So, how did Lisa Page's closed door testimony work out? The answer will surprise most

(CNN)  Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page was questioned behind closed doors on Friday . . . .  Republicans said they learned new information from a witness who was able to talk more freely than Strzok.
Two Republican congressmen, Reps. John Ratcliffe of Texas and Matt Gaetz of Florida, characterized Page's closed-door testimony as more forthcoming than Strzok's, because she answered . . . . .  more questions about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation, as well as the Hillary Clinton probe.
Republican Rep. Mark Meadows, a North Carolina Republican, [and chairman of the Freedom Caucus ~  editor] said they had learned new information that "has been a long time coming," but he and the other lawmakers declined to provide details.
"There is significant new info she has provided," Meadows said, adding that he wouldn't discuss details unless transcripts of the interviews were released.
 
Meadows called Page a "very credible witness," and said she had been "falsely accused" of not wanting to cooperate with the committee, a charge that had been levied by his fellow Republicans and President Trump.
 
Republicans went so far as to even praise Page for her testimony after she had been threatened with contempt earlier in the week.
"I found Lisa Page to be far more credible than Strzok," Gaetz said. "We did not see the smug attitude that we saw from Strozk."
And in a sign that Republicans are not eager to replay the nasty Strzok hearing, GOP lawmakers signaled Friday that they were unwilling to force Page to testify publicly -- despite earlier indications that they would.
 
 Editor:  Guess the rest of us smucks will have to wait until our masters get around to telling us why her testimony was so good.  Look,  I trust the Freedom Caucus but we all are tired of waiting for this nonsense to be over   . . . . . .   and the sheer passage of time gives us the opinion that this Democrat nonsense is just that.  Ditto Trump; I trust the man.   And, he is correct   . . . .  If he were to go out into the streets of Manhattan and shoot someone,  I would call it "self defense" and move on.  

At least the GOP heard some useful testimony on Friday.