“Nor has Mr. Strzok provided any reason why he cannot first ask Mr. Bowdich whether he was in fact influenced by former President Trump’s ‘pressure campaign,’ which he concedes is part of establishing his First Amendment claim,” the Justice Department’s filing said.
The Justice Department sought to quash the subpoena in January, as the department has argued that Strzok must exhaust other avenues for obtaining the information that is relevant to his lawsuit before seeking the former President’s testimony.
A 2018 report by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz found that the Strzok and Page texts “cast a cloud” over the credibility of Clinton investigation, although he found no evidence “that these political views directly affected the specific investigative decisions that we reviewed.” A 2019 inspector general report of the Russia probe likewise cleared it of political bias.
Page has brought her own lawsuit alleging that the Justice Department violated the Privacy Act by releasing their texts. Their cases have been consolidated for purposes of discovery.
“Even if Plaintiff first deposed other officials, such as Mr. Bowdich, or FBI Director Wray, they would at most be able to testify about what he said, not what he intended when he said it,” Strzok said in the March filing, which also said the degree of malice is a relevant question for the damages Strzok is seeking in the lawsuit.
The Justice Department argued Monday that “whether or not former President Trump intended to influence Mr. Bowdich is immaterial.”
The only question relevant to Strzok’s lawsuit, the Justice Department said, “is whether or not former President Trump (whatever he intended) did influence Mr. Bowdich. But that is a question properly addressed only to Mr. Bowdich, or others directly involved in the removal process.”
