Sarah Burris is a long-time veteran of political campaigns, having worked as a fundraiser and media director across the United States. She transitioned into reporting while working for Rock the Vote, Future Majority and Wiretap Magazine, covering the Millennial Generation's perspective during the presidential elections. As a political writer, Burris has had bylines at CNN, Salon.com, BNR, and AlterNet and serves as a senior digital editor for RawStory.com.
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."
"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."