Peter Strzok transcript released

A transcript from former FBI agent Peter Strzok’s private June 2018 testimony before a joint congressional task force was released by the top House Judiciary Committee Republican on Thursday. Strzok, a lead investigator in the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's unauthorized private email server, appeared before the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees as part of their investigation into potential bias in the Justice Department and FBI. “As I have said before, I believe the American people deserve transparency, and deserve to know what transpired in the highest echelons of the FBI during that tumultuous time for the bureau,” House Judiciary Committee ranking member Doug Collins, R-Ga., said as he announced the release of the Strzok transcript.

The private testimony with Strzok took place weeks before he appeared in a dramatic public hearing in July 2018. Last week Collins began to release transcripts of private testimony provided to the joint task force when he requested Justice Department official Bruce Ohr’s testimony from August 2018 be put on the record. Ohr acted as an unofficial back channel between the FBI and the author of the so-called Trump dossier. Strzok, who also worked on special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, attracted scrutiny after it was revealed in 2017 that he and FBI lawyer Lisa Page were involved in an extramarital affair and exchanged text messages critical of President Trump. Strzok was removed from the Mueller inquiry upon the discovery of the text messages and was fired in August 2018. Page also testified before the task force last year, and the transcripts of her testimony were released by Collins on Tuesday. She resigned from her post in May 2018. Mueller is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election, and whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Kremlin.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/peter-strzok-transcript-released

Interview: of Peter Strozk

https://www.scribd.com/document/401890764/06-27-18-Interview-of-Peter-Strzok#fullscreen&from_embed

Repost from last bread, was at heel

Mueller's 'pit bull' leaving team

One of special counsel Robert Mueller's top prosecutors is leaving the team, the latest indication that the Russia investigation is winding down. Andrew Weissmann, who is widely regarded as Mueller's "pit bull," is departing Mueller's office and the Justice Department in the next couple weeks to work at New York University, according to NPR. Weissmann led the federal inquiry's case against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who over the past week was sentenced to roughly seven and a half years in prison for conspiracy and fraud.

Weissmann has come under fire by conservatives for actions that show the potential for bias, including attending Hillary Clinton's 2016 election night party and praising former acting attorney general Sally Yates in an email after she refused to defend his initial travel ban. Weissmann was also one of the Justice Department officials who was informed of the anti-Trump dossier by former DOJ official Bruce Ohr before joining Mueller's team.

The timing of that Weissman's departure comes after recent reports suggested the Russia probe would soon wrap up, but three U.S. officials told Reuters Mueller’s team has funding until the end of September, indicating that the inquiry could last for several more months. Still, there have been other high-profile departures indicating that the Russia investigation is almost done.

Special Agent in Charge David Archey, Mueller's top investigator, left Mueller's team to become the head of the FBI's office in Richmond earlier this month. Brandon Van Grack and Kyle Freeny, two prosecutors who were also part of the Manafort case, parted ways with Mueller late last year to return to their positions at the Justice Department. So far, 34 people and three companies have been indicted or taken guilty pleas as part of Mueller's investigation, but none of them have to do with Russian collusion. President Trump has repeatedly called Mueller's investigation a "witch hunt."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/muellers-pit-bull-leaving-team

Other stories referenced in this here:

Andrew Weissmann, Mueller’s Legal Pit Bull

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/31/us/politics/andrew-weissmann-mueller.html

Key Justice Department officials, including Mueller deputy, knew about dossier

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/key-doj-officials-mueller-knew-about-dossier

Top Mueller Prosecutor Stepping Down In Latest Clue Russia Inquiry May Be Ending

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/14/703108073/top-mueller-prosecutor-stepping-down-in-latest-clue-russia-inquiry-may-be-ending

Mueller investigation 'close to being completed,' says acting AG Whitaker

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mueller-investigation-close-to-being-completed-says-acting-ag-whitaker

Mueller probe sheds more attorneys

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/oct/2/robert-mueller-probe-sheds-attorneys-brandon-van-g/

Peter Strzok: Clinton, DOJ struck deal that blocked FBI access to Clinton Foundation emails on her private server

Fired FBI agent Peter Strzok told Congress last year that the agency "did not have access" to Clinton Foundation emails that were on Hillary Clinton's private server because of a consent agreement "negotiated between the Department of Justice attorneys and counsel for Clinton." That agreement was revealed in newly released congressional transcripts from Strzok's closed-door testimony at the House Judiciary Committee on June 27, 2018.

When asked by then-majority general counsel Zachary Somers if “the Clinton Foundation was on the server”, Strzok testified that he believed it was “on one of the servers, if not the others.” But Strzok stressed that due to an agreement between the DOJ and Clinton, they were not allowed to search Clinton Foundation emails for information that could help in their investigation. The FBI would have been investigating Clinton's emails in 2016, when former President Barack Obama was still in office and when Clinton was running for president against then-candidate Donald Trump.

Somers was asked in the 2018 hearing: “Were you given access to those emails as part of the investigation?” Strzok replied: “We were not. We did not have access," according to the transcript. The FBI’s investigation into Clinton, called the “Midyear Exam,” focused on whether she had mishandled classified information in emails that were sent and received through her private server. Strzok testified that “according to the [DOJ] attorneys, we lacked probable cause to get a search warrant for those servers and projected that either it would take a very long time and/or it would be impossible to get to the point where we could obtain probable cause to get a warrant.” Strzok testified that the FBI did not have immediate access to Clinton’s servers, but rather “obtained possession of the servers over time.”

Although the FBI would eventually gain possession of Clinton’s server, it was only according to terms negotiated with Clinton’s lawyers. Strzok said that the FBI “had it voluntarily in the context — in the case of the servers, voluntarily in the context of consent that was worked out between DOJ attorneys and counsel for Secretary Clinton.” Strzok testified that the FBI’s ability to search these emails was constrained. He said that there was “a significant filter team that was put in place to work through the various terms of the various consent agreements.” He listed just some of the restrictions placed on the FBI’s search of Clinton’s emails: “Those could be — and this is not an exclusive list — limits of domains, of date ranges, of people. But that’s not an exclusive list.”

Despite those constraints, Strzok said the FBI was being "aggressive" in its investigation. “The FBI team was certainly, I think, comparatively aggressive, which is my experience," he said. "Agents tend to be much more aggressive in trying to get information. Prosecutors look at it from a different set of perspectives." Strzok said that the FBI's investigators didn't want to be restrained at all. "You know, we wanted — as an investigator, I want as much information as I can get," he said. "I don’t want limitations. I don’t want you to tell me a date range is off limits, a domain is off limits, anything is."

FBI Director James Comey would clear Clinton in a speech on July 5, 2016. He would listed Clinton’s numerous missteps, including the fact that 110 emails in 52 email chains contained classified information at the time they were sent or received by Clinton, but he would not recommend charging her with any crimes. The release of Strzok’s testimony today followed the release of FBI lawyer Lisa Page’s testimony earlier this week. Among the numerous revelations in Page’s testimony was the fact that officials at the FBI — including then Director James Comey — were discussing possible Espionage Act charges against Hillary Clinton, citing “gross negligence," but the Justice Department shut them down.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/peter-strzok-clinton-doj-struck-deal-that-blocked-fbi-access-to-clinton-foundation-emails-on-her-private-server

Lynch Testimony Reveals Bias and Intent For Failing To Give Trump Defensive Briefing

President Donald Trump’s campaign was never given a defensive briefing by the FBI, despite mounting concerns that Russians were allegedly trying to penetrate the campaign during the 2016 presidential election. In testimony provided by former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, along with others, it is the key finding that won’t bode well for the FBI and DOJ. It also raises significant questions regarding the treatment of Hillary Clinton’s campaign and whether she ever received ‘defensive briefings’ in detail from the bureau. Lynch’s testimony is still not public but has been reviewed by SaraACarter.com.

The defensive briefing, after all, is a procedure that is often given to presidential candidates, elected officials and even U.S. businesses that have either been unwittingly approached by foreign actors attempting to gain trust and befriend those in position of influence. The briefing allows the government to protect the candidates, specifically if there is substantial information or knowledge to suggest that someone has targeted an unwitting American for information. If the FBI or intelligence agencies suspect foreign adversaries may be trying to penetrate a presidential campaign, as those FBI and DOJ sources suggested in testimony to lawmakers, it would then be required to warn those affected, a senior former intelligence official told SaraACarter.com. Why? Because foreign adversaries like China and Russia for example, and even allies, will attempt to glean information – or favor – from unwitting persons with access to senior level officials. The access can assist those nation’s own national interest or provide access for intelligence collection.

In the case of Trump, the FBI gave only a general counterintelligence briefing but did not provide information to the campaign that the FBI believed there were specific counterintelligence threats. For example, the FBI’s concern over campaign advisors George Papadopolous, Carter Page and then concerns over former national security advisor Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn. “It is an essential task of the FBI and the intelligence community to give a defensive briefing to a presidential candidate when a foreign adversary is attempting to penetrate or make contact with someone in the campaign,” said a former senior intelligence official. “If the FBI and DOJ were so concerned about Carter Page and (George) Papadopolous why didn’t they brief Trump when he became a candidate? The fact that they didn’t is very revealing. If they gave defensive briefing to the Clinton campaign then I think we have the answer.”

Bruce Ohr’s 268-page testimony, released last week by Georgia Rep. Doug Collins reveals the machinations of the FBI’s investigation into the Trump campaign and the players involved. Ohr’s testimony coupled with testimony provided by former U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch, which has not been released but reviewed by this reporter, along with former FBI General Counsel James Baker’s testimony reveals a startling fact: everyone appeared to say they were concerned the Russian’s were penetrating the Trump campaign but no one at the DOJ or FBI authorized a defensive briefing.

https://saraacarter.com/lynch-testimony-reveals-bias-and-intent-for-failing-to-give-trump-defensive-briefing/

>>5678540

I think we have always known this, but it is nice to see it in print finally.