Peter Strzok

FBI FAILS AGAIN! Strzok HIMSELF Chose What Text Messages Were “Relevant’!

The saga surrounding Robert Mueller’s misguided and already debunked investigation into the claims that Donald Trump somehow colluded with the Russian government to beat flawed democrat Hillary Clinton have hit yet another snag today.

During the affair, reports of bias within the probe have been running rampant.  Of course, this wasn’t too surprising, given the swamp-like nature of the Beltway and the “resistance” rats who inhabit it.  Americans, to be quite honest, would be surprised if Donald Trump got a fair shake out of the whole ordeal, especially after seeing the way that the mainstream media has decided that he deserves to be treated.

Trending: Democratic Dunce Calls for “Something to Happen” to POTUS!

The left just can’t seem to understand how transparent they are, especially in their attempts to completely undermine the leader of the free world.  It’s an astounding display of willful ignorance on their part that borders on impressive.

It didn’t take long for that bias to be exposed, as an adulterous couple of agents working on the case were soon outed as anti-Trump assets within months of the case beginning.  This information was gleaned through text messages released to Congress between FBI employees and Mueller lackeys Lisa Page and Peter Strzok.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

After Strzok’s closed door testimony was considered “smug” and irritable, Congress decided to drag this young rabble rouser out in front of the nation to tell his story.  That story included one extremely frustrating fact that we had previously not been privy to, namely that Strzok was able to choose what evidence to provide to the Attorney General in their probe of his affair and anti-Trump musings with Lisa Page.

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.

This is not how the American people believe that the FBI should be acting, and it may be up to our populist leaders to take a stand.

Justice has certainly not been served in Strzok’s case, or the case of the FBI’s malfeasance in general.  The issue now is how the President will handle this subordinate behavior and willful ignorance of the law.  We mustn’t forget what happened to the last President who claimed that he was going to go after the intelligence community.

Former President Truman, whose Administration established the C.I.A. in 1947, said in 1963 that by then he saw “something about the way the C.I.A. has been functioning that is casting a shadow over our historic positions, and I feel that we need to correct it.”

And President Kennedy, as the enormity of the Bay of Pigs disaster came home to him, said to one of the highest officials of his Administration that he “wanted to splinter the C.I.A. in a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds.”

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.