I have always felt that the rumor of then-candidate Trump’s “collusion” with Russia during the election campaign is just that, a rumor, without any substance. Yet, through the FBI and Democratic intervention this has become an ongoing investigation involving millions of man hours of interviews and collecting of papers. So far there has been no evidence presented whatsoever of any such collusion, that seems so unlikely in any case.
To ensure an unbiased investigation, Robert Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel since he was acceptable to both sides and considered objective. Mueller appointed an FBI investigator, Peter Strzok, to be in charge of the case. Subsequently Mueller fired Strzok under mysterious circumstances. Now the reasons for this have been revealed publicly with the release of thousands of e-mails sent by Strzok to his lawyer. In these messages Strzok is virulently anti-Trump, calling him an “idiot” and “loathsome human” and many expletives swearing strongly against Trump. Yet, this person was put in charge of this questionable campaign to investigate Trump.
Further, Strzok was also the FBI agent who advised former Attorney General Comey to drop the investigation of then-candidate Hillary Clinton over her use of a private e-mail server for State Dept. business and was the person who modified Comey’s characterization of her actions in his public statement exonerating her to read “extremely careless” instead of “grossly negligent” So Strzok has a strong pro-Democratic bias.
But, Dep. AG Rod Rosenstein, who is Mueller’s boss, giving evidence before the House Judiciary Committee investigation of supposed Russian collusion, stated that all FBI agents are of course allowed to have private political views. But, they must not interfere with their work. However, the views of Strozok and another agent on the case were considered so extreme by Mueller that he fired them. Did he not investigate their views prior to appointing them, were their views not well-known? Members of the Committee gave Mueller himself the benefit of the doubt until further evidence is presented.
This revelation of extreme anti-Trump (and anti-Republican) bias at the highest levels of the FBI has very serious implications. The direct FBI intervention in the two matters before the Dept. of Justice, the more serious case of Clinton’s server and the less serious case of Trump’s supposed Russian collusion, with opposite results, dropping the former case and investigating the latter, indicate a perversion of justice so severe as to merit criminal prosecutions.