Perturbed Peter Strzok’s Testimony Tainted By Too Much ‘Tude

The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s attitude at this juncture in American history should be one of solemn reflection, embarrassment, and remorse.

The implications of the behavior of the Bureau are immense, as they have always been.  We allow the FBI, and the CIA, to work under cover of artificial darkness and secrecy because we know, deep down inside, that the things they do not want you to know about are things that no ordinary worker bee might have the stomach for.  It’s dirty work, and we never really wanted to look at it.

And besides; most of the “cool” exuded by television portrayals of FBI agents comes from that sense of mystery surrounding the clandestine cabal.

But, as with all good things, they must come to an end.  The final breaths of the FBI’s cloud of secrecy are here, now, thanks to a number of horrific and inexcusable missteps in recent years.

take our poll - story continues below

Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?

  • Who should replace Nikki Haley as our ambassador to the U.N.?  

  • 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.

Trending: New York Times Bestseller List Snubs Christians, Conservatives for Stormy Daniels…Despite Her Selling Less

Mass shooters such as Nikolas Cruz and Omar Mateen were both known to the FBI as potential ticking time bombs, yet nothing was done to stop them.  Mateen was even living with an FBI informant for eleven years before the incident.

These ridiculous rampages bookended another issue that the Bureau has been forced to address:  Their sheer unwillingness to prosecute Hillary Clinton, despite the mountains of evidence of her wrongdoing, and an admission by then-chief of the FBI James Comey that she was indeed culpable in the case.

This got James Comey fired, and President Trump fired up.  Now, with congressional watchdogs foaming at the mouth for their chance to get answers from the agency, one would think that a young pup fired from the Robert Mueller investigation for his anti-Trump bias would walk in with his tail between his legs and take his licking like a man.

Nope.  Not Peter Strzok.  Peter Strzok waltzed into his closed door testimony session with an attitude that annoyed more than a few witnesses.

Embattled FBI official Peter Strzok was “smug” and “laughed off” questions during his closed-door congressional interview this week, though also told lawmakers he regrets sending the anti-Trump texts that made him the poster child for bureau bias, congressional sources tell Fox News.

Strzok spoke behind closed doors before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, in his first congressional appearance following revelations of numerous anti-Trump messages he exchanged with bureau colleague Lisa Page during the 2016 campaign.

“Strzok was smug, defiant, and laughed off a lot of questions,” one congressional source told Fox News following the interview. The source also echoed earlier reports that Strzok refused to answer some questions on the advice of counsel.

Strzok went on to claim that he “regrets” sending the text messages.

That, of course, could simply be because if he hadn’t, he’d still be working on the Mueller witch hunt today.


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.