Peter Strzok and the Deep State Conspiracy Theory: Will Logic Trump Fear?

House Judiciary Committee Logo

Let’s look at FBI agent Peter Strzok’s testimony before a joint Congressional committee yesterday. The pyrotechnics blazed away through the entire day. So far, the Republicans' attempt to tear Strzok apart seem to have fizzled in a blaze of random sparks.

Strzok is one of two FBI agents (the other is his adulterous lover, Lisa Page, a former FBI lawyer) at the center of the Republican Party’s Deep State conspiracy theory. The Deep State conspiracy theory says that a massive group of government officials, including uncounted FBI agents and many Trump appointees, have been working behind the scenes for illegitimate purposes to undermine President Donald Trump’s administration. The evidence for this is that Strzok and Page had exchanged text messages expressing hostility to President Trump; for example, about Trump’s election campaign, Strzok texted: “We’ll stop it.” 

Trump tweet about Strzok

President Trump has often attacked Strzok on Twitter. Strzok’s testimony will not end the conspiracy theory – nothing will do that – but he crimped it. Conspiracy theories depend on fear, not logic, despite the mountains of dubious evidence and twisted logic that conspiracy theorists offer to support their opinions. So it was with the Deep State conspiracy theory that the Republican Congressional Representatives angrily but unsuccessfully spewed out yesterday.

Strzok’s testimony began with a prepared statement. He apologized that his “private messages” had led to “misguided attacks against the FBI.” He noted that he also had sent text messages criticizing Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, and various other politicians, so he wasn’t just against Trump. He denied that his “personal opinions” affected his official actions as an FBI agent.

Strzok’s most telling point was that, because of his involvement in the Russia-Trump investigation, he knew enough information to “derail” Trump’s campaign – and didn’t release it. He stressed that the Russia investigation “is not politically motivated, it is not a witch hunt, it is not a hoax.” He noted that he could not answer questions about the ongoing investigation, but assured the committee that “the answers would doubtless be disappointing to the questioners and undermine the conspiracy narrative being told about the Russia investigation.” That could be true, and the Republican majority obviously didn’t get the point. Strzok complained that he had not been given enough time to prepare his testimony, and that the committee had not provided a transcript of his earlier testimony.

Trump Tweet about "Witch Hunt"

Finally, Strzok pointed out something that is, although obviously true, surprisingly controversial: “I understand we are living in a political era in which insults and insinuation often drown out honesty and integrity. But the honest truth is that Russian interference in our elections constitutes a grave attack on our democracy.” President Trump routinely calls the Russia investigation a “witch hunt.”

Both sides met Strzok’s testimony with partisan explosions. After Republican Representative Trey Gowdy asked a series of accusations and insulted Strzok repeatedly, speaking in the frothing, wild-man style that seems to appeal to Gowdy’s constituents, Strzok expressed “great offense” at the question. Strzok pointed out that “any action I took” involved “multiple layers of people above me” and “multiple layers of people below me.” He did not, he noted, have the power to overcome the many safeguards that the FBI’s procedures provided. That, again, should be obvious. But isn’t.

Here are the takeaways about persuasion and public speaking:

1. Millions of people believe in outlandish conspiracy theories. These conspiracy theories often begin with a speck of truth. In this case, a few text messages did show Strzok’s strong anti-Trump political opinions. The conspiracy theory requires two additional, quite unproven steps: (a) did Strzok allow his political views to affect the investigation? Although Strzok denied this, it is possible that it occurred. But (b) the conspiracy theory also requires that many, many FBI and Department of Justice officials, most of whom are deeply conservative (it is surely no secret that law enforcement attracts conservative employees) would not only go along with Strzok’s supposedly evil deeds, but cooperate with them and facilitate them, while never taking their concerns to their supervisors or the public. This is not only unproven, but far-fetched.

2. Strzok should not have sent those text messages on his official FBI equipment. If Hillary Clinton’s email scandal should have taught us anything, it is that we should use work email for work and private email for private messages. This is not hard. The same rule surely applies to text messages. Still, many public officials, including some Trump officials, continue to have trouble following that simple rule.

3. The depth to which Russian interference in our election penetrated our democracy remains to be proven. Special Counsel Robert Mueller continues to investigate. Is President Trump vulnerable to this investigation’s results? I have no idea. Time will tell. But the hostile and often irrational responses that the Republicans on these committees gave to Strzok’s testimony makes me wonder if they know something we don’t. Are they running scared?

4. Truth has a way of coming out. Coverups don’t work. Not ever. This is another lesson that people refuse to learn, going all the way back to the Watergate scandal. Although there does seem to be a massive effort to sabotage or discredit the Russia investigation, there is no chance that that effort will succeed. None. We live in an open society, and, if President Trump and his officials have indeed done awful things, we will find out.

5. Although Strzok’s story did have some big holes, he was much better prepared and much smarter than the Republican congressional representatives who tried to discredit him. Much of their preparation seems to have come from Fox News, talk radio, and conspiracy theory websites. Still, my Twitter feed is full of nasty comments about Strzok, few of which relate to his testimony’s content. Instead they complain about his adulterous affair, call him names, or ridicule his facial expressions. This shows that he scored points and that his opponents have little to stand on.

Be careful what you wish for. The Republican majority on these committees wanted to bring Strzok onto the carpet and let him have it. They gave it their best shot. But, overall, they made a tactical mistake. Strzok made a better impression than they did, and they lost points.

Was Strzok’s testimony the most important public speaking event of the day? Probably not. President Trump’s speeches at the NATO Summit were probably even more important. I’ll talk about them soon.

Earlier posts:

Tips on how to tell if a conspiracy is real.

Trump's conspiracy theories.  

A disgraced member of Congress talked about the absurd Seth Rich conspiracy theory.