set aside the texts. look at what the ig found, look at the actions, the actions that i took, the actions -- >> with all due respect, we cannot separate the texts from that question. because the texts were written during the investigation while you were in charge of these investigations is, while you're the most responsible and important person in the investigation, and we can't separate your personal biases from the facts as they develop, at the end of the day, that's what we're all concerned about. >> what i would tell you, sir, look at the -- >> the time of the gentleman has expired. that was a statement, not a question. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> so the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. strzok, you stated today, i don't think bias was expressed in those text messages. the ig stated in his report that those derogatory texts were not only indicative of a biased state of mind, but were also "anti-threat call to the core values of the fbi and the d

text. >> in two texts, one in may, he asked you about impeachment. >> he did not ask me about any text message. >> i find that interesting that bob mueller has to remove you as con sequence of bias. you don't say it's bias. you say based on your perception of you, it couldn't be your bias. when we get into the manifestation of that bias through your words, bob mueller doesn't ask you about a single one of them. so i looked at 0 people like lisa page. did he ask her about her incendiary texts? throughout the team, you have people working for bob mueller who have active connections to hillary clinton, you know, greg anders donated to the clinton campaign. andrew goldstein donated to the clinton campaign. genie reeves represented ben rhodes in the benghazi representation. she represented the clinton foundation against freedom of information act. andr andrew wiseman attended the election party. and then there's you and mrs. page. it's interesting to me that when -- you were so damaging to the investigation that you had to go that bob mueller, the person that brought in all of these people

set aside the texts. look at what the ig found and look at the actions, the actions that i took. >> with all due respect, hold on. with all due respect, we cannot separate the text from the question. because the text were written during the investigation while you were in charge of this investigation, while you are the most responsible and important person of the investigation at many times and we cannot separate your personal views and bias from the facts that they developed. that's our pro be and at the end of the day, that is what we are concerned about. >> what i will tell you sir, is look at the -- >> the time of the gentleman has expired. >> the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. russell is recognized for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. strzok, you stated today, quote, i do not think that bias was expressed in those text messages end quotes. inspector general stated those derogatory texts were quote, not only indicative of a bias state of mind, but were also antithetical to the core values o

it's your text. >> mr. gowdy, what i would say in that is, one, i was not referring to the american electorate at all. the american electorate i respect in their decisions and their right to vote is absolutely a cornerstone of our democracy. so at no time did i insult or call into question the judgment or the power of the american electorate. what i was expressing in that text is my personal belief and my personal sense of how i saw and what i believed in the potential upcoming administration. >> see, that's what i find so confounding. because in august, you blamed the we on the american people. that the american people would stop it. >> mr. chairman, point of order. are we not given five minutes to answer questions? we have indulged this harassment nine minutes. >> the chair -- >> the oversight committee -- >> the gentle woman will suspend. the chair, in agreement with the ranking members of both committees agreed that there would be liberality in the questioning by the chairman and the ranking members of

>> i don't recall writing that text. >> do you deny -- >> what i can tell you is that that text in noway suggested that i or the fbi would take any action to influence the candidacy of -- >> agent strzok that is a fantastic answer to a question that nobody asked. >> yeah. >> that was a discussion about a newly recovered text from august of 2016 between strzok and his former colleague and lover lisa page, the famous one where she says is he going to be president referring to candidate trump and strzok responds we'll stop it. and what strzok testified to today and what he also said in that closed door deposition two weeks ago is that the "we" was not agent strzok and like minded individuals at senior levels of the fbi but in fact the "we" related to the american people and american voters. and folks at home will have to decide for themselves whether they find that to be legitimate and a credible explanation for that text, harris. >> harris: can i just get a point of fact before we move on, a member of the house judiciary committee is standing by, are you say that peter strzok strzok tod

fbi agents can send 100 billion texts or one text and they would get billed the same. >> what you texted was considered political free speech, your opinions were political free speech is what you testified today. do you feel that your use of a federally authorized, federally owned cell phone protects your right of exercising your political free speech? >> sure look. i think it was bad judgment. i think it was terrible judgment. >> let's say you took a federal -- >> i believe it is protected speech. >> as the same way the protected speech would be then if you used your federal vehicle and put a hilary clinton bumper sticker on it. why not? >> if you read the ethics guidelines -- >> that's what i'm doing. >> may i answer your question? >> please. >> the use of or display of any bumper sticker, believe me after this started, i have gone through the ethics guidelines, placing a political bumper sticker on a government car is expressly prohibited. to the contrary, expression, publicly or privately of personal political beliefs is encouraged. and i would -- >> on any federal property? [speakin

it's your text. >> mr. gowdy, what i would say is one i was not referring to the american electorate at all. i respect in their decisions and right to vote is absolutely a cornerstone of our democracy. so at no time did i insult or call into question the judgment or the power of the american electorate. what i was expressing in that text is my personal belief, and my personal sense of how i saw and what i believed in the potential upcoming administration. >> that's what i find so confounding because in august you blamed the we on the american people chkts that they would stop it because you don't want it to be you and lisa page. >> mr. chairman -- five minutes to answer questions. we have indulged this harassment nine minutes. >> the chair -- >> this judiciary and oversight committee. >> the -- the chair in agreement with the ranking members of both committees agreed there will be l liberality. >> what i find -- >> chairman we expect that liberality on every one of our questions. >> what i find confounding,

mueller in finding these texts and hearing about all these text messages to think that they might be subject to incorrect interpretations and publicity and in order to avoid the kind of attacks on this investigation that we are seeing from republican members of this committee and from the administration, to ask you to leave that investigation, having nothing to do with your competence or fairness in the investigation, but simply to somewhat insulate that investigation from unfair attacks. would you think that might be a correct -- >> yes. >> thank you. now, mr. strzok, what is the fbi's policy with respect to an agent commenting publicly about an ongoing investigation. >> we don't do that. >> sorry? >> we do thought do that. >> why is that policy in place? >> for a variety of reasons. one, i think it is inherently unfair to the subject of that investigation. it can tend to skew the conduct of the investigation. other witnesses, other future investigative avenues. it can skew potential jurors in the event that a case is taken to prosecution. i can pick any number of reasons why we don

>> i did. >> did you text similar texts to the ones you did on your government phone? >> by similar you mean what? >> commenting on mr. trump or hillary clinton or anything else politically in nature. >> i don't recall but probably safe assumption, yes. >> likely it is similar. >> it is the safest assumption. >> your personal phone has likely similar texts to the ones we found on your government phone. >> i would have it has similar expression of personal believes. >> in front of you have one sheet of paper that was presented to you a few minutes ago. i am going to go over the date and ask you to read your own words. march 4th, 2016. you want me to read this. >> o-m-g, he's an idiot. >> may 4th, 2016. >> now the pressure starts to finish mye. >> hi, how was trump other than a dooche? melania. >> trump is a disaster, i have no idea how he's stabilizing his -- >> august 6th, 2016. >> i don't believe i wrote this text. >> august 8th, 2016. i will preface for context. miss paige says no ever going to be president, right, right? >> no, he's not, we'll stop it. >> august 15t

on that day you texted ms. page and said, quote, and we need to open the case we've been waiting on now while andy is acting, unquote. first, is that andy mccabe, the former deputy director of the fbi who has since been fired and criminally referred by the inspector general? >> it is. >> what case are you referring to now that andy is the acting director of the fbi? >> to get into that would relate to ongoing investigations. i'm not authorized to discuss ongoing investigations. >> okay, let me see if i can give you a question that you can answer. you sent four more texts to ms. page. her first response to you at the bottom of that page is, quote, we need to lock in, and then there's a black mark where someone's name has been redacted. we need to lock in redacted in a formal chargeable way, period, soon, period. whose name has been blacked out? >> sir, i don't know. i'd need to see the original list -- original text. >> you don't know? okay. i don't know either. here's what else i don't know. i don't know if the

>> i did. >> did you ever text lisa page similar texts as you did on your government phone? >> by similar you mean what? >> commenting on mr. trump, hillary clinton or anything else political in nature? >> i don't specifically recall but it is probably a safe assumption that i did. >> it is likely that they would be similar. >> it is a safe assumption. >> and so your personal phone has likely similar texts to the one we found on your government phone, is that correct? >> i would say it has similar expressions of personal belief, yes? >> okay. so in front of you you have one sheet of paper that was presented to you a few minutes ago, and i'm going to just go to a date and then ask you to read your own words. march 4th, 2016. >> you want me to read this? >> yes, please. >> omg, he's an idiot. >> may 4th, 20. >> now the pressure really starts to finish nye. >> july 19th, 20. >> hi, how was trump other than a douche, miliiana. >> trump is a disaster, have i no idea how destabilizing his presidency would be. >> august 6th, 2016. >> i don't believe that i wrote this text, sir? >>

>> he didn't ask me about any text message. >> just days after mueller is appointed in two text messagesyou reference impeachment did bob mueller ask you why you are referencing impeachment? >> as i just stated, he did not ask me about any text message. >> we also got more insight from agent strzok about that infamous text when he and lisa page talk about stopping trump. he said today that was a reference to a lot of anger he felt after what he described as then candidates trump belittling a gold star family, here is that exchange. >> my presumption based on that horrible, disgusting behavior that the americann population would not elect somebody demonstrating that behavior to be president of the united states. >> you were speaking on behalf of the american people? >> i don't recall writing that text. what i can tell you is that text in no way suggested that i or the fbi would take any action to influence the candidate. >> that is a fantastic answer to a question nobody asked. >> he was also pressed on another series of texts where he was very disparaging about trump supporters in virgin

about 50,000 texts. i'm hoping the agency had the unlimited data plan since it was a taxpayers phone. you even testified today there's many more on your personal phone , which blows me away. sometimes over 100 texts a day while you are supposed to be doing your job. 2017, there were 73 exchanged texts, the same day the fbi made a deal for clinton's laptop. did you leave your desk to send these texts on that day? mr. strzok: i do not recall where i was when i sent those texts. texts, the at those huge majority of them are related to work my new shop and administrative things. rep. walker: there's a whole lot more. i don't get to text with my friends and family sometimes until we finish our work. obviously you had enough time in the day being the second lead investigator, but 50,000 texts. -- strzok: of which the bulk rep. walker: james come he talked about how the midyear investigative team was the a- team, spending every waking moment to complete the investigation. how does this square with the amount of

>> i don't recall writing that text.hat i can tell you is that text in no way suggested that i or the fbi would take any action to influence the candidate. >> that is a fantastic answer to a question nobody asked. >> agent struck strzok was alsd about that key phrase that he could smell the the trump repo. is that exchange. >> i clearly wasn't smelling one thing or the other. >> what i meant by that was living in northern virginia traveling 100 or 150 miles south within the same straight, i was struck by the extraordinary difference in the expression of belief in the community there. >> i could write that as smell in capital letters. >> that was a quick choice of words. >> democrat said today that this was testimony designed to dirty up and damage the special counsel russia investigation and they also made the point that if agent strzok have this anti-trump bias, why didn't he leak information during the campaign when they would hurt candidate trump most? here is that exchange. >> if you had wanted to harm and interfere

we don't want to read text message after text message dripping with bias against one of the two presidential candidates. we don't enjoy finding compelling evidence that the fbi director had predetermined the outcome of the case months in advance. but that is thus far what we have found. and these are only small pieces of the larger puzzle. the more information we acquire, the more interviews we conduct, and the more sources we contact, the more we learn. it has unfortunately taken a great deal of effort to get our executive branch agencies to cooperate with our legitimate congressional oversight. but we have made substantial progress, and it is a credit to our investigative task force members and staff. for all those in this room who continue to disparage our investigation as mere conspiracy theory, and for all those who have chosen to ignore serious irregularities and potential crimes we have uncovered, i say this. imagine if you were ur7bd investigation and the investigator hated you. disparaged you in all manner of ways and frater newsed with others and made crucial investigative decision

on that day you texted ms. page and said, quote, and we need to open the case we've been waiting on now while andy is acting, unquote. first, is that andy mccabe, the former deputy director of the fbi who has since been fired and criminally referred by the inspector general? >> it is. >> what case are you referring to now that andy is the acting director of the fbi? >> to get into that would relate to ongoing investigations. i'm not authorized to discuss ongoing investigations. >> okay, let me see if i can give you a question that you can answer. you sent four more texts to ms. page. her first response to you at the bottom of that page is, quote, we need to lock in, and then there's a black mark where someone's name has been redacted. we need to lock in redacted in a formal chargeable way, period, soon, period. whose name has been blacked out? >> sir, i don't know. i'd need to see the original list -- original text. >> you don't know? okay. i don't know either. here's what else i don't know. i don't know if the

his response to that is, you know, these were personal texts. in no way would it affect my investigation. and the notion that there might be russians colluding with people in the trump campaign is something that he felt was a matter of great urgency. and so you had these -- you know, this back and forth over what questions he could answer, whether the fbi had told him he could answer questions about the investigation. he said no. but you know, in every way, in every interrogation from republicans, there was the charge that you were unfair, this whole investigation, to use donald trump's words, could have been a witch hunt because it was started out of a partisan bias. >> the texts between peter strzok and lisa page, they are so damning. >> they are, wolf, which is why what gloria is laying out here, yes, that is strzok's mission today, to try to walk this line of i have personal political views, it didn't impact my work at all. that may be true, but when he says that those texts, quote, not indicative of bias, that's just flat wrong on its face.

you did a number of texts, all of the texts that were presented to us as far as i know came from your government phone, correct? >> i believe that to be the case, yes. >> so you've made no text available from your private phone, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> did you ever text on your private phone? >> i did. >> did you ever text lisa page on your private phone? >> i did. >> did you ever text lisa page on your private phone similar texts to the ones you did on your government phone? >> by similar you mean what? >> commenting on mr. trump or hillary clinton or anything else political in nature? >> i don't specifically recall, but it's probably a safe assumption that yes, i did. >> it's likely they would be similar. >> safe assumption. >> your personal phone has likely similar texts to the ones that we found on your government phone, correct? >> i would say it has similar expressions of personal belief, yes. >> okay. so in front of you, you have one sheet of paper that was presented to you a few minutes ago and i'm going to just go to a date and ask to you read your own words. m

so it wasn't the discovery of texts that got him fired, it was the bias manifest in those texts thatnd dispassionately investigate. so if the bias existed in late 2015 and early 2016, and it did. his unfitness to investigate existed then as well. agent strzok struggled to define bias for the better part of 10 hours. for the rest of us, bias is the pre-judging of a person, group or a thing. it usually has a negative connotation but it is a pre-conceived position or a pre-judgment. it is the making up of your mind ahead of time based on anything other than the facts and that is exactly what he did. bias is saying hillary clinton should win the presidency 100 million to 0 when she was still under investigation, wasn't even the nominee, hadn't been interviewed and 30 other witnesses had also not been interviewed. in march of 2016 agent strzok had clinton winning 100 million to 0. even though the investigation was far from being over. that is the pre-judging of someone's innocence before all the evidence is in. on the other hand he said trump would be destabilizing, called him an idiot. b

and that's the last text message anyone gets from her.act she has with anyone ever. >> and just before noon is when paul lost his temper and choked her to death, drove to a gas station, bought a can of gasoline. later, returned home and torched the house. and somewhere along the way, said the prosecutor, he erased all those apgry text messages she sent him. >> every single one between the defendant and her, every single one is gone. months worth. >> and then paul used jennifer's cell phone to send fake texts to her friends so they believed she was still alive. to support that claim, he introduced an expert witness who testified that texts from paul's phone and texts from jennifer's phone were hitting some of the same cell towers all afternoon. so her phone must have been right there with him in his car, which is why when she missed a meeting with her friend roy, the texts he got from her didn't make sense. they weren't a sensible response to the message he sent her. in fact, he got the same text twice. >> she didn't show up, and her phone

you sent four more texts to miss page. her first response to you at the bottom of that page you're looking at is, quote, we need to lock in -- then there's a black mark where someone's name has been redacted. we need to lock in "redacted" in a formal, chargeable way. soon. whose name has been blacked out? >> sir, i don't know. i'd need to see the original list or original text. >> you don't know, okay. well, i don't know either. here's what else i don't know. i don't know if the person whose name has been redacted is republican or democrat. i don't know if they're black or brown or white. i don't know their religious beliefs. i don't know their sexual orientation. i don't know those things and i don't care. i do know that decisions about when and whether to open investigations and when and whether to charge people with crimes aren't supposed to depend on who's sitting in the director's chair or on political decisions or on the political agendas of fbi agents and lawyers. so if a trump-hating fbi agent and a trump-hating fb

it's really just one text, okay? this text came back to haunt him all day long. trump's never, ever going to become president, right, right? no, he won't. we'll stop it. he tried to explain it away by saying the american people would vote against him and he wouldn't win. it wasn't that compelling. and he admitted -- strzok -- the texting was wrong on several levels. one of them means that he arguably violated the fbi's code of conduct. strzok didn't have a great rebuttal for that either. now, because of that, they argue that strzok has no integrity. that is relevant only if used to offset competing stories about what happened in the probe, and that is the problem for the gop after today. ten hours of today. no proof was offered that strzok did something acting on bias, okay? so is it over? no, because ultimately this isn't about strzok. it's about coming for mueller. how do we know? two examples. listen to florida congressman matt gaetz. >>> certainly then when you were removed, was it clear to you mr. mueller was aware of these incendiary text messages? >> yes.

i want to see their texts.t did they write about donald trump, they think i am deplorable and the people who voted for me. >> reporter: lisa page will speak with lawmakers behind closed doors today, there exchanged anti-trump text messages ahead of the election. rob: secret service trying to prevent more tragedies, releasing a guide for recognizing and stopping potential student attackers includes creating diverse threat assessment teams, more deeply into social media, access into weapons, staying in touch with expelled students and giving students a clear way to raise red flags. buyers shopping at the mall, could be spying on you, a report from the electronic frontier foundation said three malls in california have license plate scanners which is shared with tech company database. vigilant solutions works with immigrations and customs enforcement. the mall owners as the information is only shared with local police. jillian: social media going crazy over milania app state visit to the uk, where an off the should

i need to see the original list or original text. >> you don't know? okay. well, i don't know either. here's what else i don't know. i don't know if the person whose name has been redacted as -- i don't know if they're black or brown or white -- >> i don't know either, sir. >> i don't know their religious beliefs. i don't know their sexual orientation. i don't care. here's what i do know. i know that decisions about when and whether to open investigations and when and whether to charge people with crimes aren't supposed to depend on who's sitting in the director chair or on political decisions or on the political agendas of fbi agents and lawyers. so, if a trump-hating fbi agent and a trump hating fbi lawyer who have talked about f-ing trump, impeaching trump, within hours of president trump firing their boss, if they start opening an investigation now that andy is acting and that some person needs to be locked in in a formal chargeable way soon, i know, as a former u.s. attorney, that if, in fact, that's what happened, i know whoever is the subject of that

look at the stuff that text message. read their he's trying to

did you write the text?, sir. >> were you under duress. >> political expression engaging in hyperbole. >> were you under duress,. >> asked and asked over and over again. >> gentlewoman will suspend. the gentleman has the time. >> one other time peer, may 17th. bob comey appointed. your friend jim comey is fired. he already leaked memos to law professor friend and mueller is special counsel. do you remember how long it took for you to start talking about impeachment after bob mueller wag appointed? >> i don't, sir. >> one day. one day. you were talking about impeachment. for anyone who may have missed it the day after his appointment, agent strzok, you did it again five days later! now, how many interviews had you done as part of the special counsel team within the first five days of his appointment? >> sir, again, same answer as before. i can't get into details. >> right the answer is also the same, it is zero. no interviews had been done. >> i don't know if that is true or not. >> no interviews done by augu

it's your text. >> mr. gowdy, what i would say in that is, one, i was not referring to american electorate at all. the american electorate, i respect and their decisions and their right to vote is absolutely a cornerstone of our democracy, so at no time did i insult or call into question the judgment or the power of the american electorate. what i was expressing in that text is my personal belief and my personal sense of how i saw and what i believed in the potential upcoming administration. >> see, that's what i find so confoundi confounding because in august, you blamed the "we" on the american people, that the american people would stop it because you don't want it to be you and lisa page. >> mr. chairman, isn't there a point of order? are we not given five minutes to answer questions? we have indulged this harassment nine minutes. >> the chair -- >> this is judiciary and the oversight committee, i thought we -- >> the gentlewoman will suspend. the chair, in agreement with the ranking members of both com

you sent for car more text to ms. page and her first response to you is we need to lock-in and then there is a black mark wher, in a formal, chargeable way, soon, period. whose name has been blacked out? >> i would need to see the original text. >> you don't know, okay. i don't know either. i don't know if the person whose name has been redacted is a republican or democrat, i do not know if they are black or brown or white, i don't know their religious beliefs, i don't know those things and i don't care. here's what i know, decisions about when and whether to open investigations and when and whether to charge people with crimes aren't supposed to depend on who is sitting in the director's chair or on political decisions or the political agendas of fbi agents and lawyers. if i trump hating fbi agent and a trump hating fbi lawyer are within hours of president trump firing their boss, if they start talking about opening an investigation now that andy is acting and that some person needs to be locked in in a formal, charg

we, of course, know about these text messages. we know the image of him that republicans are trying to paint. we know that democrats are on the one hand criticizing him for those text messages, but also saying that it didn't impact his work. so it will be interesting to see how he presents himself. how does he handle what we know are going to be very contentious questions from these lawmakers. we saw this from with -- with the rod rosenstein hearings a couple weeks ago. so we know some of those same folks are going to really try to hit some partisan points. one of the things we know also in that 11-hour hearing, they wanted to talk about his affair with lisa page. how does he handle that? i mean, this is a public thing that, you know -- i'm sure embarrassing for him and painful for his family. how does he handle that questioning. so it will be really interesting. this is going to be political theatre at its best or worst, depending on your point of view. >> and it seems like -- well, we know from his attorney's letter, there were

>> i absolutely regret the appearance of some of those texts and i wish i hadn't said or phrased or texted some of those things i did. number two i disagree with your i believe with more verbal gymnastics then we actually saw, i thought we could never actually taught this. it all depends what is, is. now we were alone. i never thought we were alone. in order to believe these bizarre explanations from this verbal contortionist, he would literally have to suspend all sense of fact and fiction. and of course peter strzok thinks the smelly deplorable's from walmart, the hillbilly is that like us that believe in god and guns and bibles and religion and i have some bad news for peter. he is not the invaluable super patriot that he has clearly convinced himself he is. he lies to our face and in the end will not get away with it. in other words, is not above the law. the american people saw these lies today. we know a cover up when we one. and so did congressman louie gohmert. take a look at this tense exchange. >> you came in here and said, i have no bias. you do it with a straight face and i wat

texting and you have to know the context. the words were there and he wrote them but he doesn't want to own them. >> he didn't remember the stop trump one. but he can't remember the intent if he doesn't remember doing it. >> laura: we have a lot of forgotful fbi members. >> the fbi agents are glad because they see him as a complete renegade, a complete sko scoundrel and criminal. and the reason the democrats look so bad is they were stupidly defending him. i'm innocent like your former democratic guest here. i'm innocent because i didn't leak illegally. >> laura: that's what zoe lofgren was saying. they could have leaked this information. >> they also could have shot trump you know, it's not a defense that you didn't commit audio one. it's not a defense to robbery that he didn't hold up the candy store. it's a ridiculous defense. pathetic for an fbi agent and the guy is arrogant, smug. >> laura: he reminded me of jim comey. the smell of the walmart. the smell of the walmart. you said when you went down to southern virginia or

why expend all these energy on pete strzok's text messages? i think he did that here with his reference to mr. bannon. the assumption that the republicans on these committees seem to make is there's some perfectly apolitical set of investigators and prosecutors who could conduct these sorts of investigations. and with all due respect to brennan, most of us have personal believe. they do, as strzok demonstrated he did, leave them at the door when they go to work. as a sitting united states attorney, i both prosecuted democratic individuals and declined to prosecute republican individuals. because i didn't like my personal political beliefs intrude into those decisions. i made them, as do all prosecutors on the basis of the evidence of the law. that's what the republican side of the house seems to be missing on this side of the investigation. >> danny, look, we don't want to argue in any way it's not good for the american people to get a chance to judge for themselves. certainly seems like mr. strzok said he was happy to get out there. he wants

you did a number of texts. all of them presented to us, as far as i know, came from your government phone, correct? text available from your private phone, is that correct? on yourever text private phone? >> i did. >> did you ever text lisa on your private phone? >> i did. >> did you send some of texts to the government phone? mr. strzok: by similar you mean, on hillarymmenting clinton anything else political in nature. >> it's likely they would be similar. >> your personal phone has likely similar text to the one we found on your government phone. mr. strzok: i would say it has similar expressions of personal belief. >> in front of you you have one sheet of paper that was presented to you a few minutes ago. going to go to a date and ask you to read your own words. 2016.4, >> omg he's an idiot. >> may 4, 2016. >> now the pressure really starts. >> july 19, 2016. >> how is trump other than a douche? a first, 2016. >> trump is a disaster. , august 6, 2016. >> i don't believe i wrote this text. >> august 8, 2016.

i remember, if i wasn't with him, i was texting him all the time. >> but as for those texts followingt with ryan just before the crash? justine says, despite what many believe, she would never, ever have tried to commit suicide. knowing, as she does, that her grandmother, randy's mother, killed herself when her dad was just a boy. in fact, she says, the most likely explanation is, she was just playing a game of sorts with ryan. >> he liked controlling everything, having to do with, like, my life, and he threatened suicide twice. that's what i would think was happening, was that i was playing his own card back at him. >> well, i'm going to kill myself then. >> yeah. i don't think that they were text messages that were to be taken seriously. >> if you look at them through justine's eyes, they don't seem that way. but the jury didn't look at it through your eyes. >> no. >> and despite her conviction, all that evidence, and the fact that she has no memory of that night, justine still claims she must have been wearing her seat belt. and cannot imagine driving her car at 85 miles an hour. j

so earlier you had texted ms. page that another part of virginia, loudoun county, which is i think in northern virginia, is, quote, still ignorant hillbillies, end quote. is that what you meant? >> no, sir, not at all. >> you consider trump supporters to be ignorant hillbillies. >> sean: once again, he asked all of us to think he didn't really believe what he was caught texting. watch one more unbelievable, insane denial. >> you were both rooting for hillary clinton to win and both detested dump du detested donald trump, did you not? >> i think that's fair to say. >> and as we learned you found donald trump supporters, detestable too who you called ignorant blanks. i'm not going to say that here. and that you had visited a southern virginia walmart and could smell the trump support. don't you think that the american people, when they're paying your salaries, when they're paying for a fair and unbiassed investigation by none other than the fbi deserved a whole lot better than what those comments i just referred to

he said, these are texts.kind of blew it all off. >> rudy: it means i have a certain set of things i will do to stop this guy as a lot last resort. it doesn't mean that it wasn't illegal. it was clearly illegal, that is why he is lying about it. >> laura: do you believe that the president and his meeting on monday with vladimir putin, will he be able to be as open, effective, as focused with a relationship with russia? with all that stuff out there floating? >> rudy: there are a lot of differences between him and vladimir putin. the best thing is to iron amounts. will probably not do that. here's what the two men know, they never colluded with donald trump. whatever the russians did, they didn't collude with donald trump. the only crime committed is the hacking. nobody thinks that donald trump was involved in hacking. he wouldn't know how to do it. nor would he do it. [laughs] everybody else is entitled to play with it. if they give it to you, you can report it on fox. >> laura: last word. >> in my own profess

>> i did. >> did you ever text or similar texts that are the ones on your government phone? >> by similar you mean what? >> commenting on mr. trump or hillary clinton or anything else political in nature? >> oni don't specifically recal, but is probably a safe assumption. >> so, your personal phone has likely similar text to the ones we found on your government phone;e;t. correct? >> i would say similart expressions, guess. >> in front of you you have one sheet of paper presented to you a couple of minutes ago and i will just go to a date and ask you to read your own words, march 4: 2016. >> you want me to read this? >> yes, sir. >> omg he's an idiot. >> eight-four-2000. >> july, 19, 2016. >> how is trump other than a douche? >> july 21, 2016, trump is a disaster and i have no idea how destabilizing his presidency will be. >> august, 2016, i don't believe i wrote this text, sir. >> it is attributed to you. august 8, 2016 and i preface it by saying for contexts ms. page said not ever going to become president; right rex right to? >> no, no he's not. we will stop it. >> again?

texts. shame, shaiman these pa thaethe republicans also disparaged hillary clinton and bernie sanders. by the way, every judge, every fbi agent, every police officer, every congressman, every -- has a bias. it doesn't mean they bring it to their job, and this man -- everybody votes. every single person in public office has -- >> called america -- >> doesn't mean they can't do their job and this is a man dedicated -- these little dweebs sitting there, discourse, the way they present them. trey gowdy, i don't care what you have to say -- >> trey gowdy of the 2.5 year benghazi investigation saying i'm concerned about investigations being partisan. trey gowdy, seriously, seriously, talking out of both sides of his mouth. if anybody is being partisan and taking sides and running to his corner it's that little guy right there one of these guys referred to, bob mueller, can't pronounce the guy's name. i cannot wait until mr. mueller's report comes out. >> me, too. >> and 20 indictments now. >> look

and i don't want to take your time, but the insurance policy text that's come up before, that text represented a debate on information that we had received from an extraordinarily sensitive source and method and typically when manage is that sensitive and you take action on it, you put it at risk. every poll is saying candidate trump is likely not to win. every republican was saying that. some people said as a result of that, let's not risk this source. let's go slow. what i'm saying is we're the fbi. we need to do our job. we need to go investigate. while it isn't likely according to all the poll sfsters that candidate trump is elected, we need to make sure we are protecting america. we need to response by investigate these actions, because if candidate trump is elected, there might be people we need to investigate that might be nominated for security positions. everybody in america would want to know that. candidate trump would want to know that. >> thank you so much. i got sworn in july 11, 2017. so i am one of the most fresh new members of congress. it was about a year ago yesterday. and i

the whole reason they have the treasure-trove of text messages is because they are texting back and forth as was explained. so there is a little pushback to what he did there. >> one line of questioning was when peter strozk started doing interviews at the outset of the russia probe. tell us why that was significant. >> part of it goes to the entire spy gate conspiracy. the issue for house republicans is that they want to try to say the fbi was doing something nefarrious before the russia investigation began in july of 2016. so he was asking him what things were happening, were there interviews in the early days of the investigation. of course, congressman gowdy saying the first interview was on august 11. he wanted to show peter strozk was texting all kinds of things talking about trump detab destabilizing the country before the first interview. it was part of the whole spectacle here. that is what they were driving at. >> very dramatic stuff. >>> let's get more on the breaking news. jerry connelly of virginia is joining us. he is a member of the oversight committee. you were there. than

you did a number of texts. all of the texts that are presented to us, as far as i know, came from your government phone, correct? >> i believe that to be the case, yes. >> so you've made no text available from your private phone, is that correct? >> that's correct. >> did you ever text on your private phone? >> i did. >> did you ever text lisa page on your private phone? >> i did. >> did you ever text lisa page on your private phone similar texts to the ones you did on your government phone? >> by similar, you mean what? >> commenting on mr. trump or hillary clinton or anything else political in nature. >> i don't specifically recall but it's probably a safe assumption that yes, i did. >> it's likely they would be similar. >> it's a safe assumption. i don't know. >> so your personal phone has likely similar texts to the ones that we found on your government phone, that's correct? >> i would say it has similar expressions of personal belief, yes. >> okay. so, in front of you, you have one sheet of paper that was

do we have that text?we have that text right there, where he said he promised that, she asked him, trump's never going to become president, right, right? he said no, no, he won't. we'll stop it. what are we to assume? how can you not tell america what you meant by that? instead he gets up on his high horse, holier than thou, no possible way that i would have any bias in an investigation. you know what, peter strzok, we're all human, every single one ever us. every single one of us approaches our day with inherent bias, including those at the fbi. just admit it. joining me right now democratic strategist kevin walling, american majority ceo ned ryun. ned, your reaction to what you heard thus far from mr. strzok? >> being asked to suspend my disbelief, somehow peter strzok is pure as driven snow, super patriot, the voice of the american people, that showed no political bias at all in his texts. having to tell you, trish, being in d.c. every 20 years, i view with utter contempt and disdain the previous senior

look at the stuff that text message.ing to explain number one it was late at night, he doesn't remember saying it and when he is referring too well, it is not him and lisa page. he is talking about the american people in general. it doesn't make any sense on its face. the insurance policy has no good explanation. it is scary -- still very concerning us to what we see here. gerri: his lawyer was there. he did have his personal attorney with him. we have to play a little bit more of the fireworks, especially trey gowdy. look at to what his point was in this piece. >> your testimony is bob mueller did not kick you off because of the content of your tax. he can't do it because of some appearance. >> it is not my understanding he kicked me out because of any bias. if you want to represent, i'm happy to answer the question but i don't appreciate what was originally set being changed. >> i don't give a what you appreciate, agent stzrok. >> this is the mueller investigation still going. president trump called it a witch hunt. 55

andou look at the text historical analysis of the words of the text, not something done here off the top of your head. but, i think it is plain that in order to say that brown was unjustified on originalist grounds, usa plessy versus -- youn was justified would have to say that plessy versus ferguson was justified. wrong, whysy is would plessy be wrong? i think it is wrong because it was a law that was using the state's police power to do something and there was no good reason to do -- no good reason for that police power to be produced by the state. this said the state could do what they want in preservation of good order. thatidence was required the state was solving a problem or that there was a problem. those not enough to satisfy the three clause operative clause of the 14th amendment. it requires some inquiry into the facts. the reason the justification of the court offered was a case decided five years after the 14th amendment was house, the slaughterhouse cases. they inquired into the facts that said you did not need to do that and, from now on, don't worry about it. enough,

beverly texted me." >> reporter: word that beverly was texting gave everyone hope. >> i was ecstatic,ike i was like, "this is done. her phone had died, she got somewhere, it's charged. it's good." >> reporter: across town, beverly's friends brenda and stacey got texts of their own. >> our phones both started beepin' at the same time with text. >> and it -- i mean it was -- >> it -- >> like such an eerie feeling. >> uh-huh. >> i was just like, "oh my gosh." >> what was she saying to you two? >> she said, "i'm sorry, my phone has been dead." >> yes. >> "and i just turned it back on." >> reporter: it sounded promising, but a little off. concerned, brenda used that safety technique the office had come up with -- she texted beverly the special code. >> i said, "can you tell me if you left the red folder on my desk?" >> reporter: if beverly was in trouble, she would know to text back her location. >> there was no response. >> the one that i got was -- "i'm out having drinks with friends." and i was like goin', "well, we're right here." >> reporter: the texts on beverly's husband's phone wer

his own text exchanges betray his denials.and his mistress lisa page called donald trump an fing idiot, loathesome, an he those n enormous d. for of any you who don't believe your lying ears. take a listen to this. >> for 10 days before the investigation began which the department you work for says nothing was done before july 31. you said trump is a disaster. i have no idea how destabilizing his presidency would be. between july 31 and all 8. how many interviews did you conduct related to the alleged collusion between russia and the trump campaign. i'm asking for a number. not the names. how many people had you investigated, had he interviewed. >> the counsel of the fbi based on the special counsel's equities directed me not to answer any questions about the ongoing investigation into russian attempts to interfere. judge jeanine: directed not to answer any questions by the counsel for the fbi. why is this important? why would it be important to show the investigation began before the fbi said it did? why? because nothing happ

it is a conversational text exchange. it's not a written expression of a desire for something to occur. >> maybe i missed it. help me that we should be so lucky. >> yes, sir. i think you would accept as a very intelligent sophisticated man that people frequently speak in texting or conversation you say things that are exaggerations and are not literal. >> usually agent strozk not when i was supposed to be investigating someone i actually did not. let's go. we have already passed the who gives af one more a.d. versus investigation leading to impeachment. i think we established that there is a school of thought that you can be impeached even if you are not a current office holder. you can be barred from holding office in the future, but you did not engage in any impeachment analysis in your other 2016 investigation with secretary clinton. you saved all of that for candidate trump. so i want to go to another text. you and i both know the odds are nothing. if i thought it was likely i would be there, no question. now, this is