New FBI Director Same as The Old FBI Directors Weaponization and Corruption of FBI Bigger than One Person

Home  »  Big Government  »  New FBI Director Same as The Old FBI Directors
Print This Post Print This Post
Dec 9, 2017 No Comments ›› admin

By Ben Barrack

When FBI Director Christopher Wray appeared before the House Judiciary Committee this week, he revealed himself to be no different than his predecessors James Comey and Robert Mueller. Instead of cooperating with the committee, Wray made it clear that he was more interested in keeping the truth hidden.

Comey (L) and Wray (R) in 2004.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) paid Fusion GPS for opposition research on Donald Trump. Fusion GPS then paid a man named Christopher Steele to get it. Steele – a former British intelligence agent – produced the now infamous and discredited dossier to the FBI.

The FBI presented applications to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA). The Bureau wanted warrants to conduct surveillance on the Trump campaign. Especially relevant is how the FBI justified obtaining those warrants. At a House Judiciary Committee hearing this week, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) grilled current FBI Director Christopher Wray on that very subject.

However, Jordan introduced a twist. It involved a man named Peter Strzok (pronounced “struck”).

After Trump fired Wray’s predecessor at the FBI, James Comey, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein named Comey’s predecessor at the FBI, Robert Mueller, as special counsel. Mueller’s charge was to investigate alleged collusion between Trump and Russia, to affect the election.

Soon after, Strzok left Mueller’s team, which gave no reason for Strzok’s departure.

Strzok (L) and Mueller (R)

Then, months later, the New York Times revealed Strzok had been reassigned to a job with Human Resources inside the FBI for having sent thousands of anti-Trump / pro-Hillary text messages. Human Resources was a curious place for Strzok since he had sent those texts to his mistress and co-worker, Lisa Page, with whom he was having an extra-marital affair.

Jordan suggested to Wray his belief that the real reason for Strzok’s removal had to do with Strzok’s role in getting the FISA warrants. Jordan asked Wray if Strzok used the dossier to argue for those warrants. Not only did Wray refuse to answer that question but his justification for not producing the FISA applications is invalid. The House Judiciary Committee has every right to see the applications.

Wray Failed First Test

Wray’s performance in front of the House Judiciary committee showed loyalty to the deep state. By taking the position that he would not release the FISA applications to Congress, Wray showed partisanship. He has no right or authority to withhold those applications.

Wray’s unwillingness to answer Jordan’s question was shocking. By neither confirming nor denying the premise that Strzok used the dossier to obtain FISA warrants, Wray conceded it was possible, not ridiculous. He certainly seemed to confirm the existence of the applications. Those applications would prove Trump correct when he claimed via twitter that Obama wiretapped his campaign.

In addition, if Wray continues to stonewall the release of those applications to the committee, he risks a fate similar to that of former Attorney General Eric Holder. Congress found Holder to be in contempt for refusing to release documents related to Operation Fast and Furious.

The committee investigating Fast and Furious actually acquired wiretap applications in that case.

At another House Judiciary Committee hearing on June 7, 2012, committee member Darrell Issa (R-CA) actually produced those applications while grilling Holder. After doing so, he explained that a whistleblower had provided them. The same thing must happen in the dossier case.

Jordan was asking Wray for similar applications related to the dossier. In response, Wray behaved like Holder.

Comey was a mentor to Wray. Mueller was a mentor to Comey. It’s quite possible that Wray is reluctant to do the right thing because it could be viewed as a rat-like betrayal of his mentor and his mentor’s mentor. If Wray were to prove Jordan right, Mueller’s investigation would be revealed as a complete fraud.

Wray, Comey and Mueller in 2004

Strzok Deals

Earlier this month, Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn was indicted for lying to the FBI. Strzok was very much involved. He oversaw the FBI’s interviews with Flynn.

During the 2016 Presidential campaign, Strzok was also very involved in interviewing Hillary Clinton’s aides, to include Huma Abedin. However, Abedin was caught lying to the FBI (Strzok) and faced no consequences. During her interview, Abedin said she did not learn of Hillary’s private email server until well after Clinton’s time as Secretary of State.

The Clinton IT specialist who set up the server – Justin Cooper – testified under oath that Abedin instructed him to set up the server in 2009. In short, this meant that Abedin lied to Strzok.

In September of 2016, Cooper appeared before the House Oversight Committee. Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) got Cooper to admit that Abedin instructed him what to do:

Soon thereafter, Rep. Steve Russell (R-OK) pointed out that if Cooper was being truthful, Abedin lied to Strzok and the FBI:

Clearly, Huma recommended Hillary use a private email server in 2009.

Mueller and the mainstream media would have us believe that Strzok was removed when his texts became known to the special counsel. However, Mueller and his team had to have been aware of Strzok protecting Abedin from prosecution before ever making him a part of the team.

Wray must know this too.

That’s why the new boss is the same as the old boss.

Tagged with: , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: