Liberals didn’t even have time to absorb their lattes this morning before the latest headlines sent them into a panic-stricken fit of rage and fury. They woke up to learn that last night, the Justice Department offered a “highly unusual” invitation.

The DOJ hosted the press, allowing reporters to examine in detail a huge collection of ten thousand message texts, exchanged between FBI employees occupying key slots on Robert Mueller’s witch hunt. The posts were uncovered by the DOJ’s inspector general while auditing the FBI probe into Hillary Clinton’s secret server.

“It is highly unusual for the DOJ to release correspondences that are the subject of an ongoing investigation to Congress, let alone to the press,” one left-leaning source complains. “It’s appalling behavior by the department,” echoes former DOJ spokesman, Matthew Miller. “This is an ongoing investigation in which these employees have due-process rights, and the political leadership at DOJ has thrown them to the wolves.

Deputy AG Rosenstein shrugs off the criticism, stressing the importance of the issue and the right of the public to know. DOJ officials discussed the matter and between them, they decided “that the texts turned over to Congress were fit for public consumption.” They backed that up with a statement this morning. “We often provide information we give to Congressional committees to avoid any confusion.”

Peter Strzok used his position on Robert Mueller’s inquisition to “protect the country” from President Trump. When FBI lawyer Lisa Page suggested, “maybe you’re meant to stay where you are because you’re meant to protect the country from that menace,” Strzok quickly embraced his role as a mole. “Of course I’ll try and approach it that way. I just know it will be tough at times. I can protect our country at many levels.”

375 lurid text messages that FBI counterintelligence agent Strzok swapped with his undercover lover were turned over to the House Judiciary Committee yesterday, on the eve of the expected third-degree interrogation of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. There is no doubt that the 90 pages of text messages will “demonstrate a bias in the FBI amid Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.”

Rosenstein, the second in command at the Justice Department, appointed Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate possible Russian influence in last year’s election, so also has the authority to fire him. Every day, more and more evidence indicates that Mueller really is conducting a “witch hunt” instead of the promised impartial review. “The conflicts of interest here and the impropriety is a very serious concern,” warns Trump attorney Jay Sekulow.

FBI director Christopher Wray was subjected to a similar grilling last week where Strzok was also in the spotlight as the individual who changed the wording in James Comey’s final decision, downgrading the phrase “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless.” The difference is crucially important because gross negligence is a criminal charge. Before he grabbed a shovel to dig up dirt on Trump for Mueller, Peter Strzok was in charge of the FBI’s probe into Hillary Clinton’s back-channel secret server.

Following the hearing, the committee’s chairman, Rep. Robert W. Goodlatte (R-Virginia), was “very troubled by the recent controversy surrounding staff assigned to the special counsel’s investigation into Russian interference in last year’s presidential election.” Fellow Republican, Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), seconded the opinion. “If anyone is obscuring anything, it’s the Justice Department and the FBI.”

Rep. Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) wanted to know how Strzok got picked. “The question is, how did this guy get on your supposed unbiased team in the first place, when you consider this is the same guy investigating the Hillary Clinton email server scandal and apparently had a hand in altering the FBI’s conclusion that Clinton was grossly negligent down to ‘extremely careless,’ so she could escape prosecution and thus stay in the race against Donald Trump?”

While FBI guidelines allow the public expression of political opinions, a “conflict of interest” arises when those opinions can affect an ongoing investigation.

All through the election, the couple exchanged clearly biased messages. Page referred to Trump as a “loathsome human.” Strzok sent back “yet he may win.” Page said he would be a “worse president” than Ted Cruz.

The way they talked about Hillary showed fawning adoration. “She just has to win now. I’m not going to lie, I got a flash of nervousness yesterday about Trump.” Strzok typed. As the election got closer, Strzok’s agitation showed with messages in all caps. “I am riled up. Trump is an (expletive) idiot, is unable to provide a coherent answer. I CAN’T PULL AWAY. WHAT THE (expletive) HAPPENED TO OUR COUNTRY??!?!”

On election day, he posted “OMG THIS IS (expletive) TERRIFYING: A victory by Mr. Trump remains possible…” Page replied, “Yeah, that’s not good.”

These are only a few of the highlights but the pro-Hillary sentiment drips from every message. They thought they were being cagey about hiding their favoritism. “So look, you say we text on that phone when we talk about Hillary because it can’t be traced…” Page sent on April 2, 2016.