For those that have not heard of Peter Strzok, he was one of the members of Robert Mueller’s team that was investigating the possibility of President Trump’s team colluding with the Russian government in order to help Trump get elected. He also helped draft the exoneration letter former FBI Director James Comey used to clear Hillary Clinton from her private server charges last year, to include changing the words "grossly negligent" to "extremely careless," according to an article from CNN.
Recently, it came to light that he was dismissed from Mueller's team due to a series of anti-Trump and pro-Hillary texts that were exchanged between him and a woman named Lisa Page, a senior FBI lawyer, on government phones. The two were allegedly involved in an affair, and the messages were allegedly exchanged on their government phones to keep details of the affair off of their personal phones.
While it was not surprising that some people showed dread regards to Trump having a chance of winning the election, with one of the comments stating "God Hillary should win 100,000,000 - 0," one particular comment that got extra attention was a text that mentioned an ”insurance policy.” That particular comment has people asking questions on what was meant by having "insurance" against a Trump presidency.
Different media outlets are covering it in various ways. The Washington Post recently posted an article stating that the text exchanges between the two were just part of the cover story for the affair between Strzok and Page. Fox News published the actual text exchanges and had a few opinion pieces about whether or not there was a conspiracy.
Vox posted an article seemingly exonerating Strzok from any wrongdoing and warning that the scandal could derail the Russian collusion investigation because it gives Republican lawmakers ammunition to claim bias. Far-right Breitbart posted an article highlighting Ohio Rep. Jim Jordan drilling FBI Director Christopher Wray to see whether or not Strzok was responsible for using the Russia dossier to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on people close to Trump during the election.
What do you think? Do you think that there is nothing to see here and Trump supporters are trying to make it out to be more than it really is to distract from the investigation? Or do you think that Strzok could bring serious questions about the impartiality of the investigation?