Subscribe to Canada Free Press for FREE

FBI Corruption

VIDEO: Louis Gohmert asks Strzok how many times he looked into his wife’s eyes and lied to her

Dan Calabrese image

By —— Bio and Archives July 13, 2018

Comments | Print This | Subscribe | Email Us

Louis Gohmert asks Strzok how many times he looked into his wife’s eyes and lied to her too
There’s a lot going on here, and yet these two minutes encapsulate the flavor of the whole thing about as well as anything could.

The first thing you’ll notice is how desperately the Democrats are trying to use any and every procedural maneuver they can think of to protect Strzok from having to answer the questions posed by the Republican members. At one point, Jerrold Nadler of New York even moves to adjourn, and when Chairman Bob Goodlatte disregards the obviously absurd motion, Democrats go nuts and demand a vote on it.

Here you see several Democrats objecting to Louis Gohmert’s line of questioning, mainly because they just flat-out don’t like it. It’s true that Gohmert gets a little personal, but under the circumstances I think it’s justified and I’ll tell you why after you watch the clip:

It is relevant that Strzok was cheating on his wife with Lisa Page while all this was going on? Here’s why I’d argue that it is:

He offers some pretty implausible assertions about what some of these texts meant, particularly the claim that “We’ll stop it” refers to the American people defeating Donald Trump at the ballot box and not the FBI taking some sort of action to cripple his candidacy. It’s implausible given the context of the conversation as well as the choice of words he used, not to mention being inconsistent with other statements he made about the electorate.

Yet Strzok insists that is what he meant, and there’s really no way to prove it one way or the other, which means it all comes down to his trustworthiness.

How trustworthy is he? Is he so trustworthy that we should have no problem with him running investigations like this in spite of the bias he’s clearly exhibited? How could we test that? The only way to test it is to look at what we know about his honesty, and one thing we know is that he cheated on his wife. When his word is really all we have in assessing his claims about what he meant in those texts, why should that not be one of the factors we consider?

Strzok is very smug and he’s very composed in this setting, but his story is implausible and his track record of honesty is not great.

Assess that as you will.


Dan Calabrese -- Bio and Archives | Comments

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.