In a BOMBSHELL report, it turns out Lisa Page – the paramour to FBI agent Peter Strzok has been cooperating with Congress.
And what has been divulged is going to knock your socks off! (More below.)
Lisa Page ADMITS to the collusion delusion!
In a little noticed article from The Hill – John Solomon wrote about Lisa’s time in front of Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) “behind closed doors during a congressional interview a few weeks ago.”
She was asked to discuss her texts to Peter when the Russia investigation was taken from their hands and placed into the hands of Mueller.
Lisa stated, “eight simple words” to Ratcliffe. She said, “It’s a reflection of us still not knowing,” as reported by Solomon.
This indicates that there was no collusion found from the FBI investigation. Furthermore, as it was turned over to the special counsel there was no evidence for collusion either. (Continued below.)
Basically, there was no crime or evidence of collusion. Only the hopes it would be found…eventually.
Lisa’s words to Congress rang true. Remember, the text from Peter Strzok on May 19th to her about ‘there’s no there-there’?
It read, “I hesitate, in part, because of my gut sense and concern there’s no big ‘there’ there,” as reported by the New York Post in regards to the collusion and the Trump campaign.
“Page opined further, acknowledging ‘it still existed in the scope of possibility that there would be literally nothing’ to connect Trump and Russia, no matter what Mueller or the FBI did,” said Solomon. (More below.)
Strzok and Comey are on the same Page. There was no evidence of collusion prior to the Special Counsel.
Then, there was Comey. Comey testified to Congress shortly after he was fired and before the Special Counsel was founded.
Specifically, there is STILL no evidence after the Special Counsel has been going strong for close to two years.
So what gives? (Continued below.)
As award-winning investigative journalist, John Solomon stated, “No matter where Mueller ends his probe, it is now clear the actions that preceded his appointment turned justice on its head, imposing the presumption of guilt upon a probe whose own originators had reason to doubt the strength of their evidence.”