Tag: Peter Strzok

The Democrats’ Hermetically Sealed World


I was barely 16, a high school junior growing up in a small conservative farm town in Oklahoma. I was weirdly interested in politics, especially for a teenager. Not long after President Nixon won a massive landslide in the 1972 election over his challenger, US Sen. George McGovern (D-SD), I remembered a quote from Pauline Kael being bandied about in the media. At the time, she was the film critic for the New Yorker. I’ve kept it all these years.

Nixon’s landslide should have surprised no one. McGovern’s campaign was a mess almost from the start of the Democratic National Convention when he gave his acceptance speech so late that almost no one watched it. He was forced to ditch his first running mate, Senate colleague Thomas Eagleton (D-MO), over psychiatric treatment (electric shock) reasons for Kennedy family icon and our nation’s first Peace Corps director, Sargent Shriver. That didn’t help.

[Member Post]


Former disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok, who along with his paramour, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, made it his mission to crush the candidacy and then the presidency of Donald Trump, appeared as a guest on Rachel Maddow’s MSNBC show on Thursday night. Maddow, obsessed with promoting the Steele Dossier as a legitimate document, spent the better […]

⚠️ This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet's community of conservatives and be part of the conversation.

Join Ricochet for free.

Mueller Suffers Sudden Strzok


Former FBI Agent Peter Strzok

I hear Tubular Bells playing.

Sharyl Attkisson writing at Just in the News shares information on two documents released by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsay Graham about government surveillance of now President Donald Trump in 2016.

First, there is a summary of the 57-page, three-day interview transcript with Steele’s primary source for his notorious dossier originally assembled for hire for the Clinton campaign.

[They] Must All Hang Together, or Assuredly [They] Will All Hang Separately (Comey, Clapper & Brennan Edition)


Attorney General Bill Barr Photo: Screenshot from CBSNews.com

Like all of us who have followed the activities of the extraordinarily competent new Attorney General, William Barr, I have heard all manner of spin put on his statements, letters, memoranda, casual meetings in hallways with various Government officials such as Nancy Pelosi, and testimony before Congress. Somewhere in that storm cloud of words, one line in his recent interview and earlier in his testimony to Congress kept coming back to me, and so I sat down and read, closely studied in this case, the actual transcript from CBS News of his interview with that network’s Legal Analyst, Jan Crawford, to be  absolutely certain I was on sound footing when I used one of the phrases I thought I had heard in that discussion. Sure enough, there it was on p. 13:

[Member Post]


I think I heard the start of this with today’s substitute for Rush on his show so I hope whoever listened for more details can fill them in. Somewhere in the northeast, it was discovered (?) that a group of history teachers were in email contact about making a “pact” to HIDE their liberal progressive […]

⚠️ This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet's community of conservatives and be part of the conversation.

Join Ricochet for free.

Michael Ledeen on the Potential Collapse of Iran’s Khomeinist Regime


For this week’s Big Ideas with Ben Weingarten podcast, I had historian, Freedom Scholar at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, former Special Advisor to the Secretary of State and consultant to the National Security Council during the Reagan administration, author of 38 books and most pertinent to today, Iran expert, Michael Ledeen on the podcast to discuss among other things:

  • The impending collapse of the Khomeinist regime and what the U.S. can do to accelerate it
  • The false narrative about alternatives for Iran being either appeasement or war
  • The history of U.S. intelligence failures in Iran
  • How secular and liberal Iran’s dissidents actually are
  • Whether there is a wedge that can be exploited between Iran and Russia
  • What will become of Hezbollah if the Iranian regime collapses
  • The allegedly political witch hunt against Iran hawk and Israel supporter Larry Franklin as an illustration of historic anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism in the foreign policy and national security establishment
  • Ledeen’s theory that Gen. Michael Flynn — with whom Ledeen co-authored the book, The Field of Fight — falsely pled guilty, and the real reason why Gen. Flynn was targeted in the first place

You can find the episode on iTunes, everywhere else podcasts are found, download the episode directly here or read the transcript here.

Strzokism and the Degradation of Democracy


As the passage of time gnaws away at memories of Peter Strzok’s testimony before Congress and America’s outrage industry ratchets its screech-o-meter up a notch or two, perhaps a few observations about the FBI’s noteworthy apparatchik are in order.

Certainly, there is no shortage of opinions about what took place, especially in the form of numbered “takeaways” from the hearing. Thus, Molly Hemingway observed how the Department of Justice succeeded in obstructing congressional oversight, why Strzok came off “even worse than he did in his texts,” and how the Democrats sided with him, in an embarrassingly raucous manner.  Indeed, one mentally challenged mouthpiece from the Democrats’ kindergarten kaucus volunteered to award Strzok a purple heart, authority permitting, of course.

Fred Lucas implied that the inestimable Strzok could have given Vladimir Putin lessons in casuistry about what “he really meant” when, for instance, he said, “No. No, he’s not. We’ll stop it.” (Trump becoming president, that is.) This apparently is the highest form of patriotism: “…the honest truth is that Russian interference in our elections constitutes a grave attack on our democracy,” he opined. Further, Strzok “truly believe[s] that today’s hearing is just another victory notch in Putin’s belt and another milestone in our enemy’s campaign to tear America apart.”  Nothing like wrapping the flag around your arrogance, especially when threatened with a Contempt of Congress charge, which Strzok likely would regard as a badge of honor.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America commend House Republicans for planning a vote on “Abolish ICE” legislation that Democrats have already begun to step away from. They also criticize tactics of some House Republicans during the Peter Strzok testimony, in which members seemed more interested in scoring a dazzling soundbite than effectively questioning the witness. And they question President Trump’s negative remarks about British Prime Minister Theresa May, noting the alternative to her government could be far worse.

Strzok Strikes Out


I watched a good bit of Peter Strzok’s testimony before the House Judiciary Committee today. A few observations:

  1. It is truly frightening that the arrogant, biased, and petulant person who testified today can rise to the very top of the FBI/DOJ bureaucracy and use the awesome power of the federal government to investigate and punish someone he dislikes intensely.
  2. The fact that such a man can rise to the pinnacle of power in DC is an indictment of the Deep State, where liars and malefactors of every stripe can thrive and prosper.
  3. When you are in serious jury trial, the worst facial expression your witness can exhibit is the “Strzok Smirk.” If your witness does it, you should throw in the towel and plead him guilty immediately.
  4. Strzok’s personal attorney, Aitan Goelman, had the toughest job in the hearing room. He was seated behind Strzok and was on the television screen when his client answered question. In a masterful performance, he managed to refrain from rolling his eyes or pulling out chunks of his beard during some of Strzok’s answers.
  5. Lisa Page must be one desperate woman to have become involved with Strzok. In fact, I don’t know how anyone could be in the same room with him for fifteen minutes.
  6. The three FBI lawyers with whom Strzok consulted during his testimony must be the lawyers with the lowest seniority in the entire DOJ.
  7. Strzok did give one straight answer. When asked if he detested Trump, he said, “Yes.”
  8. He had no specific recollection of writing the email to Lisa assuring her that “we’ll stop him.” But he did say it was late at night when he sent it.
  9. Maxine Waters has a higher IQ than the Dem Representatives who pontificated (none asked questions) today in the hearing.
  10. After today, Congressional approval numbers will slip below those of the only two professions that have polled lower: iPhone update techs and website designers who build phony “unsubscribe” buttons.

Mueller Re-indicts Scooter Libby


Last Friday I stumbled into an ugly DC building on Pennsylvania Avenue in search of the IMC (International Mensa Convocation) where I was scheduled to speak.

After a lingering probe of each of my numerous body cavities, the comely security guardette directed me to check out a meeting room on the second floor where she said there were “a number of other odd-looking people” gathered.

Who is Responsible for the FBI Mess?


I retired from the FBI almost 20 years ago after about 30 years as an agent.  I have no inside information about what is going on in the FBI but, like most of us, have been following the recent troubling news and struggling to figure out what the hell is going on with the FBI that I thought I knew so well.

Since it is fundamental to the FBI culture that agents never allow politics to influence their investigations, the facts that have emerged recently are troubling.  Deputy Director Andrew McCabe has been removed after a storm of criticism over two highly charged political cases.  Two senior FBI employees, Lisa Page, an FBI attorney, and Peter Strzok, an agent and key member of the investigative teams that were involved in these two important investigations of our political leaders, Secretary Clinton and President Trump, exchanged text messages that reveal strong political bias.  At least one of those investigations, the one involving Mrs. Clinton, was deeply flawed.

Chatting before the much-anticipated Senate vote to end the government shutdown, Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are glad to see Democrats feeling the heat on refusing to fund the government and taking some steps to get things fully up and running, but they also warn listeners what Democrats and some Republicans really want in an immigration bill to go along with reopening the government.  They also don’t believe the FBI’s explanation that it somehow lost five critical months worth of text messages from Peter Strzok, the agent fired form the Mueller special counsel team and bragged about an “insurance policy” against a Trump victory.  And they also call BS on the explanation from Sen. Rand Paul’s neighbor for attacking Paul, namely that the senator was assaulted from behind and had five ribs broken because he was stacking brush close to their shared property line.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are cautiously optimistic that Republicans may soon pass a tax cut and while the proposal is not perfect, it moves in the right direction on a number of fronts.  They also react to Disney becoming an even more mammoth presence in entertainment with the news it is paying over $52 billion to buy most assets of Fox.  And they discuss the latest hit to the credibility of the Russia investigation, as a recently fired Mueller deputy referred to pursuing an “insurance policy” just in case Trump won the election.

FBI Conspiracy?


I will not speculate too much, per the Code of Conduct, but something stinks at the J. Edgar Hoover Building.

Last night news organizations were given access to 375 text messages between FBI Counterintelligence Investigator Peter Strzok and his mistress/co-worker/lawyer Lisa Page. Most of them are pretty mild but do show a clear hatred of Donald Trump and some mild cheerleading for Hillary Clinton. But then there is this:

I want to believe the path u threw out 4 consideration in Andy’s office – that there’s no way he gets elected – but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk. It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event u die b4 you’re 40