FBI agent Peter Strzok testified Thursday before the U.S. House that the Office of the Inspector General allowed him to decide which of his text messages with former FBI lawyer Lisa Page he would turn over to investigators — and which he would withhold.
The text messages are central to the question over whether the FBI was motivated by political bias in recommending against the prosecution of Hillary Clinton, and pursuing as-yet-unproven claims of Russian collusion with President Donald Trump.
In one text message, Strzok vowed to Page that the FBI would “stop” Trump from becoming president. Other text messages discussed impeaching Trump. On several occasions, Strzok disparaged Trump supporters.
Yet there may have been other texts.
Stroke admitted to House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) that he had not, in fact, turned over all of his text messages to the Inspector General, and that he had been allowed to determine which ones had “material that was relevant to FBI business”:
Rep. Goodlatte: Now, you and Ms. Page used personal phones and accounts to communicate. Have you turned over those communications to the Inspector General?
Strzok: No, sir.
Rep. Goodlatte: If not, why not?
Strzok: Sir, they asked, and working with my attorney, the Inspector General and I arranged an agreement where I would go through my personal accounts and identify any material that was relevant to FBI business and turn it over. It was reviewed. There was none. And my understanding the inspector general was satisfied with that action.
Rep. Goodlatte: We know from texts that you and Ms. Page would transition to iMessage and Gmail. Who determined that messages were only personal in nature and not business-related, especially since you’ve just testified at length that a number of the communications that you have made on government communications devices were personal in nature?
Strzok: Sir, the broad, broad context of what I used personal email and phones for was personal communication. For those things that were work-related, almost universally that material was translated into FBI systems. Certainly, if it was anything that was a record or would constitute needing to be there, it was provided. But I made that decision.
During the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails, it emerged that she and her attorneys had been permitted to go through the emails on her server and determine which were work-related and had to be turned over to the government after she left.
Another example of 2 tiered justice system, Manafort while cooperating with an investigation gets raided and even his business suits photographed. I think todays questioning was a complete failure, those interrupting should have been removed from the procedures.
Today was a sad day for the FBI. If you look in the dictionary under Arrogance, you will find Peter Strzok.
I watched the whole thing. When questioned by a Democrat, he would smile as if previously assured the questions from the Dems would be softball or complimentary. When questioned by a Republican he would smile and become combative.
Of course, the Democrats tried every parliamentarian weapon in their arsenal. Unfortunately, there was more information available to the Committee than I think Strzok was even aware of, such as the Code of Conduct for FBI employees, which he failed miserably. When the parliamentarian maneuvers didn’t work, the Democrats resorted to whining how there were other issues that they could be taking up (children being ripped out of their mother’s arms meme) instead of showing bias (in every sense of the legal term) on the part of a man tasked with getting to the truth.
Peter Strzok came off as the Swamp Master. And while making multiple protests about how the FBI was being smeared, destroyed credibility on the part of the FBI even more.
@retire05, #2:
What you mean to say is that Chairman Bob Goodlatte attempted to ignore every rule in the parliamentary protocol handbook in his effort to force Strzok to answer questions about an ongoing criminal investigation that it would have been entirely improper for him to answer. Goodlatte wasn’t allowed to get away with it.
Steven Colbert nails it: an excerpt from the Red Hot Congressional Strzok Fest 2018
He can go ahead and push for contempt of Congress charges, preferably before another national television audience. He won’t be allowed to get away with that, either.
@Greg: Nice link we are not taking legal advice from an obviously biased weasel on a show with crap ratings.
@Greg:
Every respectable organization operates from a set parliamentarian rules, Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised, being the gold standard. The Congress, while having it’s own rules of order, are largely based on RROONV. If Sheila Jackass-Lee wanted to know the rules, perhaps she should have brought her personal copy which is provided to every Congress critter. What she, and other Democrats, did was parliamentarian maneuvering, nothing more, nothing less, in order to shut down the hearing. They failed. Deal with it, Greggie.
No surprise you would base your opinion on a self proclaimed comedian who wouldn’t know RROONV if tattooed on his forearm.
Strzok was allowed more leeway than he should have been. While he was allowed personal legal counsel, he was not entitled to FBI counsel, which Goodlatte allowed. Also, the committee can limit a witness’s response time but Strzok was allowed to ramble on, and on, and on.
Sorry to burst your little liberal bubble, Greggie Goebbles, but the one who came off the worst yesterday was Strzok, himself. Any good legal counsel would have told Strzok to do certain things; act humble, he did not; act cooperative, he did not, act controlled in facial expressions and body language, he did not; do not be combative, he was, and most of all, be likable, which he is not. He was his own worst enemy, in of FBI counsel passing him notes and whispering in his ear.
Now Strzok’s paramour is on the hot seat today in private session. Of course, she has the benefit of yesterday’s Democrat circus, but that is not going to help her much.
Stzrok’s personal cell phone and computer should be confiscated. It is clear he held (legal) bias in not just one, but two investigations he headed. I would also demand his FBI performance files. Why did Stzrok fail his polygraph test?
Trump’s GOP congressional flunkies can’t stop Mueller. Neither can Trump.
Today, the DOJ mentioned during their announcement that indicted Russians had turned damaging information they’d illegally obtained about one presidential candidate over to the campaign of the other. They didn’t say which candidate, but they know.
Eventually the truth will all come out. At this point, that’s all that matters.
@Greg:
I know you’re salivating at the prospect that the Trump Campaign is somehow guilty of some nefarious actions and #Impeachment. Except………………….
the indictment says that a Trump “staffer” was contacted by them offering information on a opposition candidate and sending another email asking the staffer’s opinion of the material sent to which the staffer replied it was “pretty standard.” IOW, a big yawn. Seems to me what ever was offered didn’t generate a whole lot of interest from the staffer. But one curious email said that Trump had about a “25% chance of winning” and the DNC convention should be interesting between Hillary and Bernie.
Of course, being the Socialist you are, you will try to make hay out of fairy wings and insist that this indictment is proof that Trump is guilty of something, anything, because in your hatred for our president you long ago lost anything close to being rational.
Odd, how with all this going on, Bernie Sanders is so quiet.
Where did Bernie spend his honeymoon?
Hillary is such damaged goods anything the Russians could add would simply disappear in the crooked pile of stench she had already buried herself in. How much worse can it get than to allow your good friend get tortured and killed by terrorists ..13 hours.