He doesn't want to rat on his old buddies at the CIA, and can you blame him ?
The former British intelligence officer who produced a ‘dossier’ linking Donald Trump and his presidential campaign to Russia has declined to give an interview to a prosecutor assigned by U.S. Attorney General William Barr to investigate aspects of the 2016 U.S. campaign, three sources familiar with the matter said.
The prosecution team, led by Connecticut-based federal prosecutor John Durham, recently approached representatives of Christopher Steele, the former British spy who produced the Trump dossier for a Washington-based investigations firm hired by Democratic Party lawyers.
Steele’s representatives told Durham’s team that the former officer for Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service, also known as MI6, was not interested in cooperating with Durham’s investigation and would not speak to his team, the sources said. Steele was concerned that Durham’s investigation was overly politicized and he would not be treated fairly, the sources said.
Trump 'dossier' author Christopher Steele rejects prosecutor's interview request
Durham is on a fishing expedition. Steele doesn't want him in his pond.
Let's say you are right.
I may, or may not believe you. The point is, the FISA came about because of Steele, so your hyperbole of "
Durham is on a fishing expedition," is just that, unrelated to the facts in the case. Steele remains culpable for the fiasco of the past three years and millions in wasted tax-payer funds and government time.
The onus is on him, at this point, to PROVE Durham is on a fishing expedition.
Likewise, I partially think this whole thing is a distraction for the public from the real story. Which of course is, why did the CIA/FBI and intel agencies, start their eavesdropping, and what other evidence did the FISA court have, which the public is not being made privy to? I don't think we can really ever know all of it, because it is all top secret business.
This, like I already intimated, has to do with the Five Eyes Agreement. Other nations in this agreement can spy on any Americans all they want, and give that information to our intel agencies, which they use as proof in the FISA court for their own purposes, no matter how nefarious they may be.
. . . and all of it? Can be deemed top secret.
Even now, after it is all over, the corporate press has lied and obfuscated the truth, the investigation has been set up to fail and has been chasing ghosts, and the public will, in the end, never really know the truth. WE are set to be globalized and controlled by a united global Deep State that has a one world technocratic police state vision.
Now, I will post a link, that after I had read several sources and read in the Guardian when it happened, I believe this is how it all came about. You can, of course deny it, but then, there is no way to definitively prove or disprove either way. That is the nature of dealing with the activity of Deep State agents. For you to say it is crap, or me to say it definitely happened this way? For both of us would be disingenuous. We can neither really know.
It all comes down to Occam's Razor. What we can agree on? We have chaos politically going on in the nation and the world, which IMO? Has to do with a lack of cohesive vision within these agencies, as there once was during the cold war.
British Role Confirmed in Trump Spying Scandal
British Role Confirmed in Trump Spying Scandal
". . .Trump Was Right
President Trump stressed the pervasive “extent” of this Obama political “wiretapping” to Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business in an Oval Office interview on April 11 (aired April 12). “Me and so many other people” surveilled, Trump said. He explained again that he had picked up the “wire tapped” terminology straight from the headline of The New York Times (of January 20) as he has explained before (on March 15; see AIM report).
Now we’re learning that GCHQ did wiretap Trump for a year before the election. “Trump” is, of course, shorthand for Trump associates and possibly Trump himself directly, depending on context. But GCHQ is trying to put a positive spin on what it admits would be illegal spying on U.S. citizens if done by U.S. agencies.
The Guardian’s sources claim a heroic role for the British GCHQ as a courageous “whistleblower” in warning U.S. agencies to “Watch out” about Trump and Russia—but carefully avoiding mention of the U.S.’s NSA, which must be protected at all costs as part of the NSA-GCHQ spy-on-each-other’s-citizens “wiretap shell game.” (See AIM Special Report of March 18).
These sources virtually admit the mutual “wiretap shell game” by inadvertently mentioning the Trump-Russia data was originally passed on to the U.S. by GCHQ as part of a “routine exchange” of intelligence. The use of this term, “exchange,” suggests what we had previously reported—the shell-game “exchange” between the NSA and GCHQ where they can spy on each other’s citizens and deny it all.
British Wiretapping
Past British Prime Ministers have been implicated in various scandals involving wiretaps. Some have involved the “Echelon” global surveillance system set up by the NSA with its counterparts in the other “Five Eyes” nations—UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Any one of these countries is able to circumvent domestic laws against spying on their own citizens by asking another Echelon member country to do it for them. This is precisely the “wiretap shell game” used by the Obama administration to have British GCHQ spy on Trump, as outlined by Judge Napolitano and his sources.
To avoid unraveling the longstanding Five Eyes spying “wiretap shell game,” the GCHQ had to pretend they “routinely” came across this Trump-Russia wiretap data “by chance,” unprompted by requests from U.S. agencies (such as the NSA or CIA) or by Obama officials, working outside normal NSA chain of command on Signals Intelligence or SIGINT (as Judge Napolitano reported on March 14).. . . "
Where does "their," foreign policy really end, and "ours," start? 
