Does Special Counsel John Durham’s report show mismanagement of intelligence or blatant compliance with the Clinton campaign?

For Context: In a 306-page report, Durham criticized the FBI's investigation into alleged ties between Russia and the 2016 Trump campaign as lacking “analytical rigor.”

No ‘Provable Criminal Offense’: An analysis by CNN (Lean Left bias) highlights that Durham found “a significant intelligence failure,” but wouldn’t be able to prosecute anyone for their actions. It also mentions that in the report, Durham included a quote from an interview he conducted with Hillary Clinton where she dismissed the investigation as a “rabbit hole.”

Strategic Compliance: An opinion writer for National Review (Right bias) argues the FBI wasn’t ignoring a “plan” by Clinton to “smear” Donald Trump, then the Republican nominee, but willfully abetted her efforts. They say the move to assist Clinton was strategic, as the bureau “fully expected Clinton to be the next president,” and wouldn’t want to deal with a president who would be “vengeful against the FBI.”

Inexcusable Public Collusion: An opinion writer for Newsweek (Center bias) argues the report doesn’t “exonerate Trump’s actions when it comes to Russia,” saying his public request of Russia to produce emails from Clinton “may not have risen to the level of secret collusion… making it a hazy First Amendment issue.” Editor's Note: We replaced an article from Newsweek we had originally used in the comparison below, as it didn't reflect a Center point of view on this story.