FBI's Strzok expected to defend anti-Trump texts at public hearing

Peter Strzok, the FBI counterintelligence agent whose anti-Trump text messaging are getting to be a fixation of President Donald Trump while he assails the ongoing Russia investigation, are going to be required to testify publicly before Congress on July 10, reported by a source aware of lawmakers’ plans.

Strzok, who testified in the closed-door session Wednesday for over nine hours, would have been a character during the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s using a private email server, and also FBI’s probe of Russian contacts with Trump campaign associates, which Strzok helped launch in July 2016.

Story Continued Below

The House Judiciary and Oversight Committees’ open hearing would give Strzok the primary probability to tell the populace his side from the story. His lawyer indicated earlier this week that Strzok would welcome that chance. Trump has called on Strzok to testify publicly.

In addition for his roles during the Clinton and Russia investigations, Strzok was an early on an affiliate special counsel Robert Mueller’s team, which took over the Trump-Russia investigation. The invention of his anti-Trump text exchanges with FBI attorney Lisa Page has prompted Trump and congressional Republicans to question whether bias into the FBI fueled the Russia investigation.

Page, who’s got yet to show up before Congress, have been required to attend a July 12 hearing of the two committees, using the source. It’s unclear whether her hearing are going to be public or in today’s world.

During Strzok’s closed-door hearing with lawmakers Wednesday, Strzok defended his text messages as “intimate” conversations with Page he never acted on, including an exchange whereby he told Page that Trump wouldn’t become president because “we’ll stop it.”

Related posts

GOP offers modest rebuke to Trump after Putin press conference


McCain: Trump-Putin appearance ‘just about the most disgraceful performances by a us president’


Kavanaugh’s four hurdles towards Top court


Leave a Comment

Skip to toolbar