Louie Gohmert Discussing Lisa Page Testimony: “The guilty dogs are barking pretty loud” – IOTW Report

Louie Gohmert Discussing Lisa Page Testimony: “The guilty dogs are barking pretty loud”

CTH: Representative Louie Gohmert appeared on Fox News to discuss the second day of closed-door testimony delivered by former DOJ/FBI Lawyer Lisa Page. Mrs. Page was the special counsel assigned to former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe. Lisa Page resigned from the DOJ on May 4th of this year.

One of the more interesting aspects of Lisa Page congressional appearances is the current FBI sending lawyers to control her testimony. Mrs. Page is not an employee of the DOJ or FBI, yet current officials consider her remarks a risk. We know from the insufferable press conference given by current FBI Director Christopher Wray (following the IG Report on the Clinton investigation), that current FBI officials are working to protect the former FBI leadership. As a consequence the institution of the FBI is corrupt, not just the officials.

watch

10 Comments on Louie Gohmert Discussing Lisa Page Testimony: “The guilty dogs are barking pretty loud”

  1. PDJT should assign secret service agents to protect her.
    First, it may actually be needed.

    Secondly, the reaction from the left, the MSM, the NeverTrumpers , etc. would be great entertainment.
    Trump could send some tweets justifying the need for it that would drive them insane, resulting in a reaction similar to whacking a large hornets nest with a stick.

    11
  2. I’m fed up with Congress Critters using all this crap to generate Fox News soundbites for their reelection campaign ads. If probable cause of law violations exist, PROSECUTE THEM! All the misdeeds by the Clintons over the years and they are still walking (OK, slip-sliding) around free and living high off our money. Is there no one who will file charges?

    12
  3. I don’t know if dcwhispers is creditable or not. Sometimes their post seem more gossip than fact. Some of their posts do appear to be on the level. But I don’t read them very often. I don’t know if they have a track record of being accurate or of being reports that are wishful thinking for the readers they want to attract.

    At first look it seems a bit of dirt to good to be true supporting evidence of Strzok’s corruption. Everything on the internet is not true. I think it is wise to be skeptical of things that conveniently support my views. It’s like reading a story saying Lucy really held the football and Charlie Brown kicked a field goal. Really?

    If it is true it is pretty damming information about the deep level of Strzok’s corruption.

    But how would a guy with that background become approved to be an FBI agent? Surely that type of information would have been discovered in his background checks. I’d be pleased to see it confirmed by more reports that it is an accurate story, and become impossible to hide from the public.

Comments are closed.