Friday, August 9, 2019

About The Peter Strzok Lawsuit

I don't have the time to devote specifically to Peter Strzok's claim that he was wrongly fired, nor, frankly, do I have the expertise in administrative processes. However, for anyone interested, I highly recommend Margot Cleveland's article today:

Here’s Your Guide To Former FBI Agent Peter Strzok’s Lawsuit Demanding His Job Back
Disgraced Trump investigator Peter Strzok probably won’t get tossed out of court right away. But once litigation proceeds, Strzok’s claims will be on shaky grounds.

The article is very thorough and walks you through the whole investigation and firing, as well as Strzok's prospects in court. One thing to note--once again, this was an OPR driven process, not OIG. I stated in a recent comment that I had a lot more confidence in OIG to do the right thing generally than I do in OPR. This does nothing to change my mind in that regard.


  1. This lawsuit tells us that Strzok is not cooperating and fully expects to be indicted for his complicity in defrauding the FISC and the attempted coup. In this regard, he knows he has huge legal liability, especially since Lisa Page is cooperating and will likely testify as to all the things that remain hidden at present. Strzok really has only two options on the table. He can flip and make the best deal possible. Or he can shoot the moon hoping for a miracle reprieve via political warfare and defeating Trump in next year's election. That he is apparently attempting the latter option does not reflect well on his intelligence. And that is a scary thought given his former position at the FBI.

    Barr's focus cannot be solely prosecution of prior internal criminality. The FBI itself needs to be repaired quickly or we may be at grave risk due to the incompetence of this vital agency.

    1. I think Strzok takes his cues from McCabe. McCabe from Wray.
      On TV Strzok appeared to be a loon.
      McCabe appeared more rational but hate-fueled.
      Wray appeared supremely arrogant and territorial.
      Quite a law-enforcement organization we got there.

    2. "That he is apparently [ hoping for a miracle reprieve via political warfare] does not reflect well on his intelligence. And that is a scary thought given his former position at the FBI."

      That's an important point re the FBI and its organizational culture. For comparison, recall the recent post re a former head of CI at the FBI--Frank Figliuzzi--as well as the recent FBI doc re "conspiracy theorists." It all illustrates that the FBI is heavily influenced by unintelligent leftist thinking--probably a product of hiring the products of modern college education. There's a lot more that could be said, but it's all very disturbing.

    3. In a way his recalcitrance reflects the entire Coupgate mentality; that even though they knew there was no there there they refused to cut their losses and just kept digging.
      That this is reflective of the entire education system is correct. What they "feel" is more important than objective reality and so critical thinking or reasoned decision making goes out the window. Unfortunately this is endemic, now, in our society. Case in point Gillette CEO defiant at criticism that his "woke" ad campaign cost his division of P&G $4 billion in value; being totally unwoke to the pain his virtue, bought with other peoples money, might cost deplorable retirees through reduced value of the 401K, IRA or pension plan while his Golden Parachute is safe and sound in contractual law. All virtue: no responsibility.
      Tom S.

  2. @Mike

    The lauraloomer link is fascinating...if a little incoherent in spots...opens up can fulls (or is it cans full?) of worms to be sorted out...So Strzok might have been Hillary's CIA fixer? Can't wait to see where that thought goes...curiouser and curiouser...thanks for posting...

  3. I don't know if he's CIA or FBI but he's crazy. Kind of like Colonel Flagg in the old M*A*S*H TV show with Wayne Rogers and Alan Alda. If you were a fan of that show, it really fits the Loomer article.