Skip to content
Advertisements

Judicial Watch files FOIA request seeking information about Peter Strzok’s removal from Russia collusion investigation

December 28, 2017

  Several months ago now Robert Mueller removed Peter Strzok  from the special counsel which is investigating the Russian collusion scandal but had been mum on the reason why despite the Congress’s, and Judicial Watch’s, repeated requests for information.

 We learned on December 3rd that Peter Strzok was removed because of political bias: he had been engaging in anti-Trump texts with his mistress. On December 13th we learned these texts included a reference to a meeting with Andrew McCabe in which an “insurance policy” was discussed that would guarantee Donald Trump would not become President. This was shortly before the now infamous Russian dossier was released, fueling speculation this was the “insurance policy” he was talking about.

  Now Judicial Watch has filed a FOIA request seeking all the documents related to this story. Here is more:

Judicial Watch, a government watchdog group based in Washington, D.C., has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the FBI for records about the reassignment of FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok, who was removed from Speical [sic] Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged Trump-Russia collusion in the 2016 presidential campaign apparently because of anti-Trump and pro-Clinton texts he shared with his mistress, Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer who also briefly worked on the Mueller team.

“It is disturbing the FBI has stonewalled our request about the Mr. Strzok demotion for four months,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. 

  Why would Robert Mueller not be forthcoming with the details? The answer is obvious to me–it looks like the FBI and the Justice Department were colluding to stop Donald Trump and at the same time protect Hillary Clinton–and Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch has come to the same conclusion:

“One can only conclude the FBI and Justice Department (including Mr. Mueller’s operation) wanted to hide the truth about how Strzok’s and Page’s political biases and misconduct have compromised both the Clinton email and Russia collusion investigations,” said Fitton.

  It looks like the Democrats were right all along: there was collusion during the 2016 election to change the outcome of the election…

malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium

Advertisements
7 Comments leave one →
  1. petermac3 permalink
    December 28, 2017 11:41 pm

    If, and that’s a big if as my third grade teacher Mrs Rothman used to say when referring our upcoming class field trip which depended on our classroom deportment, if these thugs, these self righteous law breakers are ever taken to task and found guilty they should have the mark of the demon carved into their foreheads. A scarlet letter of sorts s.

    Liked by 1 person

    • December 29, 2017 6:28 am

      I would be okay with that but like you said, that is a big if.

      Like

  2. December 29, 2017 5:07 am

    Reblogged this on Brittius.

    Liked by 1 person

    • December 29, 2017 6:28 am

      Thank you.

      Like

      • December 29, 2017 7:51 am

        You’re welcome.

        Like

  3. December 29, 2017 10:31 am

    The arrogant pompous little Mr. Rosenstein at his last hearing said he knows the answer but won’t tell…….. out spot out!

    Liked by 1 person

    • December 29, 2017 7:34 pm

      Time to compel him to talk…

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: