Breaking! (in 2016): Anti-Hillary Bias in Communications Between Ex-NY FBI Chief and FBI Agents!

NBC News / YouTube Former FBI Agent Peter Strzok Testifies...
NBC News / YouTube

The effort to paint the FBI Russia investigation as biased, relying on the Strzok texts alone, reached kind of a climax today with Strzok’s blistering defense of himself and the agency.

But from the beginning, it has driven me nuts that no one, not even our MSNBC heroes, has met this bullshit by relentlessly asking this question:

Why are we looking only at the Strzok/Page texts for bias when

1. There were 100 agents assigned to Hillary’s emails and foundation; and

2.  There are 13,000 FBI agents and 35,000 FBI employees; and  

3,  The NY FBI office was known to be riven with pro-Trump agents.

Do you think there’s maybe more than a tiny chance there are texts and other communications from and to FBI agents showing antipathy to Hillary and bias toward Trump?

And Republicans have quashed any attempt to disclose FBI communications between any other FBI agents.

And there is a lot of evidence showing bias for Trump and anti-Hillary.

For example, BREAKING on November 4, 2016, in Politico:

Pro-Trump former FBI official says he’s channeling agents’ rage

According to a Daily Beast article published Thursday, Kallstrom first denied speaking at all to any active FBI agents and said his assessment of the mood of the bureau’s rank and file was based exclusively on conversations with retired agents. But later in that same interview, he said that he did interact with active agents who had reached out to him.

Kallstrom stuck with that story Thursday night on Fox News’s “The Kelly File,” where he disputed the Daily Beast’s assessment that he had claimed to have spoken with active FBI agents investigating Clinton.

“Well, they can write what they want. I never did claim I talked to the actual agents. I would never do that. I would never call up people that were investigating something and even put them on the spot. I wouldn’t do that,” Kallstrom said. “But I’ve talked to hundreds and hundreds of people in the FBI — mostly retired people and some people that are currently on the job that are not directly involved, but, you know, it’s a small organization. You know, they know what’s going on.”

So Kallstrom admits he spoke with “hundreds” of active and retired FBI agents. He claims none of them were on the HRC case. Do you take him at his word?

I know why the Republicans are pounding Strzok: to try to dishonestly and selectively show bias. But why can’t the liberal media (or the MSM) simply point this out?

Can even one person on TV point this out? To show how crazy it is to accuse the FBI of bias against Trump based on a couple of texts?

Can you imagine the vitriol against Clinton in texts among agents investigating her and in texts between them and Kallstrom?

Republicans are going to do this kind of crap. Is it too much to expect the MSNBC liberals and the MSM to use this argument to call bullshit?

Chris Hayes flubbed an opportunity earlier this year and I wrote this diary about it.

I ran into Joan Walsh in January and suggested she point this out; and she did on CNN.

Selective release is a poisonous authoritarian tool. The folly of it should be pointed out at every opportunity.

Thank you to all who already support our work since we could not exist without your generosity. If you have not already, please consider supporting us on Patreon to ensure we can continue bringing you the best of independent journalism.

Leave a Comment

Be the First to Comment!