United States Attorney for the District of Connecticut John Durham’s review revealed the first culprit in the alleged collusion with Russia, initiated in 2017 by the Democrats. Despite this latest revelation, Democrats insist on interfering with the investigation.

Lawyer and professor at the George Washington University Law School, Jonathan Turley notes the intervention of former Democratic prosecutor Andrew Weissmann, who was active in the process but is nonetheless one of those interfering with the Durham review, as one of his articles published on Aug. 5 shows.

“Justice Department employees in the performance of their ethical and legal obligations should be well-advised not to participate in any such effort,” Weissmann said, referring to the Durham review, despite the potential conflict of interest that can be established.

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz found 17 serious errors, which prompted Durham’s probe, which found that former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith had added false information to one of the FISA warrants used in that investigation.

Despite the concrete results, the Democrats persist in stopping the review being carried out by Durham. Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden himself denounced the review.

Similarly, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff criticized the investigation as “tainted” and politically motivated, as quoted by Turley.

It seems that Clinesmith’s guilty plea is only the tip of the iceberg, and it is expected that based on his testimony other irregularities and names of important people will be revealed, which could have intentionally intervened in the attempt to impeach President Donald Trump, using that fraudulent investigation.

For Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), the indictment of Clinesmith is the first step in this review of the investigation into the false collusion with Russia.

“There are multiple indictments that could have been brought, probably including conspiracy and including the destruction of evidence. So my guess is maybe he’s going to cooperate. Maybe he’s not. But this is a good first step,” considered Nunes, according to Fox News.

Clinesmith’s lawyer, Justin Shur, testified about his client. “Kevin deeply regrets having altered the email. It was never his intent to mislead the court or his colleagues as he believed the information he relayed was accurate, but he understands that what he did was wrong and accepts responsibility,” Shur said.