What more is there to be said? Well, just a little.
In June and July 2017, Strzok worked on the Mueller Special Counsel investigation into alleged “collusion” between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Russian government, an investigation that, as has been subsequently demonstrated, was triggered by illicit means and partisan dirt tricks within the Justice Department, Democratic Party and the news media. Mueller removed Strzok from the investigation after text message exchanges between Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, with whom he was having an affair, were revealed to contained evidence of serious bias against the President and his supporters as well as veiled hints of a conspiracy within Justice to make sure Trump was “stopped.” The fact that two government employees with this attitude were anywhere near the investigation is sufficient reason to question its fairness, objectivity and integrity, as well as the competence and trustworthiness of Special Counsel Mueller and his hand-picked staff.
Strzok’s Ethics Alarms dossier is here. He is, beyond question, unethical slime, though somewhat useful to remind those who insist that President Trump did not have to cope with efforts within the government to sabotage him that they are biased fools.
It is important to note that what was released today is a draft of the termination letter; perhaps the final version was more restrained. It doesn’t matter. What does matter, and attention must be paid, is that since his disgrace Strzok has been a frequent guest on CNN and MSNBC, which should tell you everything you need to know about those alleged news networks, their legitimacy, and their agendas.
7 thoughts on “From The Res Ipsa Loquitur Files: The FBI’s Draft Termination Letter To FBI Special Agent Peter Strzok”
THAT (Strzok) weasel always conjured up visions of another EPIC WEASEL …
Frank, of course, acted like a weasel and looked like a weasel, making him less dangerous than the hidden weasels, like Strzok. The movie version of Frank was played by Robert Duvall, who was more villainous and less weasel-like.
Poor Peter; If he could have just held on until Garland was in charge at DOJ, all would have been forgiven.
And when you do see him, he will bear the byline of “expert”.
Over/Under on Strzok being a permanent fixture on MSNBC or CNN?
I think it’s more likely he’ll be on MSNBC…. CNN Is attempting to paint the fig leaves back on.
Oh, I’d bet the farm on it. Liz Cheney is an even safer bet. Has MSNBC signed Trump’s niece yet?
Nope, no need… yet. She’s a card they don’t need to play yet. If and when Trump 2024 gets off the ground, then they might decide to play her, or hold her back to see how that election shakes out. If it gets Trump a second term, then they might use her to undermine him.
The fact is that when corruption is at the top, there’s really no hope of things getting better. We aren’t in Khmer Rouge country yet, but it’s not impossible to get there. Ordinary people had no hope at all in a nation where every previous institution was abolished and there was a 100% conviction rate and a 0% recidivism rate… because anyone accused was simply clubbed to death with a pick or a hoe. Do they have much more in a nation where your political affiliation determines whether you get a long prison sentence vis-a-vis a slap on the wrist?