Dear CNN: Lisa Page Admits FBI Could NOT Prove Collusion Between Trump & Russia, Is That ‘News?’

Written by Wes Walker on September 17, 2018

Despite assertions by the Media(D) and Adam “Shifty” Schiff that Russian collusion is a known fact, the people who were actually investigating it are saying otherwise… under oath.

Schiff has gone on record saying there was ‘plenty of evidence’ and ‘ample evidence’ of so-called Russian collusion in the Trump campaign, as though he’s got some kind of inside information.

That’s quite a feat. Unless he is lying through his teeth or was part of the framing job some say is really behind this investigation, Shiff supposedly knows something that even the investigators themselves didn’t know.

Lisa Page is a familiar name by now. But some may have trouble placing it without that other name she usually makes the news with — Peter Strzok of the now-infamous text exchange fame.

Both Lisa and Peter were involved in the investigations into (among other things) Hillary’s email scandal, the ‘Crossfire Hurricane’ investigation into Trump/Russia, AND the Mueller investigation until they were removed on account of these same texts.

It was while answering questions about these texts that we see an interesting development months after the investigations into Russia first began:

“It’s a reflection of us still not knowing,” Page told Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) when questioned about texts she and Strzok exchanged in May 2017 as Robert Mueller was being named special counsel to take over the Russia investigation.

With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia’s election meddling.

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.

“As far as May of 2017, we still couldn’t answer the question,” she said at another point.
Source: The Hill

This does nothing to diminish any skepticism of the whole Mueller Probe that observers have had from what she said earlier in the summer:

From other reporting of the exchange, we get a little more context:

“I cannot provide the specifics of a confidential interview,” Ratcliffe told Fox News when asked for comment. “But I can say that Lisa Page left me with the impression, based on her own words, that the lead investigator of the Russian collusion case, Peter Strzok, had found no evidence of collusion after nearly a year.”

And despite the fact Strzok obviously wanted Trump out of office, even he had been skeptical:

The May 18, 2017, text was highlighted by Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz in his recent report about the handling of the Clinton email probe by the FBI and the Justice Department. The day after Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s appointment to the Russia probe on May 17, Strzok and Page discussed whether Strzok should join Mueller’s team.

“Who gives a f*ck, one more A(ssistant) D(irector)…(versus) (a)n investigation leading to impeachment?” Strzok texted on May 18, according to the IG report. Strzok later continues, “…you and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.”

The transcript shows Ratcliffe read the text exchange nearly verbatim to Page, and asked her to explain it, specifically if the lead investigator on the Russia collusion case, agent Strzok believed “the odds were nothing and that he had a concern that there was no big there there regarding any collusion…”


And THAT is the statement Page’s earlier comments about a reflection of us still not knowing was in answer to.

Strzok had every reason to be skeptical… he had been part of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation that unleashed some of the most powerful investigative powers available on the idea of Russian Collusion and came up empty.

Even the ‘big players’ like Carter Page have been hit with charges completely unrelated to anything Russia may or may not have done.

If at the end of this, there turns out to be no evidence of connections to Russia and the Left — including the ‘free press’ have been using this to shape election narratives, and to dog the duly-elected President’s every step, there is going to be HELL to pay.

That’s ok. the cries of ‘Impeach 45’ don’t care about evidence.

They care about knocking off a political rival.

Is it clear now why those midterms matter so much?