The more the public finds out about the inner workings of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and its leadership, the less belief they have that the country is in qualified hands. In fact, the latest reports documenting text messages exchanged between agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, fellow bureau employee Lisa Page, hint at action taken to suppress the free and fair election of Donald Trump.
It remains increasingly important to remind those who have lost complete track of the increasing sub-narratives involving investigative malfeasance, Strzok was the agent who, until only recently, was leading the investigation of alleged collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign. You know, the supposedly independent investigator. It’s also important to point out the obvious: the most powerful investigative body – perhaps on the face of the planet – professes not to have known about Strzok’s political predilections in an age where virtually all information is collected, logged, and examined when necessary.
First, there’s the straightforward Trump-bashing that exposes the bald-faced fervor with which Strzok and Page loathed the idea of Donald Trump as a presidential candidate, and Trump himself.
‘Page - God Trump is loathsome human.
Strzok – Omg he’s an idiot.
Page – He’s awful’
‘Strzok – God Hillary should win. 100,000,000-0.
Page – I know’
‘Page – I can not believe Donald Trump is likely to be an actual, serious candidate for president.’
‘Page – And wow, Donald Trump is in an enormous do*che.’
‘Strzok – Just went to a southern Virginia Walmart. I could SMELL the Trump support…’
There is also a category of text messages between Strzok and Page which qualify as either more cryptic in nature. Including the message that seems to implicate Page and Strzok had a whole different, untraceable phone – likely used to cover up their extramarital affair but also used to talk about who knows what.
Remember, text messages thus far constitute 375 of an estimated 10,000 exchanged between Strzok and Page, and those are merely the ones sent on traceable phones. Surely, the most damning of the lot were not willfully released by the feds.
‘Page – So look, you say we text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can’t be traced, you were just venting, bc you feel bad that you’re gone so much but that can’t be helped right now.’
The open disdain for Donald Trump and his voters is enough that, if discovered by the FBI, would have warranted the exclusion of both Strzok and Page from any investigation pertaining to Donald Trump. It’s unbecoming of those tasked with investigating crime and doling out justice at the highest ranks of the American judicial system. However, the exchange that has riled up the most criticism and aroused further questioning along the lines of ‘what, exactly did he mean?’ is the mention of an ‘insurance policy’ that seemingly alludes to a measure that would prevent Trump’s election.
‘Strzok – I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office - that there's no way he [Trump] gets elected - but I'm afraid we can't take that risk.’
So many questions arise from this single exchange, with the term ‘risk’ drastically escalating the discourse from one centered around disdain for Donald Trump to one that indicates he is a threat to the FBI, if not Strzok personally. But there are two questions which are most pressing, and they are questions for which the American people, and the sitting president, deserve answers.
1) What, precisely, is the ‘threat’ that a Donald Trump victory would pose to the bureau?
2) What was the bureau willing to do in order to decrease the chances of a Donald Trump victory, if anything?
The exposure of Strzok’s compromised political nature is enough, in many peoples’ opinions, to shut down the Mueller investigation and clear house in a bureau that is either incompetent, compromised beyond repair, or both. Considering that the president is who he is may suggest that the latter is the case. But, Strzok’s apparent indication that FBI employees had internal conversations regarding the cost of any given president winning the election, and potential plans that may or may not call for interference in the electoral process, is startling. Many believe that the man referred to in the text as ‘Andy’ to be former acting deputy director Andrew McCabe, the man who is reported to have launched the Russian investigation. If true, this affirms the perception that virtually no office remains untouched by anti-Trump bias.
It’s unlikely that the nation will receive answers to the questions arising from the Strzok-Page texts, answers which are vital to clear or confirm the suspicions that so many Americans justifiably harbor toward the intelligence community. We are in the age of scandals going out with a whimper as vital questions are left unanswered, and have been in this age for quite some time now. There is no good reason to believe that veiled allusions arising from blatant anti-Trumpism within the bureau will be unveiled. As sure as the fact that the Mueller investigation continues, Americans will have to draw their own conclusions once again, as they can’t expect the feds to do connect any dots for them.