@shipwreckedcrew It’s just oh so convenient that it also means they didn’t have to explain to the FISC that Page had worked for CIA against the Russians, as FBI already knew since it had CIA’s memo about it since 8/17/16, even tho FBI’d claimed in 3 applications Page was a Russian agent.🙄 /1
@shipwreckedcrew I am not buying that bridge. And there are still several problems. One is that the question wasn’t really “was Page a “source” for you?” The question was “did Page work with you in any capacity esp 1 that would undercut that he’s a Russian agent?” The answer was clearly “Yes.”/2
@shipwreckedcrew Clinesmith’s claim that he “honestly” thought CIA meant Page wasn’t a source is beside the point. Although that’s exactly why he put it in quotations in his alteration. /3
@shipwreckedcrew And, It’s not enough to satisfy a plea. If he thought the email was substantively accurate, it can’t be a “materially false statement” as the statute requires. If that’s what he thinks, then he needs to go to trial. /4
