Peter Strzok disagrees with Durham's characterization of what he said in his final report
Former special counsel John Durham released his final report on Monday, confessing that there was nothing illegal that happened at the FBI during Robert Mueller's investigation or during the Russia probe prior to the 2016 election. As former Mueller prosecutor Andrew Weissmann put it, "John Durham is a big, fat, nothing."
MSNBC host Joy Reid spoke on Monday to former FBI agent Peter Strzok, who became a target of Donald Trump's during the Russia investigation.
"Nowhere in the report are those foreign junkets mentioned," Strzok explained. "But look, this is a predictable sad ending to an investigation that never should have taken place. Shortly after he was announced in 2019, he went on the record as a prosecutor, making a rare public statement that he disagreed with [inspector general Michael] Horowitz's conclusion that the investigation was appropriately launched. And then he spent the next three to four years with a cognitive bias trying to build a case that somehow it was. We saw the results today, and the results are clearly he didn't come up with anything."
Strzok went on to highlight Durham's record with "two failed prosecutions and one plea that Michael Horowitz presented to him on a platter, and then I compare that to the record of special counsel [Robert] Mueller, who convicted Paul Manafort and Rick Gates and Michael Flynn and Roger Stone and indicted dozens of Russians."
In total, Mueller indicted 34 people, ABC News noted in its running total.
"If you want to compare which one of these had substance and meat behind the allegations, it's absolutely clear. Robert Mueller did."
Reid went on to read a piece of the Durham probe that includes Strzok claiming, "There's nothing to this but we have to run it to ground."
Strzok noted it was odd because Durham only interviewed him in a "narrow scope before I went into the grand jury related to the investigation."
"Had he interviewed me, there would have been a wide variety of things I would have said," he continued. "First and foremost, the initial allegation was extraordinarily serious. It was potentially a threat to the national security of the United States, and it absolutely merited opening a full investigation. And the IG found it was proper and in accordance with DOJ and FBI regulations and finally, after years of independent investigation, found there was no testimonial or documentary evidence that anybody acted with bias or inappropriately. so this was worth opening. I agreed with opening it. I wrote the opening ec. It absolutely should have been opened, and the proof of that again is looking at all those people who were found guilty in the course of special counsel Mueller's investigation."
See the full video below or at the link here.
Leave a Comment