Lisa Page’s Interview Contains Two Big Lies
Giving her first public interview interview, Lisa Page sat down with the Daily Beast’s Molly Jong Fast, one of Twitter’s most active (alleged) trust fund babies. Molly has taken a break from using her platform as an alleged journalist to mock conservative brain cancer victims to move onto more pressing issues, like helping Page with damage control.
Among the key things we learn in the Daily Beast interview are the following:
Page is speaking up because Donald Trump made fun of her: I asked her why she was willing to talk now. “Honestly, his demeaning fake orgasm was really the straw that broke the camel’s back,” she says. The president called out her name as he acted out an orgasm in front of thousands of people at a Minneapolis rally on Oct. 11. “I had stayed quiet for years hoping it would fade away, but instead it got worse,” Lisa says. “It had been so hard not to defend myself, to let people who hate me control the narrative. I decided to take my power back.”
She denies any wrongdoing: “…it’s also very intimidating because he’s still the president of the United States. And when the president accuses you of treason by name, despite the fact that I know there’s no fathomable way that I have committed any crime at all, let alone treason, he’s still somebody in a position to actually do something about that. To try to further destroy my life. It never goes away or stops, even when he’s not publicly attacking me.”
She claimed to associate with the following: “[my role]…gives me a lot of exposure to senior FBI executives, as well as leaders through the IC, DOJ, and White House.”
She repeats the myth that Papadopoulos started the Russia investigation against the Trump campaign: “There are two things that happen in the late summer of 2016,” Page says. “The first, of course, is that the FBI gets the predication [courtesy of loose-lipped George Papadopoulos], which starts the Russian investigation. We learn about the possibility that there’s someone on the Trump campaign coordinating with the Russian government in the release of emails, which will damage the Clinton campaign.”
She falsely denies any spying on the Trump campaign, which a number of FISA warrants beg to differ with: “There are two things that happen in the late summer of 2016,” Page says. “The first, of course, is that the FBI gets the predication [courtesy of loose-lipped George Papadopoulos], which starts the Russian investigation. We learn about the possibility that there’s someone on the Trump campaign coordinating with the Russian government in the release of emails, which will damage the Clinton campaign.”
She says she was blind-sighted by being put under investigation: “At the end of July in 2017, I am informed by the DOJ Inspector General’s Office that I’m under investigation for political text messages and honestly, I have no idea what they’re talking about,” she told me. “I have no recollection. And initially they’re very coy about it. They don’t tell me much about it. I don’t have the first clue what they’re talking about. What I do know is that my text messages will reveal that I had previously had an affair…” Jong Fast adds that Page “doesn’t think for a minute that her texts with Peter Strzok are too political.”
She doesn’t believe she did anything wrong: She is convinced that she’s followed the rules. She is, after all, a lawyer and knows that she is a restricted employee under the Hatch Act and can’t engage in partisan political activity. Molly’s logic here is hysterical, amounting to “Lisa Page wouldn’t have done anything wrong because she knows that laws exist.” Page concurs, that ” I know I’m a federal employee, but I retain my First Amendment rights. So I’m really not all that worried about it.”
Though I can’t fault either of them. Indeed I wouldn’t be all too worried about legal repercussions if I were Lisa Page either, but only because there never seems to be any consequences in politics for her side.