In this review, we found that, while LisaPage attended some of the discussions regarding theopening of the investigations, she did not play a role inthe decision to open Crossfire Hurricane or the fourindividual cases. We further found that while Strzokwas directly involved in the decisions to open CrossfireHurricane and the four individual cases, he was not thesole, or even the highest-level, decision maker as toany of those matters. As noted above, then CD ADPriestap, Strzok's supervisor, was the official whoultimately made the decision to open the investigation,and evidence reflected that this decision by Priestapwas reached by consensus after multiple days ofdiscussions and meetings that included Strzok andother leadership in CD, the FBI Deputy Director, the FBIGeneral Counsel, and a FBI Deputy General Counsel.We concluded that Priestap's exercise of discretion inopening the investigation was in compliance withDepartment and FBI policies, and we did not finddo entary or testimonial evidence that political biasor improper motivation influenced his decision. Wesimilarly found that,
while the formal do entationopening each of the four individual investigations wasapproved by Strzok (as required by the DIOG), the Executive SummaryReview of Four FISA Applications and Other Aspects of the FBI's CrossfireHurricane Investigationdecisions to do so were reached by a consensus amongthe Crossfire "Hurricane agents and analysts whoidentified individuals associated with the Trumpcampaign who had recently traveled to Russia or hadother alleged ties to Russia. Priestap was involved inthese decisions. We did not find do entary ortestimonial evidence that political bias or impropermotivation influenced the decisions to open the fourindividual investigations
Reply With Quote
