Chuck Grassley Demands FBI Produce All Strzok Text Messages As Part Of Trump Anti-Bias Probe

Following this weekend's shocking disclosure that Peter Strzok was removed from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russia-Trump election (having previously handled the Clinton email server probe and interviewing Michael Flynn) after allegedly having exchanged anti-Trump and pro-Hillary Clinton text messages with his mistress (who was an FBI lawyer working for Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe), an angry Senator Senator Grassley - who was previously stonewalled by the FBI and DOJ from getting requested information about Strzok's unexpected removal - has issued a letter demanding FBI documents in advance of an upcoming Senatorial interview with the anti-Trump FBI agent.

In his letter to FBI director Christopher Wray, Grassley writes:

The Committee has previously written to Mr. Strzok requesting an interview to discuss his knowledge of improper political influence or bias in Justice Department or FBI activities during either the previous or current administration, the removal of James Comey from his position as Director of the FBI, the DOJ’s and FBI’s activities related to Hillary Clinton, the DOJ’s and FBI’s activities related to Donald J. Trump and his associates, and the DOJ’s and FBI’s activities related to Russian interference in the 2016 election. To date, the Committee has received no letter in reply to that request.

 

In advance of Mr. Strzok’s interview, please provide the following communications, in the form of text messages or otherwise, to the Committee no later than December 11, 2017:

  1. All communications sent to, received by, or copying Mr. Strzok related to then Director Comey’s draft or final statement closing the Clinton investigation, including all records related to the change in the portion of the draft language describing Secretary Clinton’s and her associates’ conduct regarding classified information from “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless”;
  2. All communications sent to, received by, or copying Mr. Strzok regarding the decision to close the Clinton investigation without recommending any charges;
  3. All communications sent to, received by, or copying Mr. Strzok related to opening the investigation into potential collusion by the Trump campaign with the Russian government, including any FBI electronic communication (EC) authored or authorized by Mr. Strzok and all records forming the basis for that EC;
  4. All communications sent to, received by, or copying Mr. Strzok related to the FBI’s interactions with Christopher Steele relating to the investigation into potential collusion by the Trump campaign with the Russian government, including any communications regarding potential or realized financial arrangements with Mr. Steele;
  5. All communications sent to, received by, or copying Mr. Strzok related to any instance of the FBI relying on, or referring to, information in Mr. Steele’s memoranda in the course of seeking any FISA warrants, other search warrants, or any other judicial process;
  6. All FD-302s of FBI interviews of Lt. Gen. Flynn at which Mr. Strzok was present, as well as all related 1A documents (including any contemporaneous handwritten notes); and
  7. All communications sent to, received by, or copying Mr. Strzok containing unfavorable statements about Donald J. Trump or favorable statements about Hillary Clinton.

Since this will be the first - and so far only - glimpse inside the ideological motivations inside Mueller's prosecutorial team, the public will be greatly interested in finding what they reveal, especially those which show any direct communication between Strzok and Comey.

Grassley's full letter below (Link):

Comments

techpriest Shitonya Serfs Wed, 12/06/2017 - 13:12 Permalink

Grassy's demands won't be met, and nothing will happen to FUBI for not providing those communications.

Now that I'm thinking about it... he is up for re-election in 2018, and back in 2012 (when I lived in IA) the locals were no longer content with "vote for me and I'll bring the ag money." And by locals, I mean the party (which is the 1% of voters who bother to show up at the local library for the monthly meeting), not the voters. He's had to pivot and look like he's doing something, but if it's anything like '12 the key words will be look like.

In reply to by Shitonya Serfs

chubbar Ghost of Porky Wed, 12/06/2017 - 13:41 Permalink

Sessions is culpable in the obstruction of justice UNLESS there is something big going on behind the scenes. The FBI will not provide requested documentation. The choice is going to come down to reorganizing the FBI from outside that institution. I wouldn't have a clue about legality or process of doing that, but that is what it will come down to. You can't expect these criminals to do it on their own or to voluntarily place their heads in a noose with documentation.

In reply to by Ghost of Porky

lester1 Wed, 12/06/2017 - 12:25 Permalink

When the truth comes out that this Mueller investigation is a  total scam, Trump needs to fire Mueller and all the left over corrupt Obama appointeess at the FBI !!

ludwigvmises Wed, 12/06/2017 - 12:28 Permalink

How is a last name like Strzok allowed in America? Trump needs to get homeland security investigate this guy's entire family. Sounds like a terrorist name!

PGR88 Wed, 12/06/2017 - 12:34 Permalink

Immediately fire 10% of the FBI staff, randomly.There is no way ever-changing elected officials can control the culture of a permanent bureaucracy, so that bureaucracy must control its culture itself.  Therefore, punish the FBI collectively for the crimes and political corruption of its elites.After that is done, you can then begin to seek out the most corrupt players for removal - but this lesson of collective guilt and responsiblity must be taught first.

CRM114 PGR88 Wed, 12/06/2017 - 12:53 Permalink

Worst idea ever.Decimation only works with conscription. If you use collective punishment, then over time you will drive out all those who are both good and innocent.There is no problem controlling a permanent bureaucracy if those who are ever-changing are both competent and honest. If they are not, then there's your problem. Furthermore, if they are not, then that 'random' selection won't be random at all.

In reply to by PGR88