The retreat to the bunker is now getting bumpy, as the way out of the circus leads through the midway to the carnival.
The reality is that this does nothing to deter the Mueller probe since Strzok was always a side-show invented by the Trumpists, probably because of the extramarital affair making it reality-TV kafaybe. A small distraction meant to support he Trumpian illusions of rigged witches, but wasting resources is important because the FBI-IG report also helps insulate the agency from the Comey screw-ups in 2016.
More interesting is that all this attention to Strzok may be WH retaliation for his work against the Russians, as Trump does another solid for Vlad.
Perhaps this firing even occurred as a Mueller counter-distraction as everything else moves forward like another week of the the first Manafort trial. We’ll see what noise the Trumpists produce in the next 24 hours.
Remember that this was the day promised ten days ago by Giuliani that the decision would be announced for the interview with Mueller. Instead Giuliani now claims no such mention of Flynn took place between Comey and Trump, even as Giuliani affirmed it last month.
Of course the FBI is political—how, as a powerful institution in Washington, with a leader appointed by the president, could it not be?—but its politics are not reducible to partisan allegiance, although its ranks include Democrats and Republicans. Like most bureaucratic institutions, the FBI’s primary loyalty is to its own interests, and when it intervenes in politics, that tends to be in its own service.
That reality comes through in the texts between Strzok and Page, who were reportedly in a romantic relationship. The messages show a pair of FBI employees who indeed detested Trump, but also detested many if not most Washington players in both parties and all institutions, and owed their allegiance to the bureau itself.
Employees at the FBI have personal political views, obviously, and there’s nothing inherently wrong with that, as long as is it doesn’t affect their work. (An investigation that seeks to answer whether it affected Strzok’s is ongoing.) The alternative is untenable. It’s no surprise that views would range from left to right—though probably not too far left. Historically, when the bureau has waded into politics, it has often done so against Democratic politicians and left-wing groups, from trade unions to civil-rights leaders. That bent was because Republicans had, until the present moment, been deferential to the FBI, while left-wing groups were more likely to try to challenge or curtail its powers.
As I have written several times in recent weeks, the FBI’s history of abuses makes it a strange and ill-fitting ally for liberals who think the bureau could help stop Trump. Matt Ford demonstrates that one can be wary of the FBI’s political history, and the broader abuses of the intelligence community, while still opposing the weaponization of the FBI for partisan purposes. Yet it is important to remember, as the debate over the bureau continues, that the FBI is not a neutral force, waiting to be captured by the political interests of one party or the other. It already has its own politics, which center around the protection of its own prerogatives at all costs.
www.theatlantic.com/...
“Being on a TV show does not qualify you to work in the government,” the President told reporters.
So much that’s not presidential…
Let’s see 45* take it to court… perhaps an episode of Judge Janine, since WH NDAs have no force, and if they did, Reince Priebus might be in a reserve barrel because he didn’t sign one of those phony documents.