Discover more from Medicine for the Dead
Attorney Robert Barnes On The Durham Investigation
Why has Robert Barnes taken such an absolutist stance about the Durham Investigation?
I watch a lot of streams with Attorney Robert Barnes and Viva Frei, and Barnes has been unequivocally stating for quite some time that John Durham will only go so far and that Durham won’t go after the big players in the Spygate/Russiagate investigation.
Barnes has brought this up several times on many streams and recently said:
“Durham just took out the mid-level people. That’s his MO. He comes in and takes out outsiders, and mid-level people in order to protect the most powerful people.”
This has always been so puzzling to me from a guy I consider to be very rational and MAGA. So I decided to take a deeper look into what’s driving Barnes to take this position.
In this article I’m going to show why I believe Barnes has taken this stance and let you decide whether what he’s saying holds water.
I’ll state up front, that I don’t agree with Barnes and I want to present what I found in a completely neutral manner so we can perhaps find out why Robert Barnes believes what he does and come to our own conclusions.
I’m not here to bash Barnes at all. This is totally about finding out why he’s saying what he’s said.
Nevertheless, let’s have at it.
If you’re unfamiliar with what Barnes has been saying, here’s some clips from Barnes and Viva on their stream from May 26th, 2022
Starting at 6:29 through to 7:42
“And the real scam here was, they knew, like here’s the other false story that kind of Durham is pushing other people are trying to justify Russiagate are, are putting out there.
Which is that going to the FBI would have stopped the media from covering it. It’s just the opposite.
They knew in order to get the New York Times to really give it coverage, they needed to be able to confirm there’s an open FBI criminal investigation.
That’s the other reason he was doing it. Now, the problem is the FBI can’t look like they’re doing overtly political activity.
So they needed the outsiders to lie to them about the source of their information and the reason for their presence.”
And here’s where Barnes makes some very strong allegations about Durham:
“And this is Durham continuing the corrupt FBI’s business which is just like he did with the CIA rendition case, frankly it’s what he really did if you really dug in with the Whitey Bulger case.
People like, somehow Robert Mueller got to walk. Robert Mueller was in Boston when they were running Whitey Bulger as an informant.
Somehow he never gets implicated in that case.
Durham just took out the mid-level people. That’s his MO. He comes in and takes out outsiders, and mid-level people in order to protect the most powerful people.
And that’s what the Sussmann case really is.”
Barnes goes on to admit that Michael Sussmann is dead to rights and should be charged with a material lie to the FBI in the course of an investigation, and he should go to jail for this.
Here’s a clip from the most recent Viva Barnes stream from May 29th where Barnes states Sussmann is guilty.
Starting at 50:48 to 50:55:
“…so by definition that’s why when I saw the facts of the case, and saw the evidence, he’s (Sussmann) dead to rights.
There’s zero question he committed the crime.
There’s only a question whether the jury will convict.”
Indeed that’s the big question as we head into the week where the verdict should be returned.
So the supposition Barnes is laying out here is that the entire investigation is absolutely legitimate. That crimes were committed but DC insiders like Sussmann are so arrogant that they believe they never will or would have to answer for anything illegal. And to reinforce that point, Barnes believes that the entire Durham investigation is nothing but a dog and pony show based on what Barnes believes is historical when it comes to Durham’s role in past federal investigations.
Whitey Bulger and John Connolly
In the Whitey Bulger case, FBI agent John Connolly actually was sentenced for 40 years and went to prison for his role with Bulger as an informant, but Barnes is blaming Durham for stopping at just Connolly and not going after bigger players such as former FBI Director Robert Mueller who also was in the Boston FBI office at that time.
Is he right about this?
First, here’s some current news about Connolly:
Notorious ex-FBI agent John “Zip” Connolly is said to be dying and is up for a medical release in Florida next week that will be streamed live, the Herald has learned.
Connolly was sentenced to 40 years in jail for his double-dealing relationship with James “Whitey” Bulger during the mobster’s murderous reign in South Boston. Bulger was beaten to death in a West Virginia prison in 2018 and now Connolly wants to die at home.
Here are some interesting articles about Durham’s involvement with the Bulger investigation:
In this article from February 18, 2021, Boston Globe reporter Kevin Cullen, who has extensively reported and written books about Bulger, mentions that Durham’s report was buried (emphasis in bold is mine):
His FBI supervisors not only knew what Connolly, and by extension Bulger, was doing, but encouraged it and rewarded them for it. The FBI promoted Connolly, showcased him as an expert on how to cultivate informants, all while looking the other way as Bulger murdered with impunity.
Whitey bought one of those supervisors, John Morris, with a case of wine and a plane ticket for his mistress. Like Connolly, Morris was complicit in the murder of a hoodlum, Brian Halloran, which was bad enough, but also the murder of an innocent father of three, Michael Donahue, who had the misfortune of offering Halloran a ride home when Bulger chose to clip Halloran.
Morris cut a deal to testify against Connolly and was allowed to waltz free.
Mark Wolf, the federal judge who blew open the conspiracy and forced the FBI to admit Bulger was their snitch, nine years after The Boston Globe Spotlight Team first exposed the unholy alliance, concluded that more than a dozen FBI agents, supervisors, and Justice Department officials had engaged in what could be generously described as corruption in their handling of Bulger.
The Justice Department, in the name of then special prosecutor John Durham, promised to get to the bottom of the culpability of other federal officials. But Durham’s report has never seen the light of the day.
The Justice Department and the FBI conspired to fashion a self-serving narrative, that Whitey Bulger’s reign of terror in Southie and beyond was the work of a rogue agent, John Connolly, who was motivated by greed and a desire to protect not only his snitch but the snitch’s politician brother, William Bulger, the Massachusetts Senate president.
This Washington Post article by Aaron Blake from May 14, 2019 article states that Durham was the right person to handle the job. (again emphasis in bold is mine):
In 1998, U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts Donald Stern needed someone to look into allegations that the FBI had been protecting mob leaders in Boston. One of them was Irish mob boss James “Whitey” Bulger. This was a big case, involving potential misdeeds by high-ranking federal law enforcement agents. And Stern knew who he wanted.
“We didn’t go to Washington with a list,” Stern later told the Associated Press. “We went to Washington and said, ‘We want John Durham to do it.' ”
John Durham did it. The new special prosecutor’s work would lead to the overturning of four 1968 murder convictions after he unearthed secret documents revealing an FBI informant had framed the men. By 2002, he secured the conviction of retired FBI agent John Connolly, who had protected Bulger and top associate Stephen “The Rifleman” Flemmi. (Connolly tipped off Bulger ahead of his 1995 indictment, allowing him to flee. Bulger would evade arrest until 2011.) The investigation also led to another indictment of a retired FBI agent, but the agent died before trial.
Note that Blake refers to Durham as “the new special prosecutor”. This was 1998 to 2002 when John Durham may not have the power to be able to pull off what Barnes has been saying about Durham just taking out the mid-level people.
According to the website States Attorney their John H. Durham bio may indeed not have had the power to go after larger targets (again emphasis in bold is mine):
John H. Durham has been associated as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for 35 years in various positions in the District of Connecticut. In the year 1977 and 1978, Durham was the Deputy Assistant State’s Attorney in the Office of the Chief State’s Attorney. He served as an Assistant State’s Attorney from the year 1978 to 1982 at the New Haven State’s Attorney’s Office. The office was at that time led by Arnold Markle.
He was next appointed as the attorney and afterwards a supervisor of the Justice Department’s Organized Crime and Racketeering Section of Boston Strike Force, New Haven Field Office from the year 1982 to 1989. In 1997 and 1998, Durham served as the United States Attorney as an acting and interim authority.
When the Bulger/Connolly/FBI investigation took place, Durham was acting and interim authority and very likely not someone powerful enough to implicate others higher up the FBI ladder in the Bulger investigation.
Of note, John Durham was appointed to the Bulger investigation by Attorney General Janet Reno who worked in the Clinton administration:
Durham is widely regarded as a fair and dogged prosecutor, famously leading the prosecution of mobsters, including a series of high-profile convictions of the New England Mafia. His corruption investigation of former Connecticut Gov. John Rowland resulted in the Republican finding himself behind bars following a guilty plea. He was also appointed by then-Attorney General Janet Reno in 1999 to investigate the corrupt connections between law enforcement officers in Boston with James “Whitey” Bulger and other associates of the Irish mob’s Winter Hill Gang.
That said, John Connolly wasn’t convicted until 2002 for racketeering, lying to an FBI agent (Sounds like the Sussmann trial doesn’t it?) and obstruction of justice and given a 10 year sentence.
Note: Connolly was also convicted of second degree murder in 2008 which was overturned in 2014, but then upheld. This is where the 40 year sentence comes from.
This is where things get a bit interesting…
Barnes also made a reference in the first clip above to this (again emphasis in bold is mine):
“And this is Durham continuing the corrupt FBI’s business which is just like he did with the CIA rendition case”
Barnes doesn’t clarify in this clip what he’s referring to and may have in other streams, and I don’t recall him making any reference to any CIA coverups.
What he’s likely referring to is the infamous Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq trial of CIA waterboarding torture tapes being destroyed back in 2005.
Looking at that case it appears that Durham felt he didn’t have enough evidence to prosecute as was written in this article in Truthout by Jason Leopold on November 9, 2010:
Nearly three years after he was appointed to investigate the destruction of at least 92 interrogation videotapes, a dozen of which showed two high-value detainees being subjected to waterboarding and various other torture techniques by CIA interrogators, Special Prosecutor John Durham has determined that he does not have enough evidence to secure an indictment against anyone responsible for the purge.
Department of Justice (DOJ) spokesman Matthew Miller said in a statement Tuesday that Durham, a US Attorney from Connecticut, has “concluded that he will not pursue criminal charges for the destruction of interrogation videotapes.”
Further on in the article there’s a reason why Durham didn’t call a key witness:
Jose Rodriguez, the head of the CIA’s clandestine division, who was the primary focus of Durham’s criminal investigation, ordered the destruction of the videotapes on November 9, 2005, exactly one week after The Washington Post published a front-page article exposing the CIA’s use of so-called “black site” prisons overseas to interrogate alleged “war on terror” suspects using torture techniques that were not legal on US soil. Rodriguez said he received clearance from agency attorneys. The videotapes were made at secret CIA prisons in Thailand and destroyed there.
One witness in the case who worked with Rodriguez said, “I can’t believe Rodriguez got away with it” upon learning that Durham would not prosecute his former colleague. This person said Rodriguez destroyed evidence to cover-up the fact that the two detainees whose interrogations were videotaped were tortured.
Rodriguez, according to people familiar with the investigation, was never called by Durham to testify before his grand jury.
Brent Mickum, an attorney who represents Abu Zubaydah, the first high-value detainees subjected to waterboarding whose torture was captured on the videotapes, said the fact that Durham did not call Rodriguez to testify suggests that Rodriguez intended to assert his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.
“There really isn’t any other explanation” as to why Durham did not call Rodriguez to testify, Mickum said. Durham “can’t force Rodriguez to testify if he intended to plead the Fifth. If [Durham] didn’t call him and could have and was not advised that Rodriguez would plead the Fifth than that would be unacceptable. I feel very confident, however, that didn’t happen.”
If this is what Barnes was referring to, the inference is that Durham was also covering up for powerful people here with the CIA as well as with the FBI involvement with Bulger.
And here at 11:00 to 11:19 Barnes goes even farther:
It was for their benefit.
It was ‘Hey you tell me you’re not here for a client, then I can legitimately run it up as just not coming from a contaminated source’.
I mean they were in on it. It was a conspiracy between the two of them and everybody knows it but everybody has to pretend otherwise because Durham wants to cover up for the high ranking corruption that took place here.
I’m not sure who ‘everybody’ is that Barnes is referring to here, but me and a whole lot of others aren’t buying that story at all.
At 14:28 to 14:57 Barnes continues:
“Unfortunately, there’s doubts whether even Sussmann will be convicted and unlike some of my friends, I don’t think it will go any further.
I think this will be pretty much the end and the wrap up of the Durham investigation, nobody higher up is gonna get hit, they’re all gonna get to walk and you know friends like Kash Patel right? Some others that are optimistic are gonna be deeply disappointed when they discover how the deep state really operates.”
I will say that isn’t the first time I’ve heard Barnes say this either. But it’s hard to believe that John Durham and the Special Council Office have been working on this case for the better part of almost five years now to just let the big fish skate.
From the most recent stream on May 29th Barnes again gives his main reason for why he thinks the investigation won’t go any further.
From 53:23 to 53:33:
Viva Frei: Alright, I think I know the answer as you always have put it forward, why did Durham wait so long to bring this case?
Barnes: Because Bill Barr clearly didn’t want any major prosecutions to help Trump to be brought before the election.
That’s my conclusion.
Bonus: Barnes then goes on to absolutely rip Sean Hannity at 53:40 to 54:02. I thought I’d throw this in there because this I 100% agree with Barnes on:
Durham couldn’t even issue a report before the election. Barr and Hannity kept lying to Trump for 6 months.
‘Report’s about to come!’
Remember Hannity? ‘Tick tock, tick tock.’
Man that guy’s a big fraud. Sean Hannity, BIG FRAUD.
War mongering, war whoring, FRAUD.
CIA spook sponsored FRAUD.
That’s who Sean Hannity is.
If you’re still listening to him, you’re the sucker and you’re the sap.
Barnes mentioned Kash Patel in clip further back who has been more and more visible commenting on the Durham investigation is very interesting.
From the U.S. Department of Defense website:
Kashyap P. Patel, Esq.
Former Chief of Staff to the Secretary of Defense
Mr. Patel served as the former Chief of Staff to Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and is responsible for leading the Secretary’s mission at the Department, including his executive staff and providing counsel to the Secretary on all matters concerning the Department’s operations.
Previously, Mr. Patel served as the Deputy Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Counterterrorism (CT) at the National Security Council (NSC). In that capacity, Mr. Patel oversaw the execution of several of President Donald J. Trump’s top priorities, including eliminating ISIS and Al-Qa’ida leadership such as al-Baghdadi and Qasem al-Rimi, and the safe repatriation of numerous American hostages. Mr. Patel also served as Principal Deputy to the Acting Director of National Intelligence, where he oversaw the operations of all 17 intelligence community agencies and provided the President’s Daily Briefing.
Kash was on the X22 Report about the Durham investigation May 27th, 2022
From 17:20 to 18:32 Kash says (again emphasis in bold is mine):
Kash: I think once Sussmann goes down, John Durham… If you look at the pleadings, from the two cases we’ve talked about, Sussmann and Danchenko, that John Durham has made public, you’ll notice one thing; John Durham only speaks to the public through federal pleadings. Which is basically a statement under oath.
And never leaks. Which is a good sign about his investigations.
Dave X22: It’s amazing that there’s no leaks. Amazing.
Kash: Not one leak. Not one leak to anybody. It’s really impressive. That also gives me strong encouragement that he’s doing it right.
What he said in those pleadings he has labeled something called a ‘joint venture conspiracy’ that’s not a Kash term, that’s a legal term when we say ‘Judge, based on my investigation’, he has said that Tech Executive Rodney Joffe, who concocted this entire fraud with the Alfa Bank stuff, who is also by the way an FBI source who got fired just like Christopher Steele. That was revealed this week in court was unbelievable. And all that information that was withheld from us that Congress when I was running the investigation, that’s a whole nother story.
Be he has said, John Durham has said, Tech Executive Rodney Joffe is currently a target of my investigation as are other members of the joint venture conspiracy.
And he went on to label them because in Federal Court you can’t name names, you give titles.
Barnes believes he has some evidence to back up what he’s saying about John Durham, but in my opinion, without knowing who else was involved in those two cases with the FBI and CIA, it’s hard to say for certain that Durham is as involved with the Deep State as Barnes insinuates.
On the other hand, Kash has been steadfast in his assertions that John Durham isn’t anywhere near being done with indictments either.
Here’s an interview with both Kash Patel and Brian Cates by Sean Morgan on the American Media Periscope channel from May 27th, 2022 on Rumble.
Finally, I’m certainly not here to go after Robert Barnes. I actually have a ton of respect for Barnes and enjoy listening to what he has to say, especially when he’s on with Viva Frei.
I think the larger point of all of this is we all can’t be 100% in agreement about everything all the time and worse, dismiss others who don’t agree with everything we do.
One final clip from Barnes where he says at 54:55 to 55:10 to show that Barnes isn’t saying what most of us believe is going to happen isn’t impossible (with a caveat):
“…there was no practical reality in which Durham was gonna go after anyone else.
People are gonna probably have to learn that the hard way over the next six months.
But, it’s, I’ll be shocked. I’ll be happily shocked but still be shocked if it goes anywhere.”
One thing that is for sure that I will say, someone is going to be very wrong here when this is all said and done and I sincerely hope that someone is Robert Barnes and that he indeed will be happily shocked.
We shall see…
Thanks for reading Medicine for the Dead! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.