'Don't fall for it': Legal expert flags Durham report's glaring omissions
Special Counsel John Durham, who then-United States Attorney General William Barr appointed in 2019 after the release of the Mueller report to probe the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation, arrives for his trial at the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on May 26, 2022 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Ron Sachs/Consolidated News Pictures/Getty Images)

Even though former President Donald Trump has seized on special counsel John Durham's final report on the Trump-Russia investigation as vindication, University of Michigan Law Professor Barb McQuade is warning that the report's contents should not be taken at face value.

In a lengthy Twitter thread, McQuade pointed out some of the glaring omissions in the report that she believes led it to an incorrect conclusion that an FBI investigation into the Trump campaign's contacts with Russian agents was not warranted.

In particular, McQuade knocks Durham for downplaying the boasts of former Trump campaign official George Papadopoulos about getting help from Russia to win the 2016 election, which she noted came right after Russian intelligence services hacked into the Democratic National Committee.

"FBI was properly concerned about Russia’s efforts to influence the presidential election," she writes.

IN OTHER NEWS: Pro-DeSantis PAC thinks it made a 'massive mistake' by airing accurate criticisms of Trump: report

McQuade then notes all of the reasons for the FBI to be concerned with Trump's relationship with Russia.

"Trump had other concerning ties to Russians: real estate deals, Miss Universe Pageant, loans from Russian lenders, Trump Tower Moscow project," she notes. "Campaign Chairman Paul Manafort had lobbied for pro-Russian oligarchs. Trump campaign members also had ties to Russia. Mike Flynn was paid $45,000 by Russia Today in 2015 for a speech he gave at a banquet where he sat next to Putin. He later lied to FBI about his calls with the Russian ambassador about sanctions during the transition."

All of this leads McQuade to conclude that "failing to investigate these ties would have been a breach of duty by FBI," and she said that Durham deserved to be taken to task for painting such a misleading picture of the FBI's activities.

"The Durham Report provides fuel for the false claim that the Russia probe was a hoax," she writes. "Don’t fall for it."