New Yorker writer and columnist John Cassidy thinks the FBI has got some explaining to do with regard to the decision to fire Peter Strzok:
The firing of the F.B.I. agent Peter Strzok gives the appearance that the agency buckled under political pressure, and sets a highly disturbing precedent. https://t.co/kzLbeTCLHf
— The New Yorker (@NewYorker) August 14, 2018
Cassidy writes:
As of late Monday afternoon, there was still no official word from [Deputy FBI Director David Bowdich] or his boss, Christopher Wray, about Strzok’s dismissal. The Times and the Wall Street Journal both reported that a spokesperson for the F.B.I. didn’t respond to requests for comments about Strzok’s firing.
It is perhaps possible that Bowditch and Wray have some damaging information about Strzok that we don’t know about. Horowitz, the inspector general, is still carrying out a separate inquiry into the Bureau’s handling of the Trump-Russia investigation. Conceivably, he could have found something damning and tipped off Bowditch and Wray.
If there is such information, the F.B.I. needs to make this clear immediately. At the very least, it needs to explain the basis of the decision to dismiss Strzok, pointing out which internal rules he violated, and why these violations amounted to a firing offense. As things stand, it looks like the Bureau’s leaders buckled to Trump and his political and media outriders, dispensing with departmental norms and setting a highly disturbing precedent.
Recommended
For what it’s worth, Geraldo Rivera also sees something “disturbing,” but it’s not that the FBI fired Strzok; it’s Strzok’s conduct as an FBI employee:
Strzok’s shameless — and we do mean shameless — fundraising in the wake of his firing certainly lends credence to the theory that he’s just a super-shady guy.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member