Representative Doug Collins Releases Transcript of Lisa Page Congressional Testimony…

Well, well, well; he did it again.  Representative Doug Collins has released the transcript of testimony from former FBI Lawyer Lisa Page. [SEE HERE] The transcript is from two days of congressional testimony July 13th and July 16th, 2018.  Each day is a separate transcript:  Day One Transcript

.

Day Two Transcript (below)

.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dept Of Justice, Desperately Seeking Hillary, Election 2016, IG Report Clinton Investigation, IG Report FISA Abuse, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, Spygate, Spying, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

391 Responses to Representative Doug Collins Releases Transcript of Lisa Page Congressional Testimony…

  1. freepetta says:

    Thank You Representative Collins!!

    Liked by 26 people

  2. It all comes down to the will to take and hold ground.
    The left is fanatical about doing this.
    The GOPe not at all as far as I can see.
    I’m doing what I can to financially support those trying to take back America.
    Unfortunately both Ohio senators are leftists.
    My local rep for life is Brad Wenstrup and not a strong supporter of POTUS DJT.
    Thank God for Jim Jordan!

    Liked by 13 people

  3. bocephusrex says:

    Does anyone else think Mueller’s goons will selectively leak ANYTHING from the report which can be used to smear POTUS?

    Like

  4. Walt says:

    Sundance,
    Is this good or bad? Good to get the information? or bad they can now come up with a defense for it?

    Liked by 2 people

    • John-Y128 says:

      Indeed, the republicans haven’t exploited any of these transcript releases for the sake of justice for American citizens, they dragged their feet for the last 2 years, and why didn’t they release this info before losing the House?

      Like

  5. CountryClassVulgarian says:

    I expect rep Collins is going to be the subject of an “investigation” any day now.

    Liked by 14 people

  6. jack says:

    Yeah Sundance!
    I know we ask a lot of you, and you deliver! But I didn’t see a cliff notes summary …. are we “bad” because we expect you to read it for us, and tell us what’s in it? 🙂
    Well, at least we trust you to tell us the TRUTH, we can’t say that about if we let CNN give us a breakdown. 😉
    Thanks for the thread, I might look it over … tonight (to help me get to sleep) 😉

    Liked by 3 people

  7. ATheoK says:

    Doug Collins is singularly increasing Washington DC, Arlington, Fairfax and Maryland’s laundry profits as the guilt ridden soil their underwear.
    By now, Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe and others are likely shopping for a gross of new underwear; and desperately hoping that the new underwear can be shipped overnight.

    It is wonderful!

    Liked by 10 people

    • 1stgoblyn says:

      I doubt that. Their arrogance is such that they think their shirt doesn’t stink. Their lawyers help them excuse away all the incriminating shirt.

      Liked by 3 people

  8. Streak 264 says:

    An audio version please!
    LOL

    Like

    • L4grasshopper says:

      Did he have to address the letter to the “Honorable” Jerald Nadler??

      Liked by 1 person

    • Sandra-VA says:

      Wow! I really, really like this guy! What cojones to take on Nadler & Co.

      Very interesting that they have hired Berke as an attorney for their inquisition, someone who worked for the Trump Org for 25 years….

      It is very encouraging to see such a well written rebuke of the inquisition.

      Liked by 8 people

    • aisheschayal says:

      I am lovin this Collins guy!!

      Like

    • Firefly says:

      Wow! Doug Collins wrote a wonderful letter citing laws in a clear, concise and hard hitting way. Doug Collins went to John Lawson Law school, which is considered top notch. Notice how the crony Harvard lawyers don’t seem to be able to step up to this high quality work. Beginning to think Harvard isn’t up to par with how great they claim to be. Maybe some of the Harvard gang in congress bought their way in and as Dershowitz point out Harvard is giving everyone a gold star.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Representative Collins wrote an outstanding letter to The Penguin. A copy should go to every media outlet in the United States. Nice job Mr. Collins.

      Like

    • Bella says:

      OMG! This Rep. Doug Collins is amazing! That’s an incredibly detailed and well written letter, with legal cases cited. I hope Rep. Nadler and the attorney he hired to work on the bogus investigations, Barry Berke, appreciate that they will have formidable opposition if they pursue their Witch Hunt. I think Collins’ letter also gives the attorneys of those 81 people of whom Nadler made demands for documents grounds to refuse cooperation with Nadler. Thank you for linking this here!

      Liked by 2 people

    • Remington..... says:

      THAT is a serious letter…..This guy is top shelf….

      Liked by 1 person

  9. velvetfoot says:

    Nunez (on Hannity) just confirmed SD’s comments on Fusion/Nellie’s authorship and Steele’s laundering of dossier to Feds.

    Liked by 6 people

  10. MAGADJT says:

    Nunes just told Hannity that we know about 2/3 of the story so far, and Hannity said “but the last 1/3 is the most explosive, right?” and Nunes said “Well it’s a lot of the same stuff you saw in the first 2/3.”

    Liked by 1 person

    • Paula Daly says:

      Also he said, that it was Nellie, Glenn Simpson and his wife that wrote the fake dossier from articles they had years ago, like from a movie script, that Chris Steele was just the passthru. He said something else important, but damn, I can’t remember!

      Liked by 3 people

      • farrier105 says:

        On June 14, 2016, the Washington Post published the exclusive about the DNC hack based on what DNC executives Amy Dacey and Debbie Wassserman Schultz, and Crowdstrike executives Dmitri Alperovitch and Shawn Henry told National Security Reporter Ellen Nakashima. The article claimed only DNC opposition research about Trump, consisting of two files, was stolen. Intelligence experts told Nakashima the improbable story that the Russians didn’t have any intelligence about Trump as a politician, so they hacked the DNC to get the opposition research. Basically, WAPO told America that the DNC hack was a nothingburger. The New York Times didn’t bother cribbing from Nakashima for TWO DAYS after her front page article appeared.

        Meanwhile, just 13 days later, we see this first comment on the WAPO Web site:

        bernsm
        6/27/2016 11:52 AM EDT
        Russian hackers linked to the government spill the DNC’s strategy, undermining their campaign against Mr. Trump right when his campaign needs a boost. Doesn’t this appear to support the allegations that Mr. Trump’s candidacy is being supported by Russia, a nation which is not currently behaving like our friend. When you put these together with Mr. Trump’s stated admiration of Russia’s dictator, a disturbing picture begins to emerge. How much do we really know about this guy and who his real friends are?

        On June 27, 2016, based on the WAPO article, no one should have been accusing Russia of supporting Trump. After all, RUSSIA DIDN’T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT TRUMP, that’s why they hacked the DNC.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russian-government-hackers-penetrated-dnc-stole-opposition-research-on-trump/2016/06/14/cf006cb4-316e-11e6-8ff7-7b6c1998b7a0_story.html?utm_term=.08aeb07d48ae

        Like

        • Bella says:

          Wow, this is very interesting! Thanks for posting this. So who do you think the poster “bernsm” is? A CIA employee engaged in setting up the phony Russia collusion narrative? A Hillary campaign operative?

          Like

          • farrier105 says:

            I think it is Glenn Simpson’s wife, Mary Jacoby. She bragged early and often about how Simpson was after Manafort which led him to get after Trump.

            Like

    • Paula Daly says:

      Just remembered, Nunes told Hannity also, this all started in 2016 not 2017.

      Liked by 1 person

      • 1stgoblyn says:

        I would not be surprised to learn that it started in 2015 when VSPGPDJT descended that escalator and announced he was running. Could have even started when he first considered running in 2011.

        Liked by 8 people

        • Mncpo(ret) says:

          I, honestly, think he had been spied on for years. Barry hated him. Seriously, hated him. If you go back to 2011/12 (not sure which) there are clips of those two attending the same functions. There was big time tension between them then.

          Like

          • Peoria Jones says:

            Zero and his handlers were always paranoid that DJT could pull back the curtain.

            Like

            • spoogels says:

              DJT was a Democrat and schmoozed with #DemScum for years and obv heard all the inside gossip. Then he saw what they were doing and decided to dump the #DemScum and try and fix their Commie Socialist mess.
              Make no mistake Pres Trump knows all the #DemDirt

              Like

          • Jim in TN says:

            If Trump wasn’t being spied on before his taking up the birth issue, Zero would have made sure Trump was spied on after that went public.

            Like

      • GB Bari says:

        Depends upon what “this” is, to which Nunes is referring.

        Some of “this” goes back before 2015, before DJT announced his candidacy.
        Such as the Dossier, which we know Glen Simpson & ? drafted in 2007.
        Such as the illegal use of NSA /FBI database for 702(16)(17) queries about US citizens by contractors.

        Some of “this” began as soon as DJT announced his candidacy in April 2015.
        Such as the attempted framing of DJT and campaign associates by planting evidence via spies.

        And some of “this” did start in 2017.
        Such as the massive coverup (of all the above) by creating a fake investigation via Special Counsel Mueller & his Trump-hating Team to withhold and hide evidence of the criminal coup conspiracy using the excuse – “because of the ongoing investigation.”

        Like

      • jnr2d2 says:

        I’ll keep saying this: It started right after the Nov 2014 loss of the Senate. Obama, and his Svengali’s Jarrett and Rhodes, meet to formulate a come back that first would guarantee Hillary’s win. They started their “research” in the winter of 2015 on probably every potential Republican candidate for President.(which is why DOJ Deputy Asst Sec of Defense for Russia and Ukraine 2012-2015, Evelyn Farkas said, after she left the Government in the fall of 2015 that “if they found out how we knew what we knew …”

        Liked by 3 people

        • PBR says:

          Actually, I do believe that was in reference to all the Obama aides and cronies sharing the info with all the agencies after they had surveillance on Trump.

          Like

      • farrier105 says:

        It started in 2015, That is the year Comey claimed Russia hacked DNC. This is when the story started. This could have come about because of one of the following:

        1. Russia hacking was always a false story.
        2. Russia actually hacked DNC, but stole other documents, not the emails. One of the documents stolen was allegedly a letter written by Wasserman Schultz detailed in the links below. The letter revealed that Loretta Lynch told a Hillary staffer that the email investigation would not go very deep, which was exactly what happened.

        Like

        • farrier105 says:

          I think I got the wrong second link above. Sorry about that. The top link is the one to follow. There’s another one I have in the LYNCH LETTER file somewhere. I just started following up about this Lynch Letter.

          Like

    • piper567 says:

      Hannity sometimes reminds me of the smarmy DA from the old Perry Mason program.
      leading questions abound.
      really poor choice of tactics.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Amy2 says:

      I like Nunes, but that response was weird. We either know 2/3 or 3/3 according to that answer?

      Like

  11. ristvan says:

    Finished reading the first Page transcript. Two strong conclusions:
    1. Lots of ‘I don’t recall context’ for her inflammatory/derogatory Trump remarks. RIGHT-NOT!
    2. Page 114–Crossfire Hurricane had uncovered NO collusion evidence at the time Mueller was appointed. That covers over 9 months. Rosenstein would have/should have known this fact when he appointed the SC. And Mueller had to know this almost immediately since Strzok and Page were both assigned to his team. So unequivocably it WAS all an ‘insurance policy’ witch hunt.

    Liked by 34 people

    • I haven’t read it, but you have an interesting analysis.
      If there was no collusion found by Crossfire Hurricane and it can be proven Rosenstein knew it, can Rosenstein be charged with any type of criminality?

      Liked by 3 people

    • L4grasshopper says:

      ristvan — thanks! Many of us have come to look forward to your “lurking lawyer” observations on many topics.

      Liked by 12 people

    • jack says:

      ristvan!

      Add me to the guys that want to thank you for giving us a short and sweet assessment of the first page transcript.

      Like

    • 1stgoblyn says:

      My take-away from reading just the first 265 pages is that the lawyers questioning for Nadler and Cummings had already talked with Lisa and helped her dream up explanations for the damaging texts. Yeah, sure, like I believe those explanations…NOT.

      Liked by 3 people

    • jbowen82 says:

      IIRC, didn’t Strzok text to Page that he was reluctant to join Mueller because, in his opinion, there was nothing there?

      Liked by 2 people

    • old45model says:

      Ristvan, I really enjoy your comments and observations at all times. One of the things that stands out to me is that these people, who should have exceptional memories to be working in such positions, seem to all suffer from an appalling lack of clear and concise recall of times, dates, places and context. Deliberate? Seems to me to be so.

      Liked by 2 people

    • BitterC says:

      Nunes laid bombshells on Hannity radio between interuptions

      He said “Mueller and his team colluded”

      Like

      • mark says:

        Can the convictions obtained by Mueller be overturned due to prosecutional misconduct and/or the appointment of mueller being illegal ie. not following DOJ protocol to identify a crime prior to appointing an SC? Mueller and rosenrat are pure scum. Mueller would have known immediately that there was nothing there but continued to destroy those associated with Trump.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      Pg 37
      is there someone associated with the campaign who is working with the Russians in order to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton

      And so we had sort of quite regular conversations about trying to balance getting the answer as quickly as possible, right, because if the answer is this is a guy just being puffery (sic_)at a meeting with other people, great, then we don’t need to worry about this and we can all get on with our lives; if this is, in fact, the Russians have coopted an individual with, you know maybe wittingly or unwittingly, that’s incredibly grave and we need to know that as quickly as possible

      Is this Carter Page or George PapaD?

      “Regular conversations”, “just a guy talking puffery”, “wittingly or unwittingly”…
      AND they wanted to get an answer as “quickly as possible”…..
      Why in the HELL didn’t they bring this guy in and just ASK HIM?

      Carter had worked for the FBI.
      PapaD they didn’t even interview until 2017 after the election, nearly a YEAR after his Misfud meeting.

      What is the FBI definition of “quickly as possible?

      AND NO DEFENSIVE BRIEFING FOR CANDIDATE TRUMP.

      Lisa Page is full of shit.

      Like

      • Zorro says:

        “just a guy talking puffery”

        OK, what was the specific “puffery’?

        Liked by 1 person

        • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

          PapaD drinking too much gin with the Australian Grand High Poobah Alexander Downer and talking about “dirt” on Hillary perhaps?

          Like

      • WRB says:

        She is probably referring to Carter Page. But I was taken aback by Lisa Page’s statement that they were interesting in:

        >> is there someone associated with the campaign who is working with the Russians in order to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton <> is there someone associated with the HRC campaign who is working with the Russians (and other foreign nationals) to obtain damaging information about DJT <<

        The answer is a clear yes, and there is lots of proof. It is infuriating that the dems are not the ones going through years of legal harassment, bankruptcy and jail.

        Like

        • WRB says:

          Formatting went awry. Trying again:

          She is probably referring to Carter Page. But I was taken aback by Lisa Page’s statement that they were interested in:

          ** is there someone associated with the campaign who is working with the Russians in order to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton **

          Because if you flip it around:
          ** is there someone associated with the HRC campaign who is working with the Russians (and other foreign nationals) to obtain damaging information about DJT **

          You can see the answer is a clear yes, and there is lots of proof. It is infuriating that the dems are not the ones going through years of legal harassment, bankruptcy and jail.

          Like

    • Robert Smith says:

      If you were still doing billable hours how much would a cursory review of that first long transcript cost a client? And we get it for free. Thanks!

      Like

  12. covfefe_USA says:

    Aaaaaannnnd, my friends, if you had been reading ‘Q’s’ drops, you would have know this was coming….. 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  13. gsonFIT says:

    DOJ lawyers attending Lisa Page would not let her answer some question on the direction of SC Mueller because it was an “ongoing investigation” This is it guys and girls!. Also Brennan had a copy of dossier early on (August 2016). I bet he coauthored the thing

    Question is did Obama know?

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Bogeyfree says:

    I appreciate these transcripts but if one wants to cut to the chase and get to the heart of this fraud, when is JW or Freedon Watch going to FOIA the names of the three contractors who were given special access to our Agency databases as Sidney Powell mentions?

    Liked by 2 people

  15. aisheschayal says:

    Good analysis tidbits of Paige testimony by Catherine Herridge on Fox video: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/lisa-page-transcripts-reveal-details-of-anti-trump-insurance-policy-concerns-over-full-blown-probe.
    Points out Paige/Strzok, texts 2 hrs after Comey firing saying they had to “open the case they were waiting on now while Andy is acting”; and other little helpful insights.

    Liked by 5 people

  16. sarasotosfan says:

    I have read Day One of the Lisa Page transcript and the best quote I found was of Ms. Shelia Jackso Lee (p 49) “Thank you, and my only haste is because I have to catch a plane that does not wait.”

    Liked by 1 person

  17. concerned3 says:

    Could Mueller, Weissmann and Barr be foolish enough to do this?

    Report: Attorney General Barr Gave Mueller Permission to Indict Trump’s Three Adult Children and Jared Kushner

    A report at The Specator on Friday claims dirty cop Robert Mueller met with Attorney General Bob Barr and the two agreed that President Trump’s children should be indicted.

    The report goes on to say that Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his 13 angry Democrats also want President Trump to be indicted but that Barr pushed back on this.

    Author and attorney Sidney Powell spoke about this during her interview on the Mark Levin Show on FOX News.

    Sidney Powell is an expert of Department of Justice corruption and has followed the career of Democrat hatchetman Andrew Weissmann who has destroyed thousands of lives during his career as federal prosecutor only to see his cases overturned years later by superior court rulings.

    Sidney Powell wrote LICENSED TO LIE: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice after seeing a core group of federal prosecutors break all the rules, make up crimes, hide evidence, and send innocent people to prison in the Enron case.

    Sidney warned that the report, which will likely be authored by Andrew Weissmann, will destroy Trump. That is the goal and that is why Democrats are looking forward to its release.

    Via Cockburn at The Spectator.

    The story said members of President Trump’s family would be charged but also noted that it is Department of Justice policy not to indict a sitting President. However, there was no frenzy at the DoJ on Friday, no throng of reporters to make the tourists heading up Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House stop and look. So what happened?

    Several sources tell Cockburn that the Special Counsel has indeed completed his report. It is said to recommend indicting three of President Trump’s children – Don junior, Ivanka and Eric – as well as his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The Attorney General, William Barr, is said to have ‘silently assented’ to this. It’s also claimed that Mueller wants President Trump himself to be indicted. Barr is said to oppose this. The two men met on Friday but apparently could not agree and this was the reason for the delay in any announcement from the DoJ. At least this is what the sources say.

    So who are these sources? Joseph Heller mocked Washington’s – and journalism’s — culture of ‘sources’ in his novel Good as Gold.

    ‘I believe I got that information about you from a reliable unnamed source.’

    ‘I’ve been doing a lot of work here as an unnamed source,’ Gold answered with nervousness and haste, ‘so it may have come from me. No truth to it at all.’

    None of Cockburn’s sources was ‘in the room’ – as they say in Washington – for the (alleged) discussions between Mueller and Barr and their two staffs. And none of the sources was briefed by the people ‘in the room’. But they did talk to the people briefed by the people in the room and – twice removed from the original conversations – they all give the same account. It is that the older Trump children and Jared will be indicted for financial crimes while Mueller wants to charge Trump with obstruction of justice. The charges, Cockburn is told now, will not be about ‘Russia collusion’.

    This is different from the story yesterday, which was that Mueller would ‘make the case for collusion’. It is different from what the former CIA director, John Brennan, said on Lawrence O’Donnell’s show on MSNBC this week. He thought that the children would be indicted and (like Cockburn) that it would happen on Friday.

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/03/report-barr-gave-mueller-permission-to-indict-trumps-three-adult-children-and-jared-kushner/

    Like

    • concerned3 says:

      Sorry, wrong location for this article.

      Like

      • Dutchman says:

        Concerned3;
        That may be, but is related. We have seen, time after time ‘leaks’from unnamed sources, each seeming to be “the beginning of the end of Trump administration”, and each have turned out to have a similar provinonce, and each have turned out to be utter B.S.

        I put this in that category. From all I have read, Barr ain’t STUPID. Indicting, or even reccomending indicting PDJT’s children would be STUPID, especially if your purpose is to try to clean up this mess. Talk about gasoline on a fire!

        Liked by 3 people

        • concerned3 says:

          Yes, I agree – Threating to endanger the children of the most powerful man in the world,
          Is not a good idea.

          Like

        • CountryClassVulgarian says:

          I’ve only been following this from its inception so I don’t know nuffin nor nuffin. Could someone, anyone, please tell me what crimes the President’s children and Jared Kushner committed? I realize there is a great deal of hatred for Ivanka and Jared out there even among supporters of the President, but not liking people in now an excuse to throw them in jail?

          Like

      • I read an article today that a new book, by HuffPost editor Vicky Ward, claims that POTUS had asked Kelly, when Kelly was Chief of Staff, to “get rid” of Ivanka and Jared.
        I doubt this is true, and the WH has rebutted the idea; but if this leak is accurate, the story might be early defense against any recommended indictments.

        https://dailycaller.com/2019/03/12/book-trump-john-kelly-fire-ivanka-jared-kushner/

        Like

    • Pyrthroes says:

      Mueller, Weissmann et al. are viciously corrupt partisan hacks, bleating “Russian collusion” to cover their own trail. As time wears on towards Super Tuesday 2020, Trump’s legal team will come to resemble his economic-leverage negotiators.

      However Nadler, Schiff, and their Occlusia-type weirds dribble out PR releases, Trump possesses rafts of truly damning material he can declassify at any moment. Who knows what horrors lurk… if anti-Semitism is a Rat problem now, just wait ’til Courts release Jeremy Epstein evidence detailing Wild Willy, MzBill and other odoriferous figures’ paedophiliac excursions unto Orgy Island while Trump plays Gangrenous’ Rosatom arias as as orchestral suite.

      At last count, most recently just weeks ago, the Clinton Mafia’s known role of Inconvenient Offings totaled 43. Who’s next for Neverland, Comrade?

      Liked by 1 person

      • concerned3 says:

        If President Trump does not retaliate, then he will be unique for a CEO, especially one with the Power of the presidency. It would be better for Mueller and Weissmann to lock themselves up.

        “After Trump’s victory, the British MI6 and GCHQ (the British equivalent of the NSA) found themselves in an unusually sensitive situation. On the one hand, the GRU (as well as the KGB) has always been their traditional adversary. On the other hand, in 2016, MI6, as well as the CIA and FBI, found themselves on the same anti-Trump side of the barricades while trying to influence the presidential elections in the United States.”

        https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/03/the_trump_dossier_and_the_poisoning_of_sergei_skripal.html

        Like

        • V says:

          concerned3 at March 12, 2019 at 7:56 pm, thanks for the link to this new article re Skripal.
          As I’ve been saying for a while:
          RUSSIA HAD NO MOTIVE TO KILL SKRIPAL

          “What is missing in the Skripal poisoning case is the motive. If one looks at what happened superficially, there was basically no need for the intelligence services of Russia to kill Skripal. ”

          BUT THEN THE ARTICLE MAKES FALSE ASSUMPTIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

          Various paragraphs including this:

          “In other words, the Skripal poisoning was a cover-up operation of the Kremlin, the purpose of which was to send the “ObamaGate” investigation in a false direction. ”
          ..,

          “Mueller charged Russian programmers on the Friday evening, February 16, [2018] as it became customary for his team to do. It was already Saturday night in Moscow. Most likely, the decision to kill Skripal was made on Monday, February 19. An incredibly short time was allocated for the operation — just two weeks. There was no time for rigorous preparation. Exactly two weeks later, on March 4, 2018, Skripal was poisoned.”

          THE AUTHOR IS DELIBERATELY OMITTING FACTS RE FUSION GPS SETUP OF TRUMP TOWER MEETING:

          “The GRU’s attempt to sell dirt on Hillary Clinton at Trump’s campaign headquarters failed (recall the Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya, who played a role in the attempt), but another attempt was successful. It was this operation of the GRU that Skripal’s murder was supposed to cover up.”

          _________

          Here is better info on Skripal

          https://spectator.org/big-dots-do-they-connect/

          Re Skripal: “,,,And he was apparently prepared to, if you like, to fold under pressure and admit that he had done that, and admit that what he had written about Trump in that dossier was pure fiction, written simply to provide his client with —””

          “…he had fabricated “material” that went into the Steele dossier; and he was prepared to say so.”

          AND SEE comments after “red meat” – it may very well be a US/UK deepstate op to silence Skripal
          http://archive.is/1BhIE

          Like

          • V says:

            Skripal is a has-been to Russia, he defected many years ago, was imprisoned in Russia, was then traded to the West, lived in UK and occasionally made up stories for UK deepstate. If the Russians had any plans for Skripal, it would have been to keep him alive and have him admit his participation in the anti-Trump Steele Dossier.

            But the author of the AmericanThinker article, if he is trying to cover up, has unwittingly opened a new can of worms. What was in that 2-16-18 Mueller indictment of the Internet Research Agency – 13 Russians and companies including one company that didn’t even exist at the time of the alleged wrongdoing – that Deepstate had to silence Skripal?

            Like

            • V says:

              Something fishy about Mueller’s 2-16-18 indictment of the “Internet Research Agency” (IRA), 13 Russians and Concord

              https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/01/mueller-attorneys-caught-withholding-information-in-court-when-will-the-judge-realize-the-mueller-special-counsel-is-criminal-gang/

              “Mueller Attorneys Caught Withholding Information in Court – When Will the Judge Realize the Mueller Special Counsel is Criminal Gang?”

              … “Lawyers defending one of three Russian companies indicted with the 13 Russians, Concord Management, showed up for court. Mueller’s team was caught off guard and never expected this. They immediately asked the judge for more time but the judge denied their pleas noting that they were the ones who indicted the Russian company in the first place.

              As the case proceeded, the Concord attorneys noted that another of the three companies indicted by Mueller was not in existence at the time of Mueller’s indictment. They called this a case of Mueller indicting the proverbial ‘ham sandwich’.

              At a subsequent court appearance, the attorneys representing Concord stated that the corrupt Mueller team’s allegations of 13 Russian individuals impacting the 2016 election were “made up” nonsense. The individuals were not even real. The Mueller team had tried to align these individuals with Concord Management.

              ——

              Did Skripal threaten to expose the truth? Does he know something about the “Internet Research Agency”? Is it a UK intel front based in Russia? Was the idea born above a fish and chips shop? MI6 operative, ha ha, let’s call it the IRA.

              Like

          • Bella says:

            I spotted one item in the American Thinker article which I think is incorrect, or at least is not consistent with Bruce Ohr’s testimony: “… Steele also distributed several copies of the fake dossier from the GRU free of charge — to the high-ranking DOJ official Bruce Ohr …” Ohr said that Steele did not give him the dossier. He said that Glenn Simpson gave him a thumb drive which Ohr believed contained the dossier. Ohr stated that Steele did not give him any documents at their meetings, only verbal information.

            Like

      • The statement: “Trump possesses rafts of truly damning material he can declassify at any moment.” has no meaning if those statement are not used as EVIDENCE in a court of law. Just mho.

        Like

      • Joemama says:

        You know, I’m really in the mood to hear a few “Gangrenous’ Rosatom arias”!

        Hah!

        Like

    • Zorro says:

      Nice Lawfare.

      Like

    • MB says:

      Mueller doesn’t need to recommend prosecutions, he has a Grand Jury impaneled. If he wanted a fist full of indictments to append to his report, he could have them.

      Like

    • bayoukiki says:

      I saw that and I don’t believe it

      Like

  18. sarasotosfan says:

    There is a very interesting give and take between Gowdy and Page concerning the interviews conducted at the outset of the commencement of Crossfire Hurricane. It begins on p 39.

    Gowdy is asking Page how many interview(s) had you conducted between 7/31/16 and 8/15/16 and were they inside or outside the U.S. It appears she could not address where interview(s) were conducted and the actual number of interview(s) is redacted.

    And a curious thing happens:

    Page: I totally agree. But by this point, at, you know, the 15th [of August], there– it is at the — literally the very beginning. So there is, in fact, a paucity of evidence because we are just starting down the path to figure out whether the predicationis true or not true, and who might ultimately be somebody who, if true, would have been in a position to receive the information.
    And so my only, sort of based on counsel’s advice, hesitation to answer the “where was it” question is that the answer would call for– the answer would — has the potential to reveal a substantive investigative equity.

    Gowdy: Which I don’t want to do. And I appreciate the fact that if you’re talking about one witness, some could consider that to be a paucity of evidence on the 15th, which necessarily means there would be a paucity of evidence also on August 9th.

    Background: Meanwhile, James Clapper was expected to begin giving intelligence briefings to Clinton (who just escaped the email gross negligence in handling of classified information by an individual with the highest security clearance available) and candidate Trump beginning on or about August 1, 2016: https://www.businessinsider.com/ap-intel-briefings-for-clinton-trump-could-begin-this-week-2016-8

    Emphasis mine
    Emphasis mine
    [ my addition]

    Liked by 2 people

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      Gowdy refers to that paucity of evidence as coming from one witness-a Confidential Human Source (CHS) and clearly that interview was out of the country.

      It doesn’t appear to be Steele, Misfud or Downer who are all later mentioned by name in questioning by Jim Jordan.

      Liked by 1 person

  19. GSparrow says:

    Imagine if even half of the GOP Republicans had Collins’ courage, boldness and determination. Nunes, the Freedom Caucus and a few more certainly do, but most are likely appalled at these “disrespectful” releases.

    I wonder how many Republicans are hiding behind their desks or preparing a speech to distance themselves from this rogue Republican. More Senators will now probably vote against the EO to demonstrate that they are still respectable and well trained members.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Dutchman says:

      Or, Perhaps Collins is one of the few Representatives in the House with NO Skeletons in his closet; he can’t be silenced with ethics violations?

      This WOULD explain “why HIM?”

      MAYBE the parties keep one member around (Jeff Sessions, in the past?) for just this reason?

      Liked by 1 person

    • Amy2 says:

      I think they are sitting back to see what kind of response Collins gets from the public. I tried to email him but am not in his district. I went to his Facebook page, thanked him and said, “keep ’em coming!”

      Liked by 1 person

  20. Mike says:

    After reading both the Page and Ohr transcripts, the contradictions between them are many and serious. One such example is when Page said that the FBI did not receive the Steele dossier until September 2016 while Ohr indicates it was much earlier. I would also note the revelation that Page had worked for Ohr for five years.

    Liked by 1 person

    • sarasotosfan says:

      Page said that was when she became aware of its existence. She surely was not speaking for the entire FBI.

      Like

      • Mike says:

        Au contraire. See page 96 of the second day of her testimony. She is speaking for the FBI. Do you believe she was not aware of the Ohr delivery to McCabe at the end of July? Page was a major player in the attempted coup. She lies repeatedly in her testimony.

        Liked by 2 people

        • sarasotosfan says:

          Will stand corrected if that is so, but I have not read day two and Page did not actually see the dossier at that time from her day 1 testimony. See p 126 – 127.

          P126 “I think we got them on the team in mid– mid to late September. So –”

          Jordan: That’s the first time you read them?

          Page: Yes.

          Like

          • Mike says:

            Ohr testified that Page was in McCabe’s office when he dropped off parts of the dossier on July 30, 2016. Page is lying.

            Liked by 2 people

            • BTY says:

              No. Bruce Ohr states in his testimony that he did NOT receive any documents from Christopher Steele during their July 30th meeting. He only received verbal information, which is what he delivered to McCabe and Page in his meeting with them in early August. Go read Ohr’s testimony.

              Like

            • sarasotosfan says:

              I read Ohr’s transcript. You need to tell me where he said that in his testimony because I definitely did not read that anywhere.

              Like

              • BTY says:

                Read Bruce Ohr’s testimony starting near end of page 169 and continuing to page 170. (You can go read this yourself. It’s not hard to search the document and find these statements.)

                Mr. Jordan. Okay. When you meet on July 30, was your — refresh my memory, we may have went over this — was your wife at that meeting as well?
                Mr. Ohr. Yes, she was.
                Mr. Jordan. She was at that meeting. And did Mr. Steele know that your wife was working for Fusion?
                Mr. Ohr. I’m not sure. Probably, but I don’t recall right now.
                Mr. Jordan. And he gives you this information. What did he give you, actually? Did you just talk?
                Mr. Ohr. We just talked.
                Mr. Jordan. So no documents were exchanged there, no memory stick, nothing, no substantive other than just a conversation?
                Mr. Ohr. That is correct.

                Then see page 180.
                Mr. Jordan. How about when you met with Mr. McCabe and Ms. Page between these two meetings, did you give them notes that you had taken? Was there anything in writing you gave to Andy McCabe and Lisa Page?
                Mr. Ohr. I don’t believe so, no.

                Then see page 189.
                Mr. Ohr. Oh, you mean August. Yeah, I’m saying August. I’m getting mixed up here.
                Then in the fall sometime, it could have been September, but I don’t recall precisely, I met with Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, and the three people I previously mentioned from the criminal division. I don’t believe I gave them any documents at that time either.

                Like

  21. sarasotosfan says:

    Page’s opinion on why Hillary Clinton was not charged with gross negligence in the handling of classified materials, p 149:

    “It is my belief that the Justice Department did not believe that gross negligence was an available statute because they regarded it as unconstitutionally vague.”

    WOW

    Liked by 3 people

    • jnr2d2 says:

      You mean since it WAS used in many prior prosecutions!!!!!

      Liked by 3 people

      • sarasotosfan says:

        I believe Page was stating it had not been used previously. Prior cases may have cited a different statute, but in any event on day one no one pressed her on other comparable situations.

        I did find it funny that they would believe it as unconstitutionally vague while not long thereafter threaten the President-elects cabinet picks with the Logan Act.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      Page also seems to say that they would never be able to get Hillary Clinton to admit her actions were intentional because she’s too smart and her lawyers are too good.

      IOW: Hillary is just too good at being Crooked.

      Like

  22. sarasotosfan says:

    p 150, the minority asking questions:

    Q, re a Lisa Page text of “Yeah, it’s a real profile in courage since she knows no charges will be brought.”: Were you expressing the fact that Loretta Lynch had some kind of knowledge of the draft that Jim Comey was coming up with?[ Lynch had the “tarmac meeting on June 27, 2016 and on July 1, 2016 announced she would accept the recommendation of the FBI and career prosecutors. Anyone know who those career prosecutors were?]

    A: No. No. No. This is not a reflection of the draft at all. This is, as I described, I think, with the majority earlier, this is a reflection of my presumption that at this late stage of the investigation [begun in July 2015 with drafts beginning in March 2016] where everybody on both sides knows that there are few, if any, investigative steps to take [like interviewing fact witnesses separately or empaneling a grand jury] that surely the Attorney General knows that there is going to be a recommendation for no prosecution in this matter.

    Liked by 1 person

    • spoogels says:

      Please Hillary KNEW she had done illegal stuff
      Remember her comment after I think the Matt Lauer show:

      “If that bastard wins we are all going to hang from nooses”

      And don’t tell me she didn’t get her revenge on Lauer re the #MeToo crap since all those “I’m with her women” hang together and gossip is rife; I truly believe she had a role in bringing Lauer down-not that he didn-t deserve it.
      But he was the ONLY lefty TV host to go in hard questioning her when he interviewed her.

      Like

  23. sarasotosfan says:

    Page’s spin on the “insurance policy” made no sense to me. It was her view that Trump was unlikely to win and thus, the urgency of the Russia investigation was secondary based on their collective belief that Trump was not going to win. They thought he would not have access to the intelligence in that event.

    However, as I pointed out earlier, Trump and Clinton were both receiving intelligence briefings from James Clapper’s office. Harry Reid actually suggested Clapper give Trump fake briefings. And I would not be shocked if Clapper did in fact falsely brief the Trump campaign as part of the FBI effort to uncover their alleged Russian collusion, but we have yet to seen whether or not the FBI tried this avenue of attack.

    If they didn’t the incompetence of the FBI is complete. And if they did they have buried their efforts thus far.

    Liked by 3 people

  24. Charlotte Powell Brooks says:

    My memory no longer serves me as it used to. Do any of the unrelated leaks (I think there was 4, maybe six) that we all wondered who was leaking them and why have a link? My searching has lead me nowhere and I need to do some studying. Just a hunch.

    Like

  25. Rainy says:

    Sort of…kind of…like, you know…sort of sort of sort of.

    Like

  26. Linnéa says:

    Ms Page: “So, upon the opening of the crossfire hurricane investigation… we were trying to find an answer to the question, right, which is, is there someone associated with the campaign who is working with the Russians in order to obtain damaging information about Hillary Clinton.”

    I agree with Ms Page. It’s pretty serious if someone associated with either campaign actually paid someone to seek out scurrilous Russians “kompromat” type damaging information on the opposing candidate. Oh wait.
    LOL

    Liked by 3 people

  27. I really don’t care if HRC does not get arrested and charged with a crime as long as every single son-of-a-bitch in the FBI and DOJ that broke any law gets arrested, tried, and if convicted gets incarcerated for the maximum allowable time. That will start putting faith back in the government and insure PDJT’s re-election.

    Liked by 2 people

  28. Nowut Ameen says:

    I read this as the FBI and DOJ were deathly afraid of Hillary Clinton’s vengeance should they properly investigate and prosecute yet fail to convict. So, they threw out the rules and did everything they could to accommodate her and simultaneously cooperate with her campaign to make sure Trump lost. When Trump won they redoubled their efforts to cripple Trump out of fear that they would be either prosecuted by Trump for their blatant corruption or again face Hillary’s wrath should they fail to remove Trump and later see Clinton or a close ally become President post Trump.

    Everything points back to Hillary Clinton.

    Liked by 2 people

  29. sarasotosfan says:

    P 85
    Page; As we’ve already discussed, I think with the majority, we have and still have information which would have been damaging, particularly if the purpose was to insinuate. You don’t have to have an actual– as is well the case, you don’t have to have an actual fact, you have to have an insinuation. You have to have something suggestive.
    So you don’t have to prove anything if what you’re trying to do is undermine. And we took absolutely no step to do so.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Cliff Richards says:

    The five year clock is ticking and has been. Good to get the information out before 2020.

    Like

  31. Genie says:

    On January 23, 2017, Page texted: “I can feel my heart beating harder, I’m so stressed about all the ways this has the potential to go fully off the rails.” CTH previously speculated this was about the Flynn set-up. Is there a searchable copy of her testimony so one can see if the committee drilled down further on this text? The copies I’ve seen are not compatible with my searching.

    Like

    • sarasotosfan says:

      Yes, it had to do with the bugging of Flynn’s phone call to Kislyak. The speculation is McCabe leaked the existence of the phone call to a reporter. No one has asked who leaked the existence of this classified communication to the press and certainly Page had to be concerned that McCabe would be caught disclosing it. That was how it could go wrong and should have gone wrong.

      Like

  32. Fools Gold says:

    Lisa Page: They discussed charging Hillary as Leaker of classified material but they came up “with the right words to sell to her beloved Dims and Oboma approved”.

    Do I need to say more?

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Perot Conservative says:

    I will call his office tomorrow to thank him!!

    WASHINGTON OFFICE
    1504 Longworth House Office Building
    Washington, DC 20515
    Phone: (202) 225 9893

    GAINESVILLE OFFICE
    210 Washington St NW, Suite 202
    Gainesville, GA 30501
    Phone: (770) 297 3388
    Fax: (770) 297 3390

    Like

  34. Dim Osmab says:

    When Lisa Page is asked why they didn’t give defensive brief to Trump, she said they had no evidence that somebody did something wrong ))) (part 2 page 88)

    So they have enough evidence to open investigation, but not enough to warn Trump about danger in his campain

    Like

  35. askandgettruth says:

    boy this is getting good, the rats on the sinking ship of fools are starting to eat their last supper. you know the truth is close at hand when the singing begins. well i have my headphones on and can’t wait till someone will alot of brass starts singing the clinton crime family blues. this will be our reward for enduring the lies and treason. still have to top Mc cain’s singing to be #1 on the justice charts.

    Like

  36. beachbum31 says:

    WAPO to the rescue! Lisa Page – American hero! funny you can almost read between the lines they didn’t even want to put a toe on this slippery slope.
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/in-newly-released-transcript-former-fbi-lawyer-fires-back-on-charges-that-anti-trump-bias-affected-trump-and-clinton-probes/ar-BBUHfnR?ocid=spartandhp

    Like

  37. pucecatt says:

    🤔

    Like

  38. A blast from the past but still relevant today. I was thinking Rep Collins was being a hero and all when I discovered it is actually Rep. Nunes who is way ahead of the game. This is why we’re seeing the strategic release of these transcripts now.
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/interview-with-fbis-gaeta-core-to-russiagate-among-53-transcripts-slated-for-release_2674522.html

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s