Deep State FBI agents could no longer hide their corrupt behavior.
Anti-Trump FBI agent Peter Strzok was forced to face the music in one explosive Congressional hearing.
And the disgraced FBI agent admitted the Deep State’s cover-up was even worse than anyone could imagine.
Strzok testified before a joint House Judiciary and Oversight committee hearing.
Republicans had been anticipating getting Strzok under oath ever since Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report catalogued the horrifying bias and abuse of power the FBI agents engaged in during the Hillary Clinton email investigation.
Strzok was a center player in that probe, as well as in the FBI’s investigation into possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.
Republicans initially gave the FBI the benefit of the doubt that the investigation was started in good faith, but when Horowitz’s report revealed Strzok had assured an FBI agent he was having an affair with that they would “stop” Trump just days after he had signed off on the Russia investigation, Republicans in Congress tossed goodwill out the window.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte questioned Strzok about his communications and asked if every text or email he exchanged was turned over to the Inspector General.
There were media reports that FBI agents like Strzok and Page were not required to turn over their personal devices to assist investigators.
Goodlatte questioned Strzok,
“Now, you and Ms. Page used personal phones and accounts to communicate. Have you turned over those communications to the Inspector General?”
Strzok responded that he did not, so Goodlatte pressed him as to why he kept some communications from the Inspector General.
Strzok responded,
“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.”
Congressman Goodlatte continued to press Strzok as to why not all of his devices and communications were turned over to the Inspector General.
“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?” Goodlatte inquired.
And the answer he received was horrifying.
“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,” Strzok answered.
Strzok digging through his own communications and determining what was personal and what was work related was straight out of the Hillary Clinton playbook.
When the FBI was investigating her mishandling of classified information on her private email server, Clinton’s lawyers got to pick and choose what was personal and what was official State Department business.
Even with Strzok’s attempted cover-up, the Inspector General’s report was damning.
Inspector General Horowitz uncovered systemic anti-Trump bias among the agents at the highest levels of the Hillary Clinton email and Russia investigations.
Now that Strzok admitted he was the one who got to pick and choose what was turned over to the Inspector General, the American people may never know the full story.
A regular citizen claiming their communications were personal and therefore none of the FBI’s business would never fly.
But critics claim Strzok was given special treatment because he was a well-connected member of the swamp.
And given that Strzok admitted the American people will never see the full picture of all his communications, it is impossible to take him at his word when he claims personal beliefs never affected his work on the Clinton email or Russian collusion investigations.
Do you agree?
Let us know your thoughts in the comment sections.
