Grassley to DOJ: You Need to Explain the 'Insurance Policy' Peter Strzok Talked About

Posted: Dec 14, 2017 2:15 PM

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley was hardly impressed by testimony given by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein Wednesday about text messages sent between FBI counterintelligence agent Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page. 

In a letter to Rosenstein Thursday, Grassley is requesting more information about the politicized environment at the FBI during the Bureau's criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton and leading up to the 2016 presidential election. He's also demanding the FBI turn over all text messages between Strzok and Page to clarify and add context to what they meant when they discussed an "insurance policy" should Donald Trump win the White House. 

These are questions Grassley wants answered. 

1. On what date did you become aware of the text messages between Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page and on what date were they each removed from the Special Counsel’s office?
2. Are there any other records relating to the conversation in Andrew McCabe’s office shortly before the text described above on August 15, 2016?  If so please produce them to the Committee.
3. Please provide all records relating to Andrew McCabe’s communications with Peter Strzok or Lisa Page between August 7, 2016 and August 23, 2016.
4. What steps have you taken to determine whether Mr. Strzok, Mr. Page, and Mr. McCabe should face disciplinary action for their conduct?
5. My understanding is that the Inspector General’s current investigation is limited to the handling of the Clinton email matter only.  What steps have you taken to determine whether steps taken during the campaign to escalate the Russia investigation might have been a result of the political animus evidenced by these text messages rather than on the merits?
6. Has the Department identified the referenced “that phone” Mr. Strzok and Ms. Page used to discuss Secretary Clinton? What steps has the Department taken to review the records on this other phone that allegedly “can’t be traced.”  If none, please explain why not?  If steps have been taken, please detail them and provide all records reviewed.

DOJ is expected to respond by December 27.