Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and the Prisoner's Dilemma

We have all heard about the Prisoner's Dilemma.  Two partners in crime are arrested.  They are interrogated separately.  Each is told that if he finks on the other, he will get a light sentence, and the government will throw the book at the other one.  He knows that if both prisoners remain silent, they will be released.  Should the prisoner remain silent and hope his partner also remains silent?  Should the prisoner tell everything, hoping for a light sentence?  It depends on what he thinks the other prisoner will do.

If you anticipate that your partner is loyal, you will show loyalty and keep your mouth shut.  If you are right, then both of you will be released.  If you guess wrong, then you go to prison for a long time.  If you figure that your partner will squeal, then you should squeal first and get a light sentence.  Betrayal is rewarded, and loyalty is punished.

In this case, the "prisoners" are Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.  They are believed to have used FBI investigations as opportunities to attack Donald Trump and go easy on Hillary Clinton.  Page was scheduled to testify on July 11, 2018 and Strzok on July 12.  Page complained that she was not given time to review certain documents, so she refused to appear on July 11.  Strzok appeared on July 12 and answered many questions before the world, which means before many people, including Page.  Page showed up on July 13 and testified behind closed doors.  This means that Strzok does not know what Page revealed.

Page has an advantage over her former partner.  She knows what Strzok said, but Strzok does not know what she said.  Strzok said their many text messages meant things far more innocent than these messages implied.  It has been revealed that Page said the messages "mean exactly what they say."  This means that Strzok is as guilty as his messages imply.  Strzok proclaimed their innocence, while Page apparently betrayed her partner.  Strzok will get the harsh sentence.

Are there repercussions for betraying a former colleague?  The Clintons' Whitewater colleague Jim McDougal confessed about their financial mischief.  He went to prison, and the guards took away his prescription medicine.  He died of "natural causes" the next day.  Whatever you believe about his morals, Strzok does not have the political power to do something like this.  If Page betrayed Strzok, she probably made a wise choice.

We have all heard about the Prisoner's Dilemma.  Two partners in crime are arrested.  They are interrogated separately.  Each is told that if he finks on the other, he will get a light sentence, and the government will throw the book at the other one.  He knows that if both prisoners remain silent, they will be released.  Should the prisoner remain silent and hope his partner also remains silent?  Should the prisoner tell everything, hoping for a light sentence?  It depends on what he thinks the other prisoner will do.

If you anticipate that your partner is loyal, you will show loyalty and keep your mouth shut.  If you are right, then both of you will be released.  If you guess wrong, then you go to prison for a long time.  If you figure that your partner will squeal, then you should squeal first and get a light sentence.  Betrayal is rewarded, and loyalty is punished.

In this case, the "prisoners" are Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.  They are believed to have used FBI investigations as opportunities to attack Donald Trump and go easy on Hillary Clinton.  Page was scheduled to testify on July 11, 2018 and Strzok on July 12.  Page complained that she was not given time to review certain documents, so she refused to appear on July 11.  Strzok appeared on July 12 and answered many questions before the world, which means before many people, including Page.  Page showed up on July 13 and testified behind closed doors.  This means that Strzok does not know what Page revealed.

Page has an advantage over her former partner.  She knows what Strzok said, but Strzok does not know what she said.  Strzok said their many text messages meant things far more innocent than these messages implied.  It has been revealed that Page said the messages "mean exactly what they say."  This means that Strzok is as guilty as his messages imply.  Strzok proclaimed their innocence, while Page apparently betrayed her partner.  Strzok will get the harsh sentence.

Are there repercussions for betraying a former colleague?  The Clintons' Whitewater colleague Jim McDougal confessed about their financial mischief.  He went to prison, and the guards took away his prescription medicine.  He died of "natural causes" the next day.  Whatever you believe about his morals, Strzok does not have the political power to do something like this.  If Page betrayed Strzok, she probably made a wise choice.