WILLIAM BRANGHAM: The long-awaited report by special counsel John Durham about the FBI's probe into the 2016 Trump campaign and its alleged ties to Russia was released publicly today.

Durham was appointed by former Trump Attorney General William Barr to look into what many on the right saw as a politically motivated investigation.

While Durham's report offers no significant new evidence, it is deeply critical of the FBI.

Durham called their handling of parts of the investigation seriously deficient and wrote that investigators were too credible towards partisan actors, writing: "Senior FBI personnel displayed a serious lack of analytical rigor towards the information that they received."

Washington Post reporter Devlin Barrett has been following all this, and he joins me now.

Devlin, thank you so much for being here.

This is the culmination of four years of work by John Durham.

What else does this report say?

DEVLIN BARRETT, The Washington Post: The report basically goes through all the steps taken in the investigation known as Crossfire Hurricane and faults the FBI again and again for how they did it.

But it also doesn't particularly tell us much more than we already knew.

And, frankly, many of these criticisms have been said before, years before, by others who looked at this.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So what Durham seems to be arguing is that the FBI received a lot of information about the Trump campaign back in 2016, and that the FBI should have treated that information as more suspect than they did?

Is that is that the gist here?

DEVLIN BARRETT: Basically.

What they're basically saying in this report is, the FBI actually didn't have a lot in the -- in terms of allegations to go on, and didn't do enough careful analysis and work to try to stand up the kinds of allegations it was getting.

And, basically, their argument is, the FBI rushed forward to investigate Trump, when, if you look at some past Clinton cases, the FBI was more cautious.

But the truth is, the FBI ultimately investigated both Trump and Clinton, so I don't know how powerful that criticism is.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: So did Durham say that there was no reason that the FBI should have been looking at the Trump -- Trump campaign?

DEVLIN BARRETT: The report, interestingly, actually says it makes sense for the FBI to have examined this initial tip they got from an Australian diplomat, which, frankly, is in some ways a walk-back from other suggestions Durham has made in the past.

I think the report is actually fairly cautious and not particularly critical on what was supposed to be his biggest criticism, which is that the case never should have been opened at all.

But that's not actually what the report ends up saying.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Well, former President Trump, as I'm sure you have seen on his Web site TRUTH Social, said: "Durham concludes the FBI never should have launched the Trump-Russia probe!

In other words, the American public was scammed."

Again, to the point you're making, that's not what this report is indicating.

DEVLIN BARRETT: No.

And, in fact, as I read the Durham report, what he's basically arguing is, the FBI should have opened a preliminary report, as -- preliminary investigation, as opposed to a full investigation.

That's a fine distinction.

But I think only lawyers and agents care about that level of granular detail.

And I don't think, in the end, it matters that much.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Who does Durham specifically point his critical judgment at?

Is it senior levels of the FBI and the DOJ or more rank-and-file members?

DEVLIN BARRETT: It's definitely the senior level that he is most critical of.

And there's particular agents who oversaw these cases that have been criticized in the past.

And he is even more critical of them, arguing that they essentially have a confirmation bias, that they were naturally suspect of Trump, and that colored their thinking.

That is something that, frankly, those officials have denied and said, look, we, as the FBI, had an obligation to investigate these allegations.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: As you mentioned before, the inspector general of the Department of Justice issued a report several years ago that covered a lot of this material.

And, then, the FBI and the DOJ had to respond to that.

Have they, FBI or DOJ, responded to this revelation today?

DEVLIN BARRETT: They have, but their point is that they have already instituted a significant number of changes to policies and practices where there were things that were found to be wrong and shouldn't have happened.

And, frankly, most of the people who made those decisions are long gone from the FBI.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Devlin Barrett of The Washington Post, thank you so much for being here.

DEVLIN BARRETT: Thanks for having me.