FBI: Deep-State Obstruction
Fidelity? Integrity? Those words are in the FBI's seal, but both are seriously in question.
The FBI’s investigations into Hillary Clinton’s private email server and Donald Trump’s alleged “collusion” with Russia were far from impartial. But we already knew that. What is new is the revelation that Peter Strzok, who was removed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s staff earlier this year, was basically a shill for the Clinton campaign. For starters, he sent anti-Trump texts to his colleague/mistress during the investigations. His removal was reported in August; the texts were hidden until now, despite a House subpoena that should have unearthed them.
Who is Strzok? The Wall Street Journal explains:
This is all the more notable because Mr. Strzok was a chief lieutenant to former FBI Director James Comey and played a lead role investigating alleged coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election. Mr. Mueller then gave him a top role in his special-counsel probe. And before all this Mr. Strzok led the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails and sat in on the interview she gave to the FBI shortly before Mr. Comey publicly exonerated her in violation of Justice Department practice.
Oh, and the woman with whom he supposedly exchanged anti-Trump texts, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, worked for both Mr. Mueller and deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe, who was accused of a conflict of interest in the Clinton probe when it came out that Clinton allies had donated to the political campaign of Mr. McCabe’s wife.
But wait; there’s more. Strzok was one of two FBI agents who interviewed Michael Flynn on Jan. 24. That would be the same Flynn who’s now guilty of lying to the FBI. Strzok also interviewed Clinton aides Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills. They too lied to the FBI and … nothing happened.
As if that weren’t enough, we’ve learned that Strzok was the one responsible for editing key language in a memo by James Comey. What Comey originally called Clinton’s “grossly negligent” behavior — language specific to the statute Clinton violated — Strzok revised to read “extremely careless.” That’s a clear pander to Clinton, who admitted she was “careless” but denied anything worse. The watered-down language gave Comey the needed rationale for exonerating her — you know, shortly after Bill Clinton met Loretta Lynch on that Phoenix tarmac.
The investigation into Trump’s supposed collusion is turning into a probe about obstruction of justice. But, between the role of the fake Clinton-funded dossier in getting the FBI’s investigative ball rolling in the first place and the increasingly obvious conflicts of interest and political preferences of lead investigators, it may be that the real obstruction occurred at the Bureau.
Update, Dec. 14: Another Wall Street Journal editorial covers newer revelations from the texting:
“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office—that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected—but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Mr. Strzok wrote Ms. Page in an Aug. 15, 2016 text. He added: “It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”
What “policy” would that be? The “Andy” in question is Andrew McCabe, the deputy FBI director. FBI officials are allowed to have political opinions, but what kind of action were they discussing that would amount to anti-Trump “insurance”?
In another exchange that month, Ms. Page forwarded a Trump-related article and wrote: “Maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace.” He thanked her and assured: “Of course I’ll try and approach it that way.” Mr. Strzok, recall, is the man who changed the words “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless” in James Comey’s July 2016 public exoneration of Hillary Clinton’s emails.
It sure would seem that Strzok’s political views were influencing his investigative work, and that should be disqualifying.