News Ticker >
[ September 20, 2019 ]

Stronger on an open thread

[ September 20, 2019 ]

Facebook Created Over 100 Pro-ISIS Pages, Meantime Censoring Conservatives

[ September 20, 2019 ]

France: The High Court condemns political commentator Eric Zemmour for telling the truth about Islamic...

[ September 20, 2019 ]

President Trump’s Approval Rating Surpasses Obama’s, Not Just on Rasmussen Reports

[ September 20, 2019 ]

Jihad-Rep Ilhan Omar Tells Congressional Black Caucus Crowd God ‘Expects’ Them To Vote a Certain...

[ September 20, 2019 ]

Afghanistan’s Taliban tells teachers, students to block presidential elections or risk death

[ September 20, 2019 ]

Alabama Muslim arrested in terrorism probe; said he would kill soldier for Islam

[ September 20, 2019 ]

Trump administration threatens to cut funding from university course for dishonest, pro-Islam discussion of Islam

[ September 20, 2019 ]

New Jersey Muslim Targeted UN, JFK Airport, New York Stock Exchange, Port Authority Bus Terminal,...

[ September 20, 2019 ]

NYC: ‘Defund Hate’ Week Protest Senators and MicroSoft

Lisa Page: FBI Still Lacked Evidence When Rod Rosenstein Appointed A Special Counsel in May 2017


Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has some explaining to do. He appointed Robert Mueller as Special Counsel to investigate possible collusion between President Trump and Russia prior to the 2016 election. The problem with that? There was no evidence. Fox News’ Catherine Herridge has just broken a story which I can only describe as a game changer and I don’t use that term lightly.

Fox News has obtained a transcript of former FBI attorney Lisa Page’s testimony before Congress this summer. The FBI counterintelligence investigation had been opened at the end of July 2016, and Page said that as late as May 2017, the month that Rosenstein appointed Mueller, there was no evidence of collusion.

During the hearing, Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-TX) asked Page to explain a text message chain between she and Strzok from May 2017; the two had been discussing the merits of joining Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team.

Specifically, Ratcliffe inquired about one of Strzok’s texts that we are all familiar with, at least in part.

Who gives a f*ck, one more A(ssistant) D(irector)…(versus) (a)n investigation leading to impeachment?…you and I both know the odds are nothing. If I thought it was likely I’d be there no question. I hesitate in part because of my gut sense and concern there’s no big there there.

“I think this represents that even as far as May 2017, we still couldn’t answer the question,” she said. Then, according to the transcript, Page stopped mid-answer.”… Sorry. Can I consult with counsel? I’m sorry. I need to consult with FBI counsel for a moment.”

When Ratcliffe asked her why Strzok pursued the case if he thought “the odds were nothing and that he had a concern that there was no big there there regarding any collusion…,” Page responded:

No, I don’t think so. I think it’s a reflection of us still not knowing…It still existed in the scope of possibility that there would be literally nothing, probably not nothing nothing, as we probably knew more than that by that point. But in the scheme of the possible outcomes, the most serious one obviously being crimes serious enough to warrant impeachment; but on the other scale that, you know, maybe an unwitting person was, in fact, involved in the release of information, but it didn’t ultimately touch any senior, you know, people in the administration or on the campaign. And so the text just sort of reflects that spectrum.

During the deposition, Page said she was not trying to be “cagey,” but that there were restrictions on what she could reveal. “I’m not supposed to talk about the sufficiency of evidence, so that’s why I am weighing my words carefully.

Page continued: “Investigations are fluid, right? And so at various times, leads are promising and leads fade away. And so I can’t — I can’t answer more his sentiment with respect to this particular text, but certainly at this point the case had been ongoing. We didn’t have an answer. That’s obvious. And I think we all sort of went back and forth about like what — what the answer was really going to be.”

During DOJ IG Michael Horowitz’ investigation on the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe, he asked Strzok about this text specifically. Strzok said: “My question (was) about whether or not this represented a large, coordinated conspiracy or not. And from that, as I looked at what would give me professional fulfillment, what I thought would be the best use of my skills and talents for the FBI and for the United States, whether to take, which path to take.”

When Fox News asked Ratcliffe for a comment, he said:

I cannot provide the specifics of a confidential interview. But I can say that Lisa Page left me with the impression, based on her own words, that the lead investigator of the Russian collusion case, Peter Strzok, had found no evidence of collusion after nearly a year.

I think that is the only conclusion one can draw from Page’s testimony as well as from everything else that’s been revealed so far. There was no legal reason either to open a counterintelligence investigation in July 2016 or to appoint a Special Counsel in May 2017. All of this was orchestrated for political reasons only. Thus, all the secrecy, the unwillingness to hand over documents. Too many secrets have been uncovered already for the rest of the story to remain concealed.

And all of the participants in this fraud, from Rod Rosenstein who knowingly appointed a special counsel when he knew there had been  no crime committed and Robert Mueller, who willingly and happily presided over this farce, appointing a team of anti-Trump thugs to dig until they found something, anything, to every last member of the mainstream media who perpetuated this fraud. The magnitude of the deception, the number of high level government officials involved, and their willingness to disregard the rule of law makes this the darkest period ever in American political history.



The Truth Must be Told

Your contribution supports independent journalism

Please take a moment to consider this. Now, more than ever, people are reading Geller Report for news they won't get anywhere else. But advertising revenues have all but disappeared. Google Adsense is the online advertising monopoly and they have banned us. Social media giants like Facebook and Twitter have blocked and shadow-banned our accounts. But we won't put up a paywall. Because never has the free world needed independent journalism more.

Everyone who reads our reporting knows the Geller Report covers the news the media won't. We cannot do our ground-breaking report without your support. We must continue to report on the global jihad and the left's war on freedom. Our readers’ contributions make that possible.

Geller Report's independent, investigative journalism takes a lot of time, money and hard work to produce. But we do it because we believe our work is critical in the fight for freedom and because it is your fight, too.

Please contribute to our ground-breaking work here.

Make a monthly commitment to support The Geller Report – choose the option that suits you best.

Contribute Monthly - Choose One

Have a tip we should know? Your anonymity is NEVER compromised. Email

Pin It on Pinterest