2002 beltway sniper because VA actually had a workable death penalty statue on the books and could get a capital conviction. I can’t remember the names of the snipers, or if they assumed room temperature, but that was the reason the case was tried in VA.

    ***

    “First, it’s not Brennan’s statement. Shapiro issued the statement to Obama Administration scribe Natasha Bertrand at Politico — guaranteed to dutifully publish anything requested of her by a former Obama era intelligence official now living in fear.”

    The statement was given to an Obama Administration scribe – Natasha… at Politico… Hmm, Natasha sounds like a RUSSIAN name! How nice, the real Hammer and Sickle administration has a “Natasha” still doing the propaganda work for its corrupt communist deep stater… What, PRAVDA wasn’t interested?

    1. marty lopez - August 23, 2020

      Thank you. I saw that too. More evidence of the bullschit they are trying to call applesauce

  6. Silas - August 23, 2020

    Brennan is in trouble. The cia’s purview is supposed to be outside the US proper. Have we all forgotten that Mssrs Barr and Durham spent time some time overseas interviewing folks? He used foreign agencys and assets to pull his coup off. There some foreign government folks who were involved in helping set all this crap up and push it.

    That’s why I think Brennan is in trouble. And he may well not be able to lie his way out of this one.

    1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

      And it’s also possible that he ran CIA assets at American citizens

      1. Gregg - August 23, 2020

        I would say probable.

        Some US persons are more target worthy then others, regardless of rules. To the CIA and many other alphabet agencies, the law and rules are merely inconvenient guidelines not to be taken seriously when politically used against Republicans.

        1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

          Sadly, you are 100% correct. That sort of double-standard is annoying in the media, but in the case of powerful federal agencies it is chilling.

  7. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

    I think this is why Barr is so insistent that the investigation focus on criminal activity and not politics:

    https://www.redstate.com/slee/2020/08/23/brennans-statement-sets-up-what-hell-likely-claim-that-he-was-targeted-due-to-political-bias/

  8. Gypo O'Leary - August 23, 2020

    Just my opinion, but here it is….. The Southern District of New York just threw a charge at Steve Bannon. There is a reason for the timing of that charge. The R convention is next week. Durham needs to indict people before labor day in order to avoid the claim his timing was to interfere with the election.

    So firing off a firecracker at Bannon before Durham’s Sh*t-storm is a typical D kind of move. Bannon’s charges make me believe Durham is going to be indicting a number of well known people. Strzok and Page are no-brainers (as was Clinesmith). They edited evidence. Comey both leaked evidence and lied to the President. I think he may be charged.

    Brennan gave Reid the Steele Dossier. The FBI used Reid’s letter as a second independent source that Russians were colluding with Trump. The letter plus the Steele dossier was their evidence. Brennan knowing this and knowing Carter Page was a CIA asset make him a criminal if he has denied any of this to the Senate or House committees. The call will be Barr’s regarding intent.

    1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

      Great post. I think you are on target.

      1. marty lopez - August 23, 2020

        I am in agreement. we will know very soon

    2. brian - August 23, 2020

      “The call will be Barr’s regarding intent.”

      I don’t think intend has anything to do with criminality, unless you are a demoncrap committing crimes. Its, was a crime committed, look at the evidence, if yes then charge. The, I didn’t mean to rob the bank, isn’t a defense, unless of course you’re a demoncrap political.

      1. phineas gage - August 23, 2020

        That’s not always true, as prosecuting say, a murder case, involves establishing motive, means, and opportunity.

        In this case, however, I agree that Durham, on directions from Barr, is only considering clear criminal violations.

  9. exexpat20 - August 23, 2020

    Arrests! When?

  10. Gregg - August 24, 2020

    The best comment today was by Marty Lopez:

    “When peaceful change becomes impossible, violent change becomes inevitable.”

    Barr et al must know this, if they don’t, they better figure it out real soon (Sept 22 THIS YEAR) and
    come through or it will get to the point where there is NO “Due Process”. Mob rule will take over and it will be a “Kill them all, and let GOD sort them out” scenario. Does Barr want another Bastille Day?

    What I think has everyone appalled here is the painfully slow drip, drip, drip ‘progress’ of this extremely wide ranging, but ultimately not all that complex a case. The months and years it has taken to get IG “reports” that carry virtually no weight, yet appear to paralyze all other parts of the ‘investigations’ is ridiculous. IG ‘reports’ should have been used to buttress prosecutions, and not be summarily dismissed BY BARR’s DOJ. A reasonable person must ask, what was the purpose of having IG Horowitz’ reports produced in the first place? And Government employees, especially in law enforcement positions must be held to a higher standard, and it is apparent they are not, especially if they are operating in support of a (D) administration.

    I, and I’m sure President Trump hopes Barr et al comes thru, but gee wiz, at this rate most of the criminals will die of old age before anything really seems to happen.

    The Dems keep talking about Trump creating numerous “Constitutional Crises”, but I, and I think many others here and elsewhere, see this coup as a true “Constitutional Crisis” that must never happen again! And if no meaning punishment happens to the main players, Barr will have ensured it will happen again to every future Republican President and Administration.

    What we are all asking, is why is there no alacrity, no sense of urgency in this matter?

    Why does it take months for the upper courts to drop the already dropped charges against Gen Flynn?

    Why does it take months, if not years, for the courts to rule on nationwide injunctions by lowly individual district court ‘judges’ against Trump policies?

    We lived through almost two years of a do-nothing Sessions with the inmates (Rosenstein, Mueller, and Weissman) running the asylum, and the only thing that I can see that has lit a small pilot light under the Durham and Graham ‘investigation’ is Grenell releasing/declassifying documents over a year after President Trump ordered Barr and Wray to declassify everything.

    That is what has so many of us pissed off. Many here are coming to the conclusion that none of key players will ever ultimately wear orange jump suits, but why can’t they at least be forced into bankruptcy for their actual crimes like Gen Flynn and others were for alleged BS process crimes?

    I do know this, if Bush the second did anything close to this to an incoming Obama Administration all of them would have been in jail within a year, probably without any real “Due Process” under an Eric Holder ‘wingman’ AG doing ‘the One’s’ bidding.

    1. brian - August 24, 2020

      And I think you nailed the sentiment of the citizenry solid. I see this same thing in pretty much every conservative site I read.

      Thank you for clearly putting that out there…

  11. CharleyC - August 24, 2020

    I, and the rest of America, hope that you are correct.

  12. Meremortal - August 24, 2020

    The song lyric comes to mind: “People talkin’ but they just don’t know.” Nothing to do but wait, and waiting builds uncertainty.

Comments are closed.

Scroll to top
%d bloggers like this: