>>> WELCOME BACK. ONE OF THE FBI’S TOP AGENTS HAS
BEEN FIRED.
BEEN FIRED. PETER STRZOK WAS ONE OF THE TOP
AGENTS ON THE RUSSIA PROBE, BUT
WAS REMOVED WHEN ROBERT MUELLER
DISCOVERED HE HAD EXCHANGED TEXT
MESSAGES DURING THE CAMPAIGN
THAT WERE CRITICAL OF THEN
CANDIDATE DONALD TRUMP.
THE PRESIDENT AND HIS ALLIES
HAVE POINTED TO STRZOK’S
ANTI-TRUMP TEXT MESSAGES AS
SMOKING GUN PROOF OF BIAS AND
CORRUPTION AT THE FBI.
STRZOK SAYS HIS WORK WAS NEVER
AFFECTED AND HIS LAWYER
SUGGESTED THE FIRING WAS
POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.
POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. PRESIDENT TRUMP ISSUED A
CELEBRATORY TWEET THAT PETER
STRZOK WAS JUST FIRED FROM THE
FBI FINALLY.
FBI FINALLY. THE LIST OF BAD PLAYERS IN THE
FBI AND DOJ GETS LONGER AND
LONGER.
LONGER. BASED ON THE FACT THAT STRZOK
WAS IN CHARGE OF THE WITCH HUNT,
WILL IT BE DROPPED?
SO HOW WILL STRZOK RESPOND TO
ALL OF THIS?
HIS LAWYER JOINS ME NOW.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING
HERE.
HERE. WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.
WHY WAS PETER STRZOK FIRED?
>> WELL, THANKS FOR HAVING ME.
I DON’T THINK THAT YOU CAN
RATIONALLY REACH ANY CONCLUSION
OTHER THAN IT WAS POLITICAL.
PETE, ALONG WITH SEVERAL OTHER
EMPLOYEES WHO SENT ANTI-TRUMP
TEXTS WERE REFERRED TO THE
OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY OR OPR, THE
DIVISION WITHIN THE FBI THAT IS
IN CHARGE OF INTERNALLY
DISCIPLINING AGENTS.
DISCIPLINING AGENTS. AND WE HAD A PROCESS, A NORMAL
PROCESS WHERE WE ENGAGED WITH
OPR AND SUBMITTED SOMETHING IN
WRITING AND WENT IN AND ORALLY
PRESENTED AND THEY DECIDED THAT
WHAT THE APPROPRIATE PUNISHMENT
SHOULD BE IS A 60-DAY
SUSPENSION, DEMOTION, AND
SIGNING WHAT’S CALLED A
LAST-CHANCE LETTER WHICH
BASICALLY IS DOUBLE SECRET
PROBATION AND SAYS THAT YOU CAN
BE FIRED IF YOU DO ANYTHING ELSE
WRONG.
WRONG. THAT DECISION WAS OVERRULED BY
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE FBI.
IT’S SOMETHING THAT HE HAD THE
AUTHORITY TO DO, BECAUSE IT WAS
DELEGATED FROM THE DIRECTOR OF
THE FBI, BUT IT IS A VANISHINGLY
RARE OCCURRENCE FOR THINGS TO
HAPPEN THIS WAY.
AN IT’S DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE
GIVEN THE STEADY DRUM BEAT OF
TEXTS DEMONIZING PETE FROM THE
PRESIDENT AND ALL THE CALLS ON
CAPITOL HILL BY REPUBLICANS FOR
PETE TO BE FIRED THAT THAT
DIDN’T PLAY A ROLE IN THE
BUREAU’S ULTIMATE DECISION.
>> WHEN YOU SAY PLAY A ROLE,
THOUGH, BE SPECIFIC.
YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT THIS BEING
POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.
POLITICALLY MOTIVATED. ARE YOU CHARGING THAT THE
PRESIDENT HIMSELF SAID TO
SOMEBODY AT DOJ, I WANT PETER
STRZOK OUT, REMOVE HIM NOW?
ARE YOU CLAIMING THAT?
OR ARE YOU CLAIMING THE CULTURE
THAT WAS CREATED AROUND THE
PRESIDENT’S TEXTS AND SAY THAT
CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY LAST
MONTH WAS SO TOXIC THAT IT -- OR
SO INFLUENTIAL THAT IT PUSHED
SOMEONE AT THE DOJ OR AT THE FBI
TO DECIDE TO FIRE STRZOK?
>> OH, I THINK BOTH ARE TRUE.
YOU ALREADY HAVE, I THINK, AN
INCIDENT WHERE PRESIDENT TRUMP
SPOKE TO I THINK IT WAS PETE
SESSIONS AND ENCOURAGED HIM TO
FIRE PETE STRZOK.
>> SO ARE YOU SAYING THAT DONALD
TRUMP SPOKE TO SESSIONS, MAYBE,
AND THEN SESSIONS RELAYED THAT
MESSAGE TO THE FBI AND THE FBI
FIRED STRZOK ON DONALD TRUMP’S
ORDERS?
ORDERS? >> NO, I’M NOT.
I’ SESSIONS AND THAT HAS
BEEN REPORTED BEFORE AND
ENCOURAGED HIM TO FIRE STRZOK
AND TRUMP ALSO AND HIS ALLIES ON
CAPITOL HILL REPEATEDLY CALLED
FOR STRZOK TO BE FIRED, SO IT’S
NOT A SECRET BACK-DOOR THING.
THEY ARE PUBLICLY DEMONIZING
THIS MAN AND SAYING HE SHOULD NO
LONGER BE AN AGENT.
>> HAS THE FBI OFFICIALLY
EXPLAINED WHY STRZOK WAS FIRED?
>> WE GOT A LETTER.
WE GOT A LETTER ON FRIDAY AND IT
CONTAINED THE ENTIRE PACKET FROM
THE DISCIPLINARY PROCESS WITH
OPR, WHICH INCLUDED A 25-PAGE
LETTER SETTING EVERYTHING OUT,
INCLUDED THE SIGNED LAST-CHANCE
AGREEMENT THAT WE EXECUTED ON, I
THINK IT WAS, JULY 26th, AND
THEN THERE WAS A ONE AND A HALF
PAGE LETTER FROM DEPUTY DIRECTOR
BOWDITCH OVERRULING THE DECISION
AND SAYING PETE’S TEXTS WERE
RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING THE FBI
INTO DISREPUTE AND THAT IS
WILDLY INCONSISTENT WITH PAST
PRECEDENT.
PRECEDENT. >> WHEN YOU SAY OPR, THAT’S THE
OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY.
RESPONSIBILITY. LET ME ASK YOU SOMETHING VERY
SPECIFICALLY.
SPECIFICALLY. DOES OPR IN ITS ASSESSMENT
EXPLICITLY SAY THAT PETER
STRZOK’S BEHAVIOR DIDN’T QUALIFY
FOR DISMISSAL?
FOR DISMISSAL? >> NO.
>> NO. NO, NOT AT ALL.
IN FACT THEY WERE VERY CRITICAL
OF PETE’S BEHAVIOR.
WHAT THEY CONCLUDED, HOWEVER, IS
THAT ON BALANCE AND THERE’S A
WHOLE KIND OF STATUTORY
FRAMEWORK OF FACTORS THAT ARE
SUPPOSED TO BE CONSIDERED CALLED
THE DOUGLAS FACTORS.
GIVEN THE NEAR CERTAINTY THAT
PETE IS NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING
WRONG IN THE FUTURE, HE’S NOT
GOING TO BE A RECIDIVIST, GIVEN
HIS STELLAR CAREER AND ALL THE
CONTRIBUTIONS HE’S MADE AND
GIVEN THE UNANIMOUS HIGH REGARD
THAT HIS WORK HAS HELD IN THE
BUREAU, THAT ON BALANCE THE
DEMOTION -- AND THESE ARE VERY
SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES, THE
DEMOTION AND THE SUSPENSION WAS
THE RIGHT CALL AND NOT
DISMISSAL.
DISMISSAL. AND THEN THAT WAS OVERTURNED BY
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR.
>> AGENT STRZOK SPOKE OUT
FORCEFULLY AGAINST THE IDEA THAT
THOSE TEXT MESSAGES MEAN THAT HE
IMPLICITLY HAD BIAS, THAT HE
WASN’T ABLE TO PUT HIS BIAS
ASIDE AND CONDUCT A FAIR
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. WE SHOULD NOTE THAT THERE’S NO
EVIDENCE THAT PETER STRZOK MADE
UP INFORMATION THAT WOULD START
THE RUSSIA INVESTIGATION.
WE SHOULD ALSO NOTE THAT THERE
WERE NO LEAKS ABOUT THE RUSSIA
INVESTIGATION BEFORE THE
ELECTION, WHICH WOULD HAVE
CERTAINLY POTENTIALLY TIPPED
PUBLIC OPINION ABOUT DONALD
TRUMP OR SWAYED IT IN ONE WAY OR
ANOTHER.
ANOTHER. THAT BEING SAID, WE HAVE FOLKS
IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY,
INCLUDING REPRESENTATIVE
INCLUDING REPRESENTATIVE SWALWELL TODAY, WHO SAID THAT,
YEAH, STRZOK DESERVED TO BE
FIRED.
FIRED. THOSE ANTI-TRUMP MESSAGES ARE
HARD TO PUT ASIDE.
YOU HAD FRANK FIGLIUZZI, THE
FORMER FBI COUNTERINTELLIGENCE
AGENT, AND HE SAID, LISTEN, THE
FBI’S CREDIBILITY IS ALL IT HAS.
THEY NEED THAT CREDIBILITY AND
WHAT PETER STRZOK DID TOOK THAT
CREDIBILITY AWAY.
CREDIBILITY AWAY. YOU CAN’T GET THAT BACK.
>> WELL, I MEAN FIRST, I THINK
YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT THAT
IT’S IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THAT
AFTER AN EXHAUSTIVE
INVESTIGATION, THERE IS NO --
THERE IS NO, NOT A SCINTILLA OF
EVIDENCE THAT ANY OF PETE’S
POLITICAL OPINIONS AFFECTED HIS
JOB AND IN FACT YOU CAN READ THE
I.G. REPORT WHO SAYS THAT PETE
WAS ONE OF THE MORE AGGRESSIVE
PEOPLE ON THE HILLARY CLINTON
E-MAIL INVESTIGATION AND IF HE
HAD WANTED TO SOMEHOW IMPACT THE
ELECTION, HE COULD HAVE EASILY
DONE IT AND DID NOT DO IT.
IN TERMS OF WHAT IS THE
APPROPRIATE PUNISHMENT HERE,
PETE HAS REPEATEDLY EXPRESSED
REMORSE.
REMORSE. I DON’T THINK THAT THERE’S ANY
QUESTION THAT HE SHOWED POOR
JUDGMENT IN SENDING THESE
TWEETS.
TWEETS. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT IT WAS
IN THE CONTEXT OF A KIND OF
BIZARRE, UNPRECEDENTED
BIZARRE, UNPRECEDENTED PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN AND THE
TWEETS SHOULD -- I MEAN THE
TEXTS NEED TO BE CONSIDERED IN
THAT LIGHT.
THAT LIGHT. BUT PETE SIGNED A LAST-CHANCE
AGREEMENT AND WAS WILLING TO
TAKE A PUNISHMENT THAT THE
OFFICE OF PROFESSIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY WHO IS HEADED BY
SOMEBODY WHO HAS DECADES OF
EXPERIENCE AND IS NOT KNOWN
WITHIN THE FBI AS A KIND OF
WARM, FUZZY CUDDLY PERSON.
SHE’S VERY TOUGH.
THIS IS WHAT SHE DECIDED WAS
APPROPRIATE.
APPROPRIATE. SO WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO
CONGRESSMAN SWALWELL, THE WAY WE
DECIDE IN THIS COUNTRY WHAT
PUNISHMENT IS APPROPRIATE,
WHETHER WE’RE TALKING ABOUT
SENTENCING AFTER A CRIMINAL CASE
OR WHETHER WE’RE TALKING ABOUT
INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE
INTERNAL ADMINISTRATIVE DISCIPLINE IS BY LOOKING AT PAST
PRECEDENT.
PRECEDENT. THIS IS WAY OUT OF PROPORTION.
>> LET ME ASK YOU ONE OTHER
QUESTION.
QUESTION. WHEN ARE WE GOING TO HEAR
DIRECTLY FROM MR. STRZOK?
IS HE GOING TO SPEAK OUT
PUBLICLY IN THE WAY THAT JAMES
COMEY DID?
COMEY DID? >> PETE IS CONSIDERING HIS
OPTIONS.
OPTIONS. HE IS ONLY NOW FINDS HIMSELF AS
AN EX-FBI AGENT INSTEAD OF AN
FBI AGENT.
FBI AGENT. THAT WASN’T SOMETHING THAT HE
WANTED OR ANTICIPATED, SO HE IS