Last Friday, Lisa Page testified in closed session before the House Judiciary and Oversight committees. That’s the same body that publicly grilled Peter Strzok, with whom Page exchanged venomous texts about Donald Trump.
By all accounts, Page was a cooperative witness. Rep. Mark Meadows, head of the House Freedom Caucus, called Page “credible.” “There is new information,” he said, “and that information is credible.” Rep. Louis Gohmert, also of the Freedom Caucus agreed that Page “has given us more insights to who was involved in what.”
FBI lawyers instructed Strzok not to answer a goodly number of questions posed by Republican committee members. This tactic was less successful with Page. According to Gohmert, “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.”
I love it.
According to Rep. John Ratcliff, Page testified that the text messages she exchanged with Strzok mean exactly what they say. Words tend to do that, so Page’s testimony isn’t earth-shattering. However, it differs from that of Strzok who tried desperately to spin some of his writings in ways that defy common sense.
Page can’t testify with 100 percent certainty about what Strzok meant by what he texted. But they were lovers who texted constantly, so she should know. Her interpretation of his texts, to the extent she offered it in her testimony, would be far more credible than Strzok’s contorted, self-serving gloss.
Given Page’s cooperation, it seems clear that she will not have to testify in public session. The public release of the transcript of her closed-door testimony is being negotiated. It should make fascinating reading.