John H. Durham, the Trump-era particular counsel who for 4 years has pursued a politically fraught investigation into the Russia inquiry, accused the F.B.I. of getting “discounted or willfully ignored material information” that countered the narrative of collusion between Donald J. Trump and Russia in a closing report made public on Monday.

Mr. Durham’s 306-page report revealed little substantial new details about the inquiry, often called Crossfire Hurricane, and it failed to provide the sorts of blockbuster revelations accusing the bureau of politically motivated misconduct that former President Donald J. Trump and his allies instructed Mr. Durham would uncover.

Instead, the report — launched with out substantive remark or any redactions by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland — largely recounted beforehand uncovered flaws within the inquiry, whereas concluding that the F.B.I. suffered from affirmation bias and a “lack of analytical rigor” because it pursued leads about Mr. Trump’s ties to Russia.

“An objective and honest assessment of these strands of information should have caused the F.B.I. to question not only the predication for Crossfire Hurricane, but also to reflect on whether the F.B.I. was being manipulated for political or other purposes,” he wrote. “Unfortunately, it did not.”

Mr. Durham stated he was not recommending any “wholesale changes” to F.B.I. guidelines for politically delicate investigations and for national-security wiretaps, which have already been tightened lately. He did suggest that the Justice Department think about assigning an official to internally problem steps taken in politically delicate investigations.

The report amounted, partially, to a protection and justification of a prolonged investigation that developed solely two felony circumstances, each of which resulted in acquittal.

Mr. Durham repeated his personal insinuations, introduced in court docket filings, that info developed by Hillary Clinton’s marketing campaign had helped gas the Russia investigation, which shadowed almost two years of Mr. Trump’s presidency and was ultimately overseen by the particular counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.

He additionally repeated criticisms made in 2019 by an inspector normal who uncovered how the F.B.I. botched wiretap purposes used within the inquiry.

In an announcement, the F.B.I. emphasised its quite a few overhauls for the reason that 2019 report.

“The conduct in 2016 and 2017 that Special Counsel Durham examined was the reason that current F.B.I. leadership already implemented dozens of corrective actions, which have now been in place for some time,” it stated.

Mr. Durham went past criticizing the wiretap purposes, writing: “Our investigation also revealed that senior F.B.I. personnel displayed a serious lack of analytical rigor toward the information that they received, especially information received from politically affiliated persons and entities. This information in part triggered and sustained Crossfire Hurricane and contributed to the subsequent need for Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation.”

But in utilizing the phrase “triggered,” Mr. Durham’s report echoed a conspiracy concept pushed by supporters of Mr. Trump that the F.B.I. opened the investigation in July 2016 based mostly on the so-called Steele file, opposition analysis not directly funded by the Clinton marketing campaign that was later discredited.

In reality, as Mr. Durham acknowledged elsewhere within the report, the file didn’t attain these investigators till mid-September. The F.B.I. as an alternative opened the investigation based mostly on a tip from an Australian diplomat, after WikiLeaks printed hacked Democratic emails, {that a} Trump marketing campaign aide appeared to have advance information that Russia would launch info damaging to the Clinton marketing campaign.

The particular prosecutor’s findings have been despatched to Mr. Garland on Friday, a division spokeswoman stated.

Mr. Durham’s group submitted a draft report back to the F.B.I. and the C.I.A. in March so these companies may flag categorized and different delicate info, in keeping with folks acquainted with the matter. A profession Justice Department worker additionally inspected the draft for info that would elevate privateness points for presidency staff.

The chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and an in depth Trump ally, Representative Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, said on Twitter that he would invite Mr. Durham to testify subsequent week.

Other Republicans seized on the report as affirmation that the Russia investigation had been tainted by partisanship, suggesting that Mr. Durham’s report would proceed to gas accusations that the Justice Department had been deployed in opposition to the previous president.

“The Durham Report confirmed what we already knew: weaponized federal agencies manufactured a false conspiracy theory about Trump-Russia collusion,” Gov. Ron DeSantis said on Twitter.

Mr. Durham’s investigation traces again to early 2019, when Mr. Mueller delivered a final report that detailed “numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.” It established how Moscow had labored to assist Mr. Trump win and the way his marketing campaign had anticipated to learn from the international interference, however Mr. Mueller didn’t discover enough proof to cost any Trump marketing campaign affiliate with a felony conspiracy with Russia.

Seizing on the findings, Mr. Trump portrayed that report as vindication that the Russia investigation was based mostly on a hoax, as he had insisted.

The subsequent month, Attorney General William P. Barr assigned Mr. Durham, then the U.S. lawyer for Connecticut, to scour the Russia investigation for any wrongdoing. Mr. Barr later bestowed particular counsel standing on Mr. Durham, permitting him to remain in place after Mr. Trump left workplace.

The Durham report has been lengthy awaited by supporters of Mr. Trump, who as soon as hoped that the particular counsel would show Mr. Trump’s concept that the Russia investigation had been a “deep state” conspiracy to sabotage him for political causes. Mr. Trump would put high-level political or nationwide safety officers in jail, they insisted.

But over an investigation that lasted about 4 years — far longer than the Russia investigation — Mr. Durham by no means fulfilled these expectations.

Critics have argued his investigation was superfluous: An inspector normal for the Justice Department, Michael E. Horowitz, was already scrutinizing the Russia investigation for proof of misconduct or bias, and he released a report on the matter in December 2019.

Mr. Horowitz did not find evidence that the F.B.I. had taken any investigative steps based mostly on improper political causes. And he concluded that the investigation’s foundation — the Australian diplomat’s tip — had been enough to lawfully open the complete counterintelligence inquiry.

In his report, Mr. Durham additionally criticized the F.B.I. for counting on the Australian diplomat’s tip with out asking extra questions in regards to the credibility of what the Trump marketing campaign aide, George Papadopoulos, had stated. But Mr. Durham additionally acknowledged there was “no question the F.B.I. had an affirmative obligation to closely examine” what the Australians had supplied, placing a contradictory tone.

Aitan Goelman, a lawyer for Peter Strzok, the previous F.B.I. agent who opened the Russia investigation and interviewed the Australians, defended the inquiry and famous that the inspector normal had stated it was correctly predicated.

“When the F.B.I. received credible information from a senior official of a close American ally that the government of Russia was interfering in the upcoming presidential election on behalf of the Trump campaign, the bureau could not ignore that information,” he stated in an announcement.

Mr. Durham additionally broached the Steele file, constructing on intensive findings by Mr. Horowitz.

In his December 2019 report, Mr. Horowitz pointed to a number of methods through which the F.B.I. had botched wiretap purposes used to focus on a former Trump marketing campaign adviser with hyperlinks to Russia, Carter Page. That included counting on allegations within the file in renewal purposes after the F.B.I. had cause to doubt its credibility.

Mr. Horowitz additionally developed a felony referral in opposition to an F.B.I. lawyer who had doctored an e mail utilized in preparation for a renewal software.

Picking up that referral, Mr. Durham negotiated a responsible plea with that lawyer, which resulted in no jail time. The solely two circumstances Mr. Durham himself developed, each circumstances of false statements in opposition to folks concerned in exterior efforts that raised suspicions over Mr. Trump’s attainable ties to Russia, resulted in acquittal.

Some Trump supporters grew disillusioned as Mr. Durham didn’t indict high-level officers main as much as the 2020 election. In March 2021, Mr. Trump issued a sarcastic statement, asking: “Where’s Durham? Is he a living, breathing human being? Will there ever be a Durham report?”

After Mr. Durham had spent a 12 months fruitlessly attempting to find proof to assist Mr. Barr’s concept that intelligence abuses lurked within the origins of the Russia inquiry, he and his prosecutors shifted gears to search for a foundation in charge Mrs. Clinton’s marketing campaign for the truth that Mr. Trump got here underneath suspicion of colluding with Russia.

The two circumstances Mr. Durham introduced have been in opposition to Michael Sussmann, a cybersecurity lawyer with Democratic ties who had handed on a tip to the F.B.I. about odd web knowledge linking servers for the Trump Organization and a Russian financial institution, and Igor Danchenko, a major researcher for the Steele file.

Mr. Durham’s court docket filings in each circumstances extensively implied that the Clinton marketing campaign had primarily got down to body Mr. Trump for collusion. Although he charged no conspiracy, his insinuation that there might need been one supplied fodder to right-wing media.

Mr. Durham returned to a Clinton theme in his report.

The F.B.I.’s “apparent confirmation bias, and an overwillingness to rely on information from individuals connected to political opponents caused investigators to fail to adequately consider alternative hypotheses and to act without appropriate objectivity or restraint in pursuing allegations of collusion or conspiracy between a U.S. political campaign a foreign power,” Mr. Durham wrote.

Mr. Durham additionally in contrast the F.B.I.’s aggression in investigating potential hyperlinks between Mr. Trump and Russia with what he described as its larger warning towards a number of investigations involving allegations associated to Mrs. Clinton.

Still, Mr. Durham’s report added a brand new element in regards to the F.B.I.’s investigation of a international donor who apparently sought to purchase affect with the Clinton marketing campaign.

In January 2016, Mr. Durham revealed, a confidential informant attended a Clinton fund-raiser with the F.B.I.’s approval. The F.B.I. later advised the informant to keep away from Clinton marketing campaign occasions.

The F.B.I. ultimately gave Mrs. Clinton’s marketing campaign a so-called defensive briefing in regards to the effort. Mr. Durham criticized the F.B.I. for giving Mrs. Clinton’s marketing campaign the briefing however not supplying one to Mr. Trump in regards to the Russia suspicions, and for not following up on a suggestion that the informant might have been illegally reimbursed by the international donor for a $2,700 donation to the Clinton marketing campaign.

In January, a report by The New York Times, based mostly on interviews with greater than a dozen present and former officers, confirmed how Mr. Durham’s inquiry turned roiled by inner dissent over prosecutorial ethics, main two prosecutors on his employees to resign in protest.

The article additionally described how Mr. Durham used Russian intelligence memos — suspected by different U.S. officers of containing disinformation — to realize entry to emails of an aide to George Soros, the liberal philanthropist who’s a goal of the American proper and Russian state media. Mr. Durham shifted to utilizing grand jury powers to acquire the knowledge after a decide twice rejected his request for an order as legally inadequate.

The article additionally revealed that within the fall of 2019, Italian officers unexpectedly gave Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham a tip about suspected monetary crimes linked to Mr. Trump. While the tip was unrelated to the Russia investigation, Mr. Barr had Mr. Durham examine the matter reasonably than referring it to a different prosecutor. Mr. Durham introduced no costs.

Mr. Durham’s report didn’t point out any of these issues.

Maggie Astor contributed reporting.