Powered by Topple

Lisa Page sets off avalanche after posting whopper under hashtag ‘2019 in 5 words’

(“Rachel Maddow” video screenshot)

Powered by Topple

If disgraced former FBI lawyer Lisa Page possesses one talent in life, it’s surely the ability to inspire masses of people to ratio her tweets.

Just take a look at her Twitter feed. Almost all of her tweets boast a negative ratio, meaning they contain more scathing replies than retweets. Sad!

The latest ratio began to form Saturday afternoon, when she blithely tweeted, “There was no insurance policy. #2019in5words.”

Fact-check: LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE!

See some of the scathing responses to her tweet below:

The story behind the tweet is complicated, so prepare yourself.

In virulently anti-Trump text messages exchanged during the FBI’s probe into 2016 presidential candidate President Donald Trump’s campaign, then-FBI attorney Page and then-FBI special agent Peter Strzok spoke of an “insurance” policy.

“I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy’s office — that there’s no way [Trump] gets elected — but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk,” Strzok wrote in an Aug. 15, 2016, text to Page. “It’s like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you’re 40.”

Because of the text’s wording, it’s long been theorized — though not yet confirmed without a shadow of a doubt — that the “insurance policy” was essentially a plot to interfere in the 2016 election by first attempting to prevent Trump’s election to office — and then, in case that failed, tying the Trump administration up in legal matters (i.e., Robert Mueller’s investigation).

While both Strzok and Page have denied this, they haven’t denied the existence of an insurance policy. Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee in July 2018, Page admitted that the “insurance policy” text referred to something real and tangible.

“Page was questioned at length about that text — and essentially confirmed this referred to the Russia investigation while explaining that officials were proceeding with caution, concerned about the implications of the case while not wanting to go at ‘total breakneck speed’ and risk burning sources as they presumed Trump wouldn’t be elected anyway,” Fox News reported when a transcript of the testimony was released last March.

But speaking with disgraced MSNBC conspiracy theorist Rachel Maddow earlier this month, she seemed to change her story a little bit.

“By ‘we,’ he’s talking about the collective we: like-minded, thoughtful, sensible people who were not going to vote this person into office,” she said of Strzok’s tweet. “You know, obviously, in retrospect, do I wish he hadn’t sent it? Yes. It’s been mutilated to death, and it’s been used to bludgeon an institution I love, and it’s meant that I’ve disappointed countless people.”

“But this is a snapshot in time carrying on a conversation that had happened earlier in the day that reflected a broad sense of, ‘He’s not going to be president.’ We, the democratic people of this country, are not going to let it happen.

However, it wasn’t either her job or Strzok’s job to choose America’s president. They were certainly allowed to vote in their private time like everybody else, but their job was to provide services to the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Yet instead of providing services, they wasted time texting each other about their shared hatred of would-be-President Trump and mentioning an “insurance policy.”

And so weighed against all this, it’s not hard to see why Page’s latest tweet has been ratioed just like the majority of all her tweets.

See more scathing replies below:

Vivek Saxena

Comments

Latest Articles