February 5, 2018 --

...That for several days the FBI couldnd't find messages exchanged between Peter Strrzok and Lisa Page? Strzok, a senior FBI counterintelligence official who investigated the Clinton email matter, and then was given the Trump collusion probe to handle, ended up working for special counsel Robert S. Mueller, until his anti-Trump biases became public. Ms. Page is an FBI attorney was also was at the special counsel office, for a time. The time frame for the missing texts is December 14, 2016 to May 17, 2017. The New York Times, December 14, 2016 ran a long article, 'HACKING THE DEMOCRATS, " focusing on the charge that the Russians intervened in the election to make Donald J. Trump president. Could Strzok and Page have exchanged comments on that article that would enlighten the public today, to full understanding of the Russiagate scenario that has been trumpeted in the Never Trump media for more than a year, now?

The media is clearly not interested in the questions directed by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley towards the FBI and Department of Justice on the FBI connection with the Steele dossier, and exploring political bias at the FBI. Grassley, beginning March 6, 2017, wrote several letters to James Comey, while he was still FBI director, with questions about the FBI and Steele. LPR is not aware that Comey replied. What better proof that the FBI remains in Obama hands than refusal to respond to congressional requests for information. In this regard, Barack Obama might still be in the White House. Consider how uncooperative the IRS was, stonewalling Congress concerning unfair treatment given Tea Party requests for tax waivers. The Obama crowd has a tradition of stonewalling inquiry from congressional Re[ublicans.

Indeed, the anti-Trump bias of the media is suggested by failure of journalists to raise the questions asked of the FBI by Chairman Grassley about FBI interest in the Steele dossier, and the impact of political bias on FBI investigations, to protect Hillary Clinton -- and to smear President Trump.'It is fascinating that disclosure of political partisanship at the FBI was disclosed in the course of the investigation by Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz, into James Comey's handling of the Hillary Clinton emails matter."

The New York Times report of the IG probe, January 13, 2017, stated that the probe was initiated by complaints from congressman and the public "about actions by the F.B.I. and the Justice Department during the campaign that could be seen as politically motivated."

There is something about the Clintons and missing documents. Think back to the Clinton years and those missing Rose law firm papers that appeared mysteriously one day. Then, too, more recently, 33,000 missing Clinton emails. Is the FBI just carrying on a Clinton tradition?

But perhaps there is too much focus on the FBI. Professor Stephen F. Cohen, on the John Batchelor Show, January 23, advised to look beyond the FBI for the source of political stains on the bureaucracy. Andy McCarthy, at National Review, recently concluded that President Obama had to know that Clinton was using a private server for official business and that she had to be protected to spare him embarrassment.

Meanwhile, with Never Trumpers continuing, apparently, to rely on Robert S. Mueller to undermine President Trump, Justice IG Horowitz will be coming out with a report that LPR believes will extend beyond Comey's handling of the Clinton email matter to anti-Trump actions at the FBI and Justice Department. Perhaps the Horowitz report will suffice for appointment of special counsel to probe the politicization of Russiagate.

And perhaps, those responsible for the Russiagate scenario will try to argue, forcefully, that challenges to their scenario will cause harm to the FBI, the Justice Department and American democracy. This view ignores the old adage: "Sunlight is the best disinfectant." And LPR hopes that the Republican congressional leadership will take that adage to heart and act swiftly to declassify documents that will disclose any post-election attempt by officials in the Obama administration to throttle, after the fact, the Trump presidency.

William McGurn, in his January 16 column, "Wanted: An Honest FBI," cited the view of James Kallstrom, former head of the FBI's New York field office,that the FBI's "'leadership in Washington has harmed the bureau's reputation." Congressional Democrats and the media, apparently, are unconcerned with the obvious politicization at the FBI. And so, they are not interested in public disclosure of any documents that would disclose the truth of what Russiagate is all about. But in a free society, isn't government based on trust in the truth, not on manipulation by means of propaganda? And in a free society, don't we have an understanding to abide by the vote of the people, and not to work to toss that vote aside?