A burning question in Washington right now is why Peter Strzok, a top FBI agent who demonstrated anti-Trump bias, still has a job at the agency.
“Why is Peter Strzok still working at the FBI?” Rep Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, asked Saturday on Fox News after a bombshell Justice Department inspector general report showed Strzok and Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer with whom he was having an affair, talked about how they might “stop” then-candidate Donald Trump from becoming president.
The watchdog report showed Page wrote to Strzok in August 2016, asking “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
Strzok responded: “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”
The IG concluded that Strzok’s text, along with other disparaging messages, “is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.” The text messages “potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions were impacted by bias or improper considerations,” the watchdog report added
While inspector General Michael Horowitz referred his findings on Strzok to the FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility for possible disciplinary measures, Strzok’s lawyer, Aitan Goelman, claimed, “Every witness asked by the OIG said that Strzok’s work was never influenced by political views.”
Strzok worked in a senior capacity on both the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server and special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation. Strzok was removed from the Mueller probe after it was discovered he and Page exchanged anti-Trump, pro-Clinton messages. While Page quit in May, Strzok, who was demoted, still remains.
The FBI declined to comment for this story.
Some, like famed lawyer Alan Dershowitz, are outright perturbed by Strzok and Page’s apparent intent to meddle in an election and he questioned why Strzok remains at the bureau.
“You’re not allowed to try to use your office to stop somebody from being elected president of the United States,” Dershowitz said on Fox News on Sunday.
Meanwhile, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., openly wondered whether someone tried to suppress Page’s text in that exchange, as “Strzok’s “We’ll stop it” reply had already surfaced before the IG report.
“You have to understand because that text message is so damaging and shows intent and shows the context of all the other text messages that surround that text message and it’s at the beginning of the investigation, you have to ask yourself, did somebody actually try to remove that text message from the FBI?” Nunes asked on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo. “I think the answer — it’s hard for the American people not to believe that was not removed on purpose.”
On the Democratic side of the debate, there is ambivalence.
Asked Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press” if Strzok should still be at the FBI at this point, House Intelligence Committee ranking member Adam Schiff, D-Calif., replied, “I don’t know.”
“I imagine that the Office of Professional Responsibility will have to make that decision,” he continued. “Certainly these texts messages are very troubling. The fact they were on a work email, the fact that they were co-mingled with emails discussing business, all that’s problematic. Again, you know the IG concluded that none of this affected decision making. But nonetheless, that was completely inappropriate.”
With all the uncertainty up in the air, lawmakers will be able to grill FBI Director Christopher Wray about this very topic and others this week when he testifies along with Horowitz before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Wray defended the FBI at large on Thursday amid fallout from the IG report, stressing “nothing in the report impugns the integrity of our workforce as a whole, or the FBI as an institution.” He did acknowledge that “a small number of FBI employees connected with” the events detailed in the report.
Lawmakers may also soon get a crack at Strzok himself, whose lawyer this weekend said his client will voluntarily appear and testify before any congressional panel that invites him. His testimony was already being sought after by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va.
A member of that committee is Jordan, who on Saturday gave a preview of the line of questioning he would press upon Strzok if given the opportunity.
Calling Strzok a “key player,” Jordan said he’d want to grill Strzok on the “sequence” of events that coincided with text messages he shared with Page, including one in the summer of 2016 about a week after the authorization of the Russia investigation om which he discussed an “insurance policy” that Republicans wonder was aimed at a Trump presidency.
Jordan also said he would want to walk through the sequence all the way through the Sept. 2 text where Page talks about preparing talking points because “potus wants to know everything we’re doing.” The president at the time was Barack Obama.
“The operative word there is ‘everything.’ So I would want to walk-through that sequence,” Jordan said.
