As the House moves closer to a historic vote to impeach Donald Trump, the Justice Department's Inspector General throws a stink bomb for all sides in the controversy over the president's conduct.

Michael Harowitz's massive nearly 500-page report, exploring the origins of the FBI's Russia investigation, was not what anybody was expecting or wanting to read.

For the president's critics, the early headlines seemed great. The IG found there was no political bias that prompted the bureau to launch Crossfire Hurricane, and that the probe was justified given the low threshold needed to initiate such an investigation.

In that sense, the president's claims that he was the victim of a witch hunt or a deep state coup was nonsense, as most of us assumed all along.

But, and it's a big but. The IG also laid out a blistering indictment of the FBI's conduct, accusing officials of, quote, serious performance failures, mistating some key evidence and concealing ex-sculpatory facts when it sought a secret surveillance warrant against one of Trump's campaign advisors.

Not only that, the FBI dispatched informants to secretly record at least three Trump campaign officials and used a routine intelligence briefing for the then-candidate to gather potentially incriminating evidence, all without any approval from the Justice Department.

It was not the vindication ex-director James Comey and his top aides had been hoping for. What went wrong?

We'll discuss with Mary McCord, who served as the acting assistant attorney general for national security when Crossfire Hurricane was getting off the ground, and on paper was one of its supervisors.

And we'll talk to Peter Bergen, one of the shrewdest national security writers around, about his new book about the strained relationship between Donald Trump and his generals on this episode of Skull Duggery.

Because people have got to know whether or not they're President Sir Croft. Well, I'm not a croft.

I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostage. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not. I did not have sexual relations with that woman.

There will be no lies. We will honor the American people with the truth and nothing else.

I'm Michael Isigov, Chief Investigative correspondent for Yahoo News. And I'm Dan Clyde, an Editor in Chief of Yahoo News.

Well, the moment seems to be coming inexorably. President Trump is being impeached. The House Judiciary Committee is voting to send two articles to the floor of the House next week.

And Trump will join the illustrious company of Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton as one of only three presidents to actually be impeached, Richard Nixon, of course, resigned before the full house had an opportunity to do so.

And in that sense, it is historic. But there have been times over the last week or so when hearing people talk about this being a historic moment. It just doesn't feel as historic as maybe it should.

And I think the ultimate impeachment articles that have now been voted on by the Judiciary Committee, two articles. One of them is abuse of power. And the other one is obstruction of Congress.

It feels a little smaller than I think I would have expected. In fact, I think the Wall Street Journal referred to it as the incredible shrinking impeachment.

I agree. There's just it doesn't seem to have the weight that the testimony and the conduct of Donald Trump justifies. For one thing, there's no allegation of criminal conduct by the President.

And all that talk about bribery and extortion and other and campaign finance violations, other potential crimes. But the article speaks of the sort of amorphous notion of abuse of power.

I think most people will agree that the Trumps comments to President Zelensky of Ukraine were an abuse of his office by demanding that or requesting that investigation of his political rival, Joe Biden. But still this is different than Clinton and Nixon. And to some extent Johnson as well.

Because Johnson was the 10 year of office act, which I think later was really beyond constitutional. It wasn't a criminal statute.

...