by Richard Enos
Transcripts representing 370 pages worth of
testimony from former FBI Lawyer Lisa Page's
closed-door meeting with Congress in July 2018 were
finally released to the public on Tuesday.
Are we seeing a pattern in the slow but orderly
release of political information that is ultimately
in service to our awakening?
Those of us who are truth-seekers and investigators
of information that is being hidden from us would
probably like nothing better than to have all
classified and secret information revealed at once.
It is a source of anger and frustration that so much
is hidden, and other people continue to hold power
over when such information is disclosed.
Even with the Assange Wikileaks dumps, the
information is shared piecemeal, and certain
subjects are still hidden from us.
But let's think about it
for a moment.
If all the information
were released all at once, how would we process it? For most of us,
would it not simply become a stack of intimidating data that we
wouldn't have the time to get to and eventually ignore?
Instead of ruing this lack of control over the situation, we would
do well to start noticing patterns in the way information is
released to the public.
It seems that when
certain information is revealed is as important as what is revealed.
This is not to say that
these processes always have humanity's best interests at heart, but
the timing often seems to pertain to the public's ability as a whole
to take in new information and slowly shift their understanding and
awareness of what is going on underneath the veneer of mainstream
Take the example of former FBI Lawyer
testimony to Congress in July 2018, where she spoke of matters such
as the FBI investigations into
Hillary Clinton's private server
370 pages worth of testimony were finally released to the public on
Tuesday by Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA).
This means members of
Congress have known about this information for 8 months already, and
have decided that now the public can know about it as well.
The biggest revelation that seems to be afforded by this release of
information is that
Loretta Lynch and the Department of Justice
actually ordered the FBI not to prosecute Hillary Clinton for
storing classified information on an unsecured server.
The conversation from the
transcript between Page and Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) is
included in his tweet below:
In the transcript, Ratcliffe's full sentence, interrupted by Page's
"You're not going to
charge gross negligence because we're the prosecutors and we're
telling you we're not going to bring a case based on that."
All in all, this
indicates that Loretta Lynch made the decision to tell the FBI not
to bring an indictment against Hillary Clinton.
Fox news article elaborates on the details of Loretta Lynch's
Page also testified
that the DOJ and FBI had "multiple conversations… about charging
gross negligence," and the DOJ decided that the term was
"constitutionally vague" and "had either never been done or had
only been done once like 99 years ago," and so "they did not
feel they could sustain a charge."
A major consequence of
this, presumably, was FBI Director James Comey's famous
about-face on the matter:
accused the former secretary of state of being "grossly
negligent" in handling classified information in a draft dated
May 2, 2016, but that
was modified to claim that Clinton had
merely been "extremely careless" in a draft dated June 10, 2016.
Comey also said that,
"although there is
evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the
handling of classified information, our judgment is that no
reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case."
In and of itself, this information might not have lead to anything
However, when you
compound it with the 'infamous tarmac meeting' in 2016 between
Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, a disturbing narrative begins to
They have both maintained
the meeting was unplanned, their planes just happened to end up next
to one another on the tarmac, and they engaged in a short
conversation that was lighthearted and personal.
According to this Blaze
Both Clinton and
Lynch denied discussing nefarious subjects, such as the DOJ's
Clinton investigation, known as "Midyear," or any other matters
involving the Clintons' public life.
However, that same
article refutes these claims.
It cites DOJ Inspector
General Michael Horowitz's report on the FBI's Hillary Clinton email
investigation to prove that the meeting was intended and planned:
The OPA Supervisor
said that he later learned that former President Clinton's
Secret Service detail had contacted Lynch's FBI security detail
and let them know that the former President wanted to meet with
staff was supposed to receive notice of such requests, witnesses
told us that they were not informed of the request from former
Additional information in
the article also contradicts the notion that this meeting was not
'lighthearted and personal':
Finally, it was
Lynch's senior counselor who broke up the meeting when she
realized it would become extremely problematic if the media
learned Lynch had just met with the husband of a subject in a
The senior counselor
said she could not recall what she heard when she entered the
plane but said Lynch appeared "uncomfortable and wanted the
meeting to be done."
"Q" Weighs In
This "Q" Post (#2860) goes even further to suggest a commonly-held
theory that Bill Clinton offered Loretta Lynch a seat
on the Supreme Court if Lynch prevented an indictment against
Hillary from happening, and notes how the investigation was
dropped by James Comey soon after, all of which are also
captured in the meme below.
Feb 2019 – 1:47:17 AM
Original Trump's twitter
The Deal of a
[Tarmac] meeting not planned according to [LL] & [BC]?
Security reports indicate USSS (sec detail [BC] & FBI (sec
detail [LL]) planned for meeting?
SC/[LL] deal presented by BC?
What actions did [JC] take days after?
Less than a week after the tarmac meeting, [JC] announced
that the FBI would not recommend an indictment against [HRC]?
Returning to the news?
The timing of the release
of the Lisa Page testimony really starts to help us put the puzzle
pieces together in terms of understanding how and why Hillary
Clinton has still not been indicted for serious, documented crimes.
It will be interesting to
see when the next piece of the puzzle gets dropped into place.