The Sift Here’s what we’re Sifting today

Giuliani slams Strzok testimony

by Harvest Prude
Posted 7/13/18, 01:03 pm

President Donald Trump’s lawyer Rudy Giuliani responded harshly Friday to FBI agent Peter Strzok’s congressional testimony by calling it a disgrace. “President Trump is being investigated by people who possess pathological hatred for him,” tweeted Giuliani, the former mayor of New York. 

During the hourslong hearing before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees Thursday, Strzok said Giuliani’s public remarks about a “big surprise” coming in the campaign in 2016, made as FBI agents seized and searched the laptop of former Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-N.Y., had him concerned the FBI leaked information about the investigation into Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails during her tenure as secretary of state. Investigators looked at Weiner’s laptop because he was married to a Clinton aide. Giuliani claimed his information came from former FBI agents. Strzok acknowledged it was possible Giuliani was exaggerating, but said, “It caused me great concern that he had information about that—that he should not have had.”

In his testimony, Strzok doubled down on his denial that anti-Trump text messages he sent in 2016 evidenced problematic bias. Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., made Strzok read aloud his own texts, including one that called Trump “a disaster.” But Strzok claimed he did not let his political beliefs get in the way of his work. Democrats supported Strzok’s statements and repeatedly called the hearing an attempt to undermine public trust in the FBI and protect Trump.

Read more from The Sift Sign up for The Sift email
Harvest Prude

Harvest is a reporter for WORLD based in Washington, D.C.

Read more from this writer


You must be a WORLD Member and logged in to the website to comment.
  •  Xion's picture
    Posted: Mon, 07/16/2018 04:59 am

    We live in a time where imagining something to be true is the same as actual truth.  Imagining how an eye was formed via evolution is the same as evidence.  Imagining any gender is deemed valid.  And an FBI agent who lavishes praise on one presidential candidate who is exonerated before hearing any testimony and spewing vile contempt for another who is condemned without any evidence is deemed unbiased.