some yourself? I basically said the exact same thing below as you have, wrt not being able to draw any conclusions from that text alone. But are you suggesting Strzok was just lying about Obama wanting to know what was going on with the Clinton investigation (since he couldn't be expected to know what someone else was texting)? And yes, while you can't jump to a conclusion from that text, do you not have enough healthy skepticism to wonder if perhaps Obama was less than honest when he claimed he would never influence an investigation (be it directly or via Loretta)? And why does it have to be "switching gears to defend His Orangeness (the use of which brings your skepticism into question IMO)" if we both carry on with the Mueller investigation, as well as look back at potential wrong doings in the Clinton investigation? Switching gears to me would seem more like trying to suggest anyone is questioning the "vast, vast majority come to work and do their jobs" by discussing Strzok (which you yourself acknowledge "maybe" doesn't fit into that mold).