Agent To Testify

PUBLISHED: 12:22 PM 3 Jul 2018
UPDATED: 5:30 PM 4 Jul 2018

House Subpoenas Biased Federal Agent For Public Hearing

The agent's lawyer said that it is a trap, and that he is not necessarily sure they will cooperate with the government's entirely legal demands.

The House has issued a subpoena for the FBI agent who sent texts about his hatred for Donald Trump. Now, he will have to answer for his conduct in a public hearing, which may reveal even more bias.

As the ever-widening web of deceit, dishonesty, and questionable ethics concerning the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Barack Obama administration, and harassment and surveillance of Donald Trump and his political campaign continues to widen, it seems that many of the same players keep coming to the fore over and over again. One such individual is Peter Strzok, an FBI agent who outright stated in text messages that he would prevent President Trump from winning the election.

Now, two powerful House committees have issued a subpoena for the agent, demanding that he testify publicly at a joint hearing that will be held next week. The only question now is whether or not he will show up. His lawyer declared that the whole thing was a ‘trap,’ kind of like the one that his client attempted to set for the President of the United States and his subordinates.

The subpoena issued today is for a joint hearing that will be held at 10 a.m. local time on July 10. The issuing committees were the House Judiciary Committee and the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

In a letter to a panel of the Judiciary Committee received earlier this week, Peter Strzok’s lawyer accused the committee of leaking portions of another interview with the agent, a closed-door interview provided last week.

Aitan Goelman, the lawyer for the FBI agent, accused the two committees of setting a “trap” for Strzok.

He suggested that the committees had “sharpened their knives behind closed doors,” and that they are now hoping to drag the Special Agent to testify in public. According to Goelman, he requested the same thing originally, only to be denied.

Strzok was recently questioned for 11 hours about his messages, which showcase his obvious anti-Trump political bias, which he sent to a fellow agent.

The messages were sent to Lisa Page, who the Special Agent had an affair with.

While being questioned, he described his messages as personal in nature, and said that they were private remarks exchanged in a close, personal relationship.

He also said that he regretted the messages.

However, Strzok also repeatedly claimed to investigators that despite the contents of his text messages, he never showed any sort of political bias toward Hillary Clinton, the former Secretary of State, to then-candidate Donald J. Trump.

He said that he didn’t show any bias when he was involved in both the investigation into Sec Of State Clinton and then the investigation into claims of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

Democrats who attended the 11-hour-long questioning described it as a partisan witch hunt, completely ignoring the hypocrisy in their support for Robert Mueller’s special investigation, which has been similarly described.

In fact, some even suggested that the entire basis for questioning Strzok about his obvious partisan bias is to ‘dig up’ ammunition to use against the Mueller investigation, a somewhat farcical claim as the investigation has found literally no evidence of any sort of collusion.

Representative Jamie Raskin, a Democrat from Maryland, said it was a “monumental waste of time.” Representative Gerry Connolly, a Democrat from Virginia, called the questioning a “farce.”

It’s strange, Republicans have said the same things about the Mueller investigation. To be fair, there’s more evidence of bias on Strzok’s part than there is ‘Russian collusion’ on the Trump campaign’s part, at this point.

Goelman accused the committee of “playing political games,” and of violating his trust and their own rules in order to do so.

He also stated that, in his opinion, it no longer “makes sense” for him and his client to cooperate. Of course, the lawyer also said that his client was more than willing to testify again, publicly.

Strzok is already facing the fallout of his texts and allowing his political biases to impact his work, or flouting such biases flagrantly via work communications systems. Recently, he was marched out of the FBI building where he worked, and many have claimed that his security clearance was revoked.

If that is the case, then it is safe to say that he is well on his way to dismissal.

In his report, Inspector General Michael Horowitz heavily and repeatedly criticized Strzok. Horowitz, who was appointed to his position as the head of the Office of the Inspector General, an organization within the Department of Defense by Obama, outright said that the FBI agent displayed a “biased state of mind” during a critical phase of the investigation into Hillary Clinton.

That alone should be reason enough for his dismissal.

However, Strzok managed to not only show his “biased state of mind” during the Clinton investigation. He was also one of the officers assigned to Mueller’s special investigation, and remained on the investigation until Horowitz informed Robert Mueller himself about the bias the agent had shown earlier.

Hopefully, this public hearing will provide the American people with greater insight into the inner working of the ‘deep state.’

At very least, it will likely show just what kind of people seem to hold power inside the beltway, at the three-letter agencies, and remind American citizens why they should question their actions.