Government & Politics

Peter Strzok's Contemptuous Testimony

His theatrics before the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees served only to underscore his arrogance and contempt.

Jordan Candler · Jul. 12, 2018

Today, FBI agent Peter Strzok strove to exonerate himself before the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees despite evidence of political predilection. His pro-Hillary Clinton favoritism was presented in a recent Department of Justice Inspector General report, which noted that Strzok “negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice.” Furthermore, Mark Alexander reminds us, “He was [former FBI Director James] Comey’s lead investigator in the Clinton email investigation and helped Comey write up his exoneration of Clinton before her softball FBI interview.”

Strzok dug himself into all sorts of trouble with what appears to be a personal vendetta. Yet he told the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees that “not once in my 26 years of defending my nation did my personal opinions impact any official action I took.” He added, “Like many people, I had and expressed personal political opinions during an extraordinary presidential election. Many contained expressions of concern for the security of our country — opinions that were not always expressed in terms I am proud of.”

Recall the infamous text in which Strzok indicated, “We’ll stop it [Trump].” Today, Strzok explained: “You need to understand that was written late at night, off-the-cuff, and … [after] candidate Trump insult[ed] the immigrant family of a fallen war hero. My presumption, based on that horrible, disgusting behavior, [was] that the American population would not elect somebody demonstrating that behavior to be president of the United States.” He further bellowed, “The suggestion that I, in some dark chamber in the FBI, would somehow cast aside all of these procedures, all of these safeguards, and do this is astounding to me. It couldn’t happen.”

Oh, it could happen alright. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) retorted, “He thinks calling someone destabilizing isn’t bias. He thinks protecting the country from someone he hasn’t even begun to investigate isn’t bias. He thinks promising to ‘stop’ someone he is supposed to be fairly investigating from ever becoming president isn’t bias.” The Federalist’s Sean Davis adds, “Strzok — who slept with an FBI co-worker behind his wife’s back, texted that he wanted to stop Trump, that he was an f—ing idiot, and that Trump voters were ignorant hillbillies — just claimed that he held himself to the highest possible standard while investigating Trump.”

The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel chimes in: “The question every American should ask is this: How would you feel if he’d expressed such disgust toward you, and was also investigating you?” This was echoed by Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), who stated, “Imagine if you were under investigation and the investigator hated you, disparaged you in all manner of ways, and fraternized with another employee working on the case who also hated you.”

Yet Strzok had the audacity to complain, “I have the utmost respect for Congress’s oversight role, but I truly believe that today’s hearing is just another victory notch in Putin’s belt and another milestone in our enemies’ campaign to tear America apart.” Perhaps Strzok should spend more time evaluating how much he and his former boss, Comey, have contributed to tearing America apart.

Click here to show comments