This is a open message via article for said participants to “get their story straight” according to whoever wants the story outcome to be, while claiming if asked (congressional hearings) that they haven’t spoken to anyone of the participants about the issue
Really? I view it completely differently from you.
I think this version of events is true. In the "insurance policy" text, there was clearly some difference of opinion between Page and Strzok. This explanation accounts for that difference of opinion.
The WSJ's sources are "people familiar with [Strzok's] account." It's possible that Strzok is seeking to strike a deal and is cooperating.
That was what I thought too. Setting out the marching orders.
Even so, however, it’s hardly innocent and I don’t see this as much of an improvement their story.