Some FBI Agents Looked for an Insurance Policy to Block Trump
There’s credible proof that at least two FBI agents wanted to ensure that President Donald Trump would never step into the Oval Office. The agents, based on intercepted conversations, were looking for something akin to insurance in the form of a political or judicial instrument that would override Trump’s electoral victory. It would be a stretch to consider that as an organization, the FBI itself considered taking an “insurance policy” to prevent Trump from becoming president, but there’s enough evidence to suggest that the matter warrants further investigation.
So believable is the evidence, in fact, that Republican officials have asked the U.S. Department of Justice to appoint a new independent prosecutor to consider the very real possibility that not only did the FBI have a bias against Trump, but it acted on it based on findings that one of its agents frequently described Trump as an “idiot” in his e-mails. The implication from FBI agent Peter Strzok is clear as he writes to fellow FBI officer Lisa Page, with whom he’s alleged to be having a romantic affair. (Source: “FBI Texts Reveal “Insurance Policy” To Prevent Trump Presidency,” ZeroHedge, December 14, 2017.)
Strzok, who was identified as a top Russian counterintelligence expert, is said to be the FBI’s second-highest counterintelligence official. He was working on the team headed by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller investigating the so-called Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The reason for his release has just started to surface; indeed, the Justice Department has identified some 10,000 text messages between Strzok and Page. (Source: “FBI agent removed from Mueller investigation over anti-Trump messages,” CNN, December 4, 2017.)
Heavy Anti-Trump Bias Should Have Been Vetted Early
These reveal a distinct anti-Trump bias, which would taint the neutrality of their judgment. They also hint that the FBI agents may even have plotted collusion to act in case Trump should win. In any other kind of judicial inquiry, such bias would be grounds for a major review of the entire investigation. Indeed, no matter how Mueller proceeds from here, now that the flaw has been revealed, the text messages between Strozk and Page have discredited his investigation.
The Justice Department’s reputation as an impartial arbitrator is in question, according to Bob Goodlatte, head of the House’s Judiciary Committee. Clearly, the FBI has to ensure that if its employees have certain political views–and it’s unrealistic that they shouldn’t, it’s their right–they should not be chosen to participate in a given investigation where their opinions can severely compromise their actions. (Source: “Rep. Bob Goodlatte Slams ‘Insider Bias’ on Robert Mueller’s Team at House Judiciary Hearing,” Breitbart, December 13, 2017.)
The very suggestion that the two FBI officials plotted to find ways to prevent Trump from fulfilling his electoral mandate, let alone their opinions, should be probed. This story will not finish here and we will be hearing more details over the coming weeks or months.