There are so many good reasons not to a) have an adulterous affair and b) have an adulterous affair with a colleague.
FBI agent Peter Strzok did both of these things with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, and like many in his position before him, has created a world of trouble for himself.
There’s one big difference between the pickle Strzok is in and the way things turn out for the majority of people who enter in to, and are caught in, extramarital trysts with co-workers: most people don’t have the eyes of the entire nation on him as his web of lies unravels. Nor do they usually find their affair to be at the center of the fallout from the most highly contested presidential election in US history.
Peter Strzok is having a very bad year. One that was made even worse this week after his ex-lover testified before Congress, who found her to be far more cooperative and informative than Strzok.
The Daily Wire has the story:
Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo that there were “significant differences” in Page’s testimony compared to the testimony given by Strzok and that she gave congressional investigators new information they did not previously have.
“In many cases, she admits that the text messages mean exactly what they say, as opposed to Agent Strzok, who thinks that we’ve all misinterpreted his own words on any text message that might be negative,” Ratcliff told reporters on Monday, according to ABC News.
Rep. Steve King (R-IA) agreed with Ratcliffe’s statement, saying, “She’s certainly more cooperative than Peter Strzok was and the pieces of information filled in some blanks along the way, but we’ve got a huge jigsaw puzzle to put together.”
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) told Fox News’ “FOX & Friends” that Page gave Congress “more insights to who was involved in what.”
When I questioned Lisa Page on Friday about the anti-Trump text messages that were sent between herself and Peter Strzok, there were significant differences in her testimony and Strzok’s as it relates to what she thought some of these text messages meant. pic.twitter.com/H73LfRFzUc
— John Ratcliffe (@RepRatcliffe) July 16, 2018
It appears that Strzok’s carefully crafted defense unraveled about as quickly as the lies he must have told his wife for well over a year–something Gohmert blasted him for during his testimony last week.
Why should Strzok have trusted Page to get his back when they had both engaged in their relationship–and their plot to prevent Trump from being elected–behind the backs of those who trusted them? Their affair alone indicates their lack of trustworthiness Page clearly feels no need to cover for Strzok anymore.
I have to say, as a firm believer in marital fidelity and conservative values, it’s pretty gratifying to see Strzok’s many forms of betrayal against those he had pledged loyalty to come back to bite him in the rear in such a dramatic way.
We can only hope this leads to the hammer of justice for Strzok and anyone else who sought to compromise our electoral process for personal political gain.
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.
‘Tolerant’ Liberal Pundit Uses Homophobic Slur to Blast Mike Pompeo
Inexcusably, as of this writing, MSNBC has made no official announcement about impending disciplinary action against Brzezinski.
BLOOD IN THE WATER: Nat’l Enquirer Chief FLIPS on Trump
The President's week has just gotten worse...somehow...even without the faintest whiff of Russian collusion.
Pentagon Backs Up POTUS on Border Wall Possibilities
The left has egg on their face again, having doubted the President's plans for the umpteenth time.
SENTENCED: Despite All His Tapes, Cohen’s Still Just a Rat in a Cage
Given Cohen's keen ability to take the bait, one wouldn't be surprised to see him frantically sniffing the air in...
Liberal Left Jumps The Shark, Calls for LITERAL SEGREGATION on Campus
Is a rose by any other name not a rose? Is segregation by any other name not simply segregation?