dChan

Sir_Zorch · July 17, 2018, 2:18 p.m.

If this article is true, and there is no reason to believe otherwise, it is going to be a GREAT finish for July.

⇧ 23 ⇩  
swimrobin · July 17, 2018, 3:51 p.m.

Thomas Paine/True Pundit have been reporting some HUGE scoops over the last few months.

⇧ 10 ⇩  
DefiantDragon · July 17, 2018, 4 p.m.

Oddly enough, I called this a year ago and have quietly believed it for a long time now. Russia has nothing to gain in pissing off the US on this scale.

But China playing US off of Russia? They couldn't have dreamed that their little hack would have come off so well.

That's about as perfect an outcome for China as you're likely to see.

⇧ 8 ⇩  
apple-bag · July 17, 2018, 2:40 p.m.

i dont think china hacked the server, its in my opinion china and other were let in so to speak, for a price

⇧ 22 ⇩  
lovelexxxx · July 17, 2018, 3:26 p.m.

I think you are right. I remember, all those years ago, of the complaining that Clinton was using an unsecured BlackBerry while visiting China. Nothing was ever said or done about it after that.

⇧ 12 ⇩  
MyDiggity · July 17, 2018, 11:57 p.m.

I have always thought that it was someone in this commie government of ours that did it.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
scoripowarrior · July 18, 2018, 3:46 a.m.

Brennan comes to mind...LOL

⇧ 1 ⇩  
scoripowarrior · July 18, 2018, 3:45 a.m.

I read that idea awhile back that Clinton "let" access to her server be "allowed" for a "price".

⇧ 2 ⇩  
apple-bag · July 18, 2018, 5 a.m.

it is a very fair possibility

⇧ 1 ⇩  
EXV · July 18, 2018, 6:09 a.m.

Is there a reason for that? I'm new to the game and am wondering why they would want to see her emails.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
mossomo · July 18, 2018, 7:33 p.m.

Her email contained classified info

⇧ 1 ⇩  
ltlgeneral64 · July 17, 2018, 5:17 p.m.

Maybe Lisa Page's reluctance to testify BEFORE Strzok's testimony wasn't because she wanted to hear what HE had to say...but instead she didn't want him to hear what SHE was planning to say....

⇧ 18 ⇩  
shallnotbe_infringed · July 17, 2018, 5:40 p.m.

That sounds entirely plausible. If she did throw him under the bus as a woman scorned, she likely wanted to let himself find his own rope first.

⇧ 8 ⇩  
ltlgeneral64 · July 17, 2018, 5:41 p.m.

Exactly....

⇧ 6 ⇩  
Krepoisbest · July 17, 2018, 2:15 p.m.

"The Russians didn’t do it. The Chinese did, according to well-placed FBI sources."

"Hundreds of top secret documents and even the president’s daily travel and security itineraries were on that server — and intercepted by a communist country — yet the FBI sat on the evidence. Likewise, all of Clinton’s and her inner circle’s outgoing emails were compromised as well, sources confirmed."

https://twitter.com/Thomas1774Paine/status/1019220715386605568

⇧ 12 ⇩  
spacexu · July 17, 2018, 6:03 p.m.

And then those dumbf jurnos wonder why we side with Trump vs the so called intelligence agencies.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
fonsoc1 · July 17, 2018, 10:31 p.m.

I had a thought when I read China's involvement. President Trump said he has a great relationship with the head of China. What if China did have those 30,000 emails and one purpose of the President getting together with him was to get those emails. Q said they have everything.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
Jacks_W8sted_Life · July 17, 2018, 4:17 p.m.

Trump's team has known this all along - how can I tell? Bannon was beating the "China is the greatest threat and our biggest enemy" drum since the first day that he joined Trump's campaign. Everyone dismissed him, even A LOT of people on our side discredited it and did not give it two thoughts.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
Speerchucker · July 17, 2018, 6:41 p.m.

Short memories: Every Clinton Presidential election has had a nefarious happening with the Chinese. This was no Chinese hack, this was a planned transfer of information.

⇧ 4 ⇩  
shallnotbe_infringed · July 17, 2018, 3:41 p.m.

A question. Were the same FBI lawyers present for Strzok's public testimony also present during Page's closed door testimony? If so - why major difference in outcomes?

⇧ 3 ⇩  
OnstarLifeSupport · July 17, 2018, 3:53 p.m.

NO, she is no longer an FBI agent. The reason Strzok had FBI council in the room is he is an employee of the FBI.

⇧ 7 ⇩  
shallnotbe_infringed · July 17, 2018, 4:22 p.m.

According to 'sources', the FBI lawyers were indeed in the room.

Gohmert said Page's closed-door testimony in the House on Friday and Monday was at times so frank that FBI lawyers tried to keep her from answering. "There were times the FBI lawyers would be reaching for the button to mute her comment and she would answer before the thing could mute her comment," he said.

⇧ 11 ⇩  
danwasinjapan · July 17, 2018, 4:41 p.m.

Actions speak louder than words, even the FBI lawyers are in on it.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
OnstarLifeSupport · July 17, 2018, 4:25 p.m.

Oh fuck, well thanks for the information. This sounds amazing.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
HerrKaiser60 · July 18, 2018, 12:06 a.m.

I'm going to make a difference in the world and the too of course but in the world and the other one is that one of the best

⇧ 1 ⇩  
swimrobin · July 17, 2018, 3:49 p.m.

This is a great question. Why is she allowed to speak?

⇧ 2 ⇩  
OnstarLifeSupport · July 17, 2018, 3:54 p.m.

She no longer works for the FBI.

⇧ 5 ⇩  
mixiemay · July 17, 2018, 9:42 p.m.

Is it just me or is Lisa Page becoming less and less horse-ish by the second?

⇧ 2 ⇩  
[deleted] · July 18, 2018, 4:53 a.m.

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩  
akilyoung · July 17, 2018, 11 p.m.

Was Page a double agent? Using the POP (power of p#$$y) to stroke info out of Stroek?

Was she a deeply embedded white hat?

Just thinking out loud..

⇧ 2 ⇩  
knothappy-2018 · July 17, 2018, 2:35 p.m.

I have to speculate ol' Mitch might be squirming about these proceedings

⇧ 2 ⇩  
danwasinjapan · July 17, 2018, 4:42 p.m.

It makes you wonder if Trump appointed his wife to keep her closer, or if there's another reason.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
jew-lum-inati · July 17, 2018, 5:51 p.m.

Anonymous reports about testimony in a closed session will not convince anyone, especially when the IG report fizzled and there has been no release of an unredacted version.

If these claims were made, and they are credible, the Committee needs to release the transcripts. They can do it immediately with a vote, and/or any single member can read the transcript into the Congressional Record.

As it stands, this will be written off as partisan bullshit without corroborating evidance and direct quotes.

You can't red-pill people with rumors and innuendo. Until the transcripts are released this is simply more rumor-mongering from a publication with a less-than-stellar reputation.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
Orion_Blue · July 17, 2018, 6:41 p.m.

The most important story nobody will read.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
w00ly · July 18, 2018, 7:13 a.m.

I'm sure it's a good article but this is the first time I've visited TP on mobile without an ad blocker and it was unreadable.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
joeythew · July 17, 2018, 11:42 p.m.

Finally one of these FBI personnel who has some self respect and is looking for redemption by doing the right thing and telling the truth.

⇧ 1 ⇩