L.R.,
“Being a 'confidential source' doesn't mean he is exempt from being investigated or prosecuted for engaging in illegal activity.”
True enough; but when the CIA told Clinesmith, in the context of a FISA warrant application inquiry, that Page was working for them, one would think that their clear statement would carry some weight. Clinesmith obviously believed that it did, because he subsequently falsified the CIA email, and obtained a counter-intelligence investigation warrant based upon a piece of fabricated evidence.
Come on guys, stop with the BHO Pom-poms.
“Claims of him being a confidential source are irrelevant unless he was specifically tasked with the illegal behaviour he appeared to be engaged in.“
So, the CIA could not figure that out, and you just did?
Y-22,
“Was Page a current informant? Or did his relationship with the CIA end in 2013 when he was involved in a criminal case (as source? witness? double agent?) with two Russian spies.”
The 2016 CIA email identified Page as “working” for them (present tense). Page had informed the FBI as far back as June 13, 2013 that he was in contact with Victor Podobnyy, whom he believed to be a junior attaché at the Russian consulate in New York, and was advising on energy investments.
“Or was Page spying on the Trump campaign for the CIA? I'm sure Obama is to blame either way.“
See, this is why I have full confidence in the Left’s capacity for expansive election fraud. There is a rabid devotion to ideological expediency that no fact-set will overcome.