House Democrats grill John Durham during his testimony on the FBI's Russia-Trump probe

House Democrats on Wednesday grilled former special counsel John Durham about his lengthy report that criticized the FBI for its investigation into the Trump campaign’s relationship with Russia during the 2016 election.

During his testimony before the Judiciary Committee, Republicans touted Durham’s findings that the FBI shouldn’t have launched the Russia probe to begin with, reiterating their argument that the Russia probe was a political hit job against the Trump campaign.

“Seven years of attacking Trump is scary enough,” Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio., the committee's chair, said at the beginning of the hearing. “But what’s more frightening any one of us could be next.”

Democrats piled on criticisms of Durham’s findings in a series of heated exchanges throughout the hearing.

Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., insisted that Durham’s “reputation will be damaged” as he accused the former special counsel of running a biased investigation.

Durham fired back: “My concern about my reputation is with the people who I respect, my family, and my Lord, and I’m perfectly comfortable with my reputation with them, sir.”

Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., accused Durham, who was appointed by Trump, of acting like a “partisan act” who attempts to “spin the facts.”

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., an outspoken critic of Trump, scrutinized the validity of Durham’s probe by pointing to former special counsel Robert Mueller’s report in the Russia probe.

In a 448-page report released in 2019 after an investigation that spanned nearly two years and resulted in 34 indictments, Mueller extensively detailed Russia’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election, multiple contacts between the Trump campaign and associates with Russians, and Trump’s efforts to quash the probe.

Schiff’s questioning prompted audible indignation from Republicans. Rep. Chip Roy of Texas was seen banging his fist on the table.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., ranking member of the committee, grilled Durham on his credentials, noting that he only filed three criminal cases and brought two cases to trial — which Durham confirmed was correct. Nadler expressed skepticism over the length and cost of Durham’s probe — which Durham sought to defend.

At one point during the hearing, Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., called out Jordan for mocking Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee’s, D-Texas, questions about Durham’s discussions with former Attorney General Bill Barr.

Durham was tapped by Barr to lead a probe into the FBI and Justice Department’s handling of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election — an investigation Barr had been highly critical of.

Durham’s testimony before Judiciary Committee comes after he spoke with the House Intelligence Committee behind closed doors for more than two and a half hours Tuesday. Durham was “very forthcoming” with the panel, saying that “he has concerns, that there are reforms that need to go into place and that there are still issues that need to be addressed,” Ohio Rep. Mike Turner, the committee's chair, told reporters after Durham’s testimony.

“I think that we were able to get some information that would be very helpful for us and the work that we have to do on both the [Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act] renewal, FISA reforms and also reform issues with the FBI,” he said.

Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the committee’s ranking Democratic member, agreed with Turner’s assessment of Durham’s testimony. He told reporters “we have to learn from the mistakes made in these investigations to make sure that Americans can have confidence in the prosecutorial power of the federal government and in their elections.”

Durham last month released a 300-page report after completing his four-year investigation into the Trump-Russia probe. He criticized the FBI at length in the report, accusing the agency of acting negligently by opening the investigation based on vague and insufficient information, but did not provide any new evidence that anyone in the government had acted unlawfully.

“The [Justice] Department and the FBI failed to uphold their important mission of strict fidelity to law,” the conclusion section of Durham’s report says. “Senior FBI personnel displayed a serious lack of analytical rigor toward the information they received, especially information received from politically affiliated persons or entities.”

Durham’s conclusions were previously disputed in 2019 by the Justice Department’s inspector general, which found that despite a series of mistakes by the FBI, the decision to open the probe was justified and not tainted by political bias or improper motivation.

In response to Durham’s report, the FBI said it had already addressed the missteps he had identified.

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

One guilty plea was made during Durham’s investigation that led to a probation charge, but he fell short of convicting defendants in two trials.

Trump’s allies in Congress, including Jordan, have seized on Durham’s report to make the argument that the Russia probe and its ties to the former president were politically motivated.