When FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI lawyer Lisa Page were strategizing about how to defeat then-candidate Donald Trump and establish a “backup plan” in case he were elected, they were involved in an affair.
And that made them, rather than Trump, the real “security risk,” according to a former FBI official.
The Daily Mail reported Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., this week released a transcript of the testimony from Bill Priestap, who was FBI assistant director for counterintelligence.
Priestap believed the affair between Strzok and Page made them vulnerable to blackmail plots by foreign spies.
Strzok, who led the FBI’s probes of both Clinton’s email server and Russian election interference, was part of Mueller’s special counsel team until his extreme anti-Trump bias was revealed and he was removed.
“He and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, his lover at the time, famously shared text messages suggesting the probe was an ‘insurance policy’ against the unlikely chance Donald Trump would win the 2016 presidential election,” the report said.
“A congressional aide asked Priestap during his testimony whether the pair could have become ‘vulnerable to an intelligence service,'” the report said.
His opinion was “yes.”
“They knew darn well, that if that was going on, that potentially makes them vulnerable,” he said.
Priestap appeared in a closed session of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees.
While Priestap had concerns about the risk the two posed, he said he didn’t know for sure what their relationship was and wasn’t about to become the FBI’s “morality police.”
He also noted he obtained no information that either had contact or engagement “with an adversary.”
The Daily Mail report noted messages between Strzok and Page included descriptions of Trump as an “idiot,” “loathsome” and a “menace.”
In August 2016, Page wrote to Strzok: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?!”
Strzok’s response: “No. No he won’t. We’ll stop it.”
The Justice Department inspector general later said that exchange indicated not only bias but “a willingness to take official action” against a presidential candidate.