FBI OFFICIALS CLAIMED ‘INSURANCE POLICY’ TEXT WAS ABOUT WHETHER TO ‘BURN LONGSTANDING SOURCES’

Strzok and Page told Congress that a text they exchanged referring to an “insurance policy” against a Trump presidency was a reference….

  •  
  •  
  • 164
  •  
  •  
  •  
    164
    Shares
  •  
    164
    Shares
  • 164
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
Strzok and Page FBI

Daily Caller: Peter Strzok and Lisa Page told Congress that a text they exchanged referring to an “insurance policy” against a Trump presidency was a reference to a discussion about potentially “burning” a longtime FBI source in the event of an aggressive investigation of the Trump campaign.

Page described the unnamed source as “sensitive and reliable.” Strzok said the source was “very sensitive.” Both told lawmakers that they and FBI officials were concerned that ramping up an investigation of the Trump campaign might expose the source and undercut future Russia-related investigations.

Former FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page claimed in congressional testimony last year that their infamous “insurance policy” text message was a reference to an internal FBI discussion about whether to potentially expose a longtime bureau source by mounting an aggressive investigation against the Trump campaign.

“As I sort of explained, if he is not going to be President, then we don’t need to burn longstanding sources and risk sort of the loss of future investigative outlets, not in this case, but in other Russia-related matters,” Lisa Page told lawmakers on July 13, 2018, according to portions of a transcript confirmed by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

In testimony on June 27, 2018, Strzok claimed that his text message discussion with Page concerned whether to open up a “very sensitive source” to exposure in the investigation.

The text message that Strzok and Page sought to explain was sent on Aug. 15, 2016, around two weeks after the FBI opened “Crossfire Hurricane,” the counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign.

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Strzok wrote in a text to Page, referring to then-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

“It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40,” added Strzok, who then served as deputy chief of counterintelligence at the FBI.

The claims about potentially exposing a source add a new wrinkle to the debate over the controversial text message, especially given Page’s concerns that exposure could potentially undercut future Russia-related probes, but not the Trump investigation.

Neither Strzok nor Page identified the source, but only three individuals, former British spy Christopher Steele, former Australian diplomat Alexander Downer and former Cambridge professor Stefan Halper, have been publicly identified as sources for the FBI in the Russia probe.

“Well, the only reason the debate is relevant is because we, the team, again, like sort of through Director Comey, were trying to decide how aggressive or not aggressive, or do we burn sources or not burn sources or do we use X tools or Y tools, and all of that was based on the likelihood, not based on the likelihood of success but was being weighed against the likelihood of success,” said Page, who also called the source “sensitive and reliable.”

Strzok told lawmakers in a closed-door deposition on June 27, 2018 that investigators were discussing whether to aggressively pursue the investigation at the cost of exposing a “very sensitive source” who had provided evidence of possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Strzok hinted at the sensitivity of a source in a public congressional hearing on July 12, 2018.

“What we had before us was an allegation that something significant, that members of the Trump campaign may have been working in cooperation with the Russians. Some people were saying, ‘hey look, this sensitive source of information that’s so sensitive, so vulnerable, we shouldn’t put it in danger,’ because sometimes if you go out and do aggressive investigation, if it’s a drug snitch or an intelligence source, you can cause significant harm,” Strzok told members of the House Judiciary and House Oversight Committees.

Strzok also testified that, unlike others at the FBI, he supported a more aggressive approach to “Crossfire Hurricane,” as the Trump campaign investigation was called. “We need to do our job. We’re the FBI, we need to go out and aggressively pursue the allegations.”

Continue reading here….

Please SUBSCRIBE in the right sidebar at RickWells.US to receive my posts directly by email, safely beyond the censorship of little comrade Zuckerberg. Thank you

  •  
  •  
  • 164
  •  
  •  
  •  
    164
    Shares
  •  
    164
    Shares
  • 164
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.


*