FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page have become well-known names in political circles for unearthed text messages between them that have raised questions as to whether they abused their positions to pursue a partisan agenda against Donald Trump. But it turns out America’s most unlikely president isn’t the only political figure they had a low opinion of.
The Daily Caller reports that despite wanting Democrat Hillary Clinton to win in 2016, Strzok was not impressed with her daughter Chelsea Clinton, and said so in the latest collection of their texts to be publicly released:
Strzok, who was removed from special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation for sending anti-Trump texts, criticized Clinton’s speech at the Democratic National Committee convention in late July.
“Chelsea was awful. Tried to do Bills up close sharing. Didn’t come across as genuine. Plus, she has a HORRIBLE billv goat speech tic,” Strzok wrote in a text to Page — his mistress and FBI colleague on the investigation at the time.
The insulting characterization of Chelsea’s appearance was not the only time Strzok targeted Chelsea; two days prior to her speech he explained to Page that he didn’t “like” Chelsea because he felt she was “self entitled” and “feels she deserves something she hasn’t earned.”
The texts were part of a 400 page cache of messages released by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Wednesday. The document dump, which includes texts sent between Aug. 16, 2015, and July 23, 2017, was accompanied by an interim report on the panel’s investigation into the FBI’s handling of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email investigation.
Advertisement – story continues below
These rare glimpses of Democrat candor when they think nobody’s looking are always simply delightful, don’t you think?
Of course, in this case the fact that liberals just can’t stand Chelsea isn’t much of a secret. Just take the word of rank-and-file Democrats:
“Chelsea needs to go away,” 49-year-old Guinevere Boyd said. “She has nothing to offer. She has said some horrible, clueless things about progressives and progressive issues.”
“The country does not have any more appetite for the Clintons,” said Mike Bender, 61. “Enough is enough.”
Or the assessment of fellow lefty Edward Yaeger at the Huffington Post:
Advertisement – story continues below
Chelsea really doesn’t have much to stand on when it comes to politics. I suppose that, as the daughter of both a former U.S. president and a potential U.S. president, she is somewhat credible by association, but what does that truly net? Her accomplishments are difficult to pin down in spite of all of the exposure, connections, resources and power that a daughter of a U.S. president and of a U.S. Senator has.
Or this truly brutal piece from TA Frank in Vanity Fair, titled “Please, God, Stop Chelsea Clinton From Whatever She Is Doing”:
The crude conventional wisdom is that Bill Clinton craved adoration and Hillary Clinton craved power. But Chelsea Clinton seems to have a more crippling want: fashionability—of the sort embraced by philanthropic high society. So you tell The New York Times that your dream dinner party would include James Baldwin, Shakespeare, Franz Kafka, Albert Camus, Jane Jacobs, and Jane Austen, and discussion would be about how “people and communities can evolve to be more inclusive, more kind, have a greater and broader sense of solidarity, while still respecting individual liberties; what provokes or blocks those changes; and what stories might resonate today to encourage us toward kindness, respect, and mutual dignity.” You almost have to bow down before someone who could host Shakespeare for dinner and make the agenda wind up sounding like a brochure for the Altria Group. At least Kafka would be on hand to capture the joy of the evening.
Strzok should have been fired from the FBI a long time ago, and we’re overdue an investigation into whether anything beyond that is warranted. But hey, when you’re right, you’re right.
What do you think? Scroll down to comment below.