Julian Assange, Putin;
and the New WikiLeaks Now Coming to Light:
If you recall, the previously released 30,322 emails from https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/ contained one damning piece of communication from Hillary Clinton, instructing a staffer to remove the classification settings from an official State Department communication and send it through a “nonsecure” channel.
Also, the Obama administration has previously prosecuted numerous whistleblowers for violating the government’s procedures for handling classified documents.
Now, Julian Assange says his next leak should virtually assure an indictment. Remember, 18 U.S. Code § 793 already makes the one email above proof of felony. There are several more.
Putin’s Newest Declaration:
Reliable intelligence sources in the West have indicated that warnings had been received that the Russian Government could in the near future release the text of email messages intercepted from U.S. Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s private e-mail server from the time she was U.S. Secretary of State. The release would, the messaging indicated, prove that Secretary Clinton had, in fact, laid open U.S. secrets to foreign interception by putting highly-classified Government reports onto a private server in violation of U.S. law, and that, as suspected, the server had been targeted and hacked by foreign intelligence services.
The reports indicated that the decision as to whether to reveal the intercepts would be made by Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin, and it was possible that the release would, if made, be through a third party, such as Wikileaks. The apparent message from Moscow, through the intelligence community, seemed to indicate frustration with the pace of the official U.S. Department of Justice investigation into the so-called server scandal, which seemed to offer prima facie evidence that U.S. law had been violated by Mrs Clinton’s decision to use a private server through which to conduct official and often highly-secret communications during her time as Secretary of State. U.S. sources indicated that the extensive Deptartment of Justice probe was more focused on the possibility that the private server was used to protect messaging in which Secretary Clinton allegedly discussed quid pro quo transactions with private donors to the Clinton Foundation in exchange for influence on U.S. policy.
The Russian possession of the intercepts, however, was designed also to show that, apart from violating U.S. law in the fundamental handling of classified documents (which Sec. Clinton had alleged was no worse than the mishandling of a few documents by CIA Director David Petraeus or Clinton’s National Security Advisor Sandy Berger), the traffic included highly-classified materials which had their classification headers stripped. Russian (and other) sources had indicated frustration with the pace of the Justice Dept. probe, and its avoidance of the national security aspects of intelligence handling. This meant that the topic would be suppressed by the U.S. Barack Obama Administration so that it would not be a factor in the current U.S. Presidential election campaign, in which President Obama had endorsed Mrs Clinton.
Moscow’s discreet messaging about a possible leak of the traffic, in time to impact the U.S. elections, was designed to pressure faster U.S. legal action on the matter, but was largely due to Russian concerns about possible U.S. strategic policy in the event of a Hillary Clinton presidency.
Apart from the breach of U.S. Federal law in the handling of classified material, the Clinton private server was, according to GIS/Defense & Foreign Affairs analysts, always likely to have been a primary target for foreign cyber warfare interception operations, particularly those of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), Russia, and North Korea (DPRK), but probably also by others, including Iran.
The FSB Report:
A very intriguing Federal Security Services (FSB) report prepared for The Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation (SLEDKOM) relating to the trial of Ukrainian “spy/terrorist” Nadiya (Nadezhda) Savchenko states that “beyond top secret” emails obtained from a “private computer storage device” belonging to former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “should/must” be allowed into the sentencing phase of this case due not only to their “critical relevance”, but, also, because the “apprehension” of them falls outside the purview of the Foreign Intelligence (SVR).
According to this report, Nadiya Savchenko is a former Ukraine Air Force pilot whoin 2014 joinedthe neo-NaziAidar Battalion, which is a volunteer military detachment of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense currently fighting against Russian separatist factions in their eastern regions andhas been the target of many war crimes investigations.
On 6 June 2014, this report continues, Nadiya Savchenko entered into the Federation from Ukraine and presented herself before Federal Migration Service (FMS) officials stating that she was a refugee and requesting she be granted Russian identity documents—which were approved.
On 17 June 2014, this report notes, while on Federation soil and in the possession of (legal) Russian identity documents, Nadiya Savchenko used her cellular phone tosecretly adjust mortar fire from her Aidar Battalion terrorist allies in Ukraineonto a militia roadblock in the vicinity of Metallist village in the self-proclaimed Luhansk People’s Republic (LPR) killing Russian television reporter Vladimirovich Kornelyuk and his sound engineer Anton Voloshin.
With the facts relating to Nadiya Savchenko’s terrorist crimes and neo-Nazi affiliations having been fully documented during her trial, FSB legal analysts in this report state, the “beyond top secret” emails belonging to former Secretary Hillary Clinton are critical for the court’s “understanding/consideration” in sentencing as they “directly relate” to the causes as to why this murderer has become the West’s latest cause célèbre against Russia.
According to these FSB analysts, the specific emails obtained from former Secretary Hillary Clinton involving Nadiya Savchenko were written by US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland who masterminded what the private American intelligence firm Stratfor (known as the Shadow CIA) called the “most blatant coup in history” in toppling Ukraine’s legitimate government.
And with these emails having a US government classification of SAP (an acronym for ‘special access programs,’ a level of classification above top secret), this report further notes, the “black project” nature of the American’s attempting to subvert justice in the case of Nadiya Savchenko has not only been confirmed, but also explained.
For what these emails show, this report explains, was that upon the FSB’s arrest and detention of Nadiya Savchenko for her crimes in 2014, Assistant Secretary Nuland began a “counter campaign” of Western propaganda depicting this neo-Nazi terrorist as a heroic female pilotunjustly being persecuted by Russia—and while at the same time not a single report of Foreign Minister Lavrov’s extensive report to the international mediahas yet appeared on any major online American, French, British and German newspaper portals or television channels, the coverage of this Nazi terrorist has been non-stop.
Most intriguing, however, about this FSB report is its advising the Investigative Committee that it is legal to use these Secretary Hillary Clinton’s emails against Nadiya Savchenko as the method(s) in which they were obtained were outside of the jurisdiction of the SVR.
This is an important distinction to note due to if these were emails obtained from a foreign government (in this case the US), the SVR would have “sole and exclusive” domain over them and would never allow their admittance in court due to the high security level they would be held under.
Having been obtained from Secretary Hillary Clinton’s “private computer email server” though, FSB legal analysts state in this report, these emails are to be considered as outside of US government jurisdiction and thus legal, under Russian law, to be used in any matter before the court.
As to how exactly the FSB obtained these “beyond top secret” Secretary Hillary Clinton emails this report doesn’t say, but it is important to note that the former US Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, did recently acknowledge that they were in the possession of Russia and, just yesterday, the US State Department was forced to admit that 22 “top secret” emails were found on her private email server she had previously told the American weren’t there because she deleted them.
The Uncovering of the Stolen Hillary Emails:
and the Lie of Omission by the MSM
The Testimony of ex-CIA Director Bill Gates,
former Secretary of Defense under President Barack Obama
There’s only one Democratic candidate not linked to an ongoing FBI investigation, and his name is Bernie Sanders. Vermont’s Senator will become Democratic nominee for many reasons, but a cyber hacker named “Guccifer” just solidified the fact only one candidate can type an email without scandal. Superdelegates exist so that Republicans like Donald Trump won’t use FBI investigations and foreign hackers against a Democratic nominee.
Forget about foreign hackers for a moment, and listen to the words of Defense Secretary Robert Gates. These words are highlighted in a Hill article titled Ex-Pentagon chief: Iran, China or Russia may have gotten to Clinton server:
Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he believes foreign countries like Russia, China and Iran may have hacked the private email server Hillary Clinton used while secretary of State.
“…I think the odds are pretty high,” he said
Gates said he agreed with former acting CIA Director Mike Morell’s claim that the server had probably been hacked by either Russia, China or Iran.
He added that the fact that classified intelligence has been found on the server was “a concern for me.”
“I never used email when I was head of CIA or head of the Department of Defense,” Gates said.
Gates believes other nations most likely compromised Clinton’s server. If you don’t trust the recent statements of a Romanian hacker (I believe him), do you trust the views of President Obama’s former Defense Secretary??
Furthermore, imagine if anyone else had endured a year-long FBI criminal investigation. As The Wall Street Journal stated in March, “The criminal investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s email setup is clearly progressing, leaving some officials hopeful the case could wrap up in a matter of months.”
But Now let Us Survey the Strange Email of “Sidney Blume” ….
Libyan Oil, Gold, and Qaddafi:
The Strange Email Sidney Blumenthal Sent Hillary Clinton In 2011
January 12, 2016 | 3:20 pm
Two weeks after France began bombing Libya, in March, 2011, Hillary Clinton’s old friend and advisor Sidney Blumenthal passed her an intelligence memo that supposedly revealed France’s true — and quite unflattering— motivations for toppling Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi. While France’s then-President Nicolas Sarkozy publicly said he wished to free the Libyan people from tyranny, Blumenthal’s memo argues that he was driven by a cocktail of less lofty incentives, including a desire for Libyan oil, and a fear that Qaddafi secretly planned to use his vast supply of gold to displace France’s primacy in the region.
Libya watchers aren’t so sure that Blumenthal was passing the US Secretary Of State solid intelligence. “For me, it’s not credible,” former French diplomat and Libya expert Patrick Haimzadeh told VICE News when asked about the Blumenthal memo. Haimzadeh worked at the French embassy in Tripoli from 2001 to 2004, and wrote the 2011 study In the Heart of Qaddafi’s Libya. “In 2011, everyone was saying anything and everything about Libya,” Haimzadeh said. “But in fact, no one really knew what was going on. At the time, the French intelligence services and the CIA were in the dark. For example, the French services said the war would last three days — in reality, it took eight months.”
It appears that Clinton’s office too was awash in Libya rumors. Nearly a third of all the emails she received on the security and political situation in Libya during her tenure as Secretary of State came from Blumenthal, a longtime Clinton associate who was not formally employed by the State Department. He was on the payroll of the Clinton Foundation, bringing in $10,000 a month as a consultant, while pursuing his own business interests in Libya. Blumenthal’s emails to Clinton now have been made public in response to a FOIA lawsuit filed by VICE News.
Clinton’s correspondence reveals that Blumenthal regularly sent her intelligence-cable-style updates on Libya that cited anonymous sources who claimed to be close to the country’s political elites.
These briefs were prepared by Blumenthal’s business partner and former CIA operative Tyler Drumheller, a consultant with plans to take advantage of economic opportunities in a post-war Libya. Both Drumheller and Blumenthal worked with a Libyan company called Osprey, a start-up that hoped to profit off medical and military contracts in the chaos after the war.
Though those contracts may have eventually needed the approval of Clinton’s State Department, Blumenthal has repeatedly denied he intended to use his connections to the Secretary of State to further his business interests. Since Libya fractured after the NATO-led intervention in 2011, the lucrative business opportunities didn’t materialize, and Osprey never really got off the ground.
Much of the intelligence Blumenthal fed to Clinton was quite odd. One email suggested that Libyan elites wanted warm relations with Israel, another that European spy agencies were encouraging tribal leaders to declare a semi-autonomous tribal zone in the east of the country. The nuggets of information were always attributed to unnamed sources, and “knowledgeable individuals.” Still, Clinton regularly forwarded these emails to her staff to ask for their take.
The most recent batch of Clinton emails reveals perhaps the most bizarre morsel of Blumenthal-baked intelligence to date. An April 2, 2011 memo titled “France’s client/Q’s gold” quotes “knowledgeable individuals” with insider information about French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s motivation for bombing Libya. The military campaign, the anonymous sources say, was designed to quash plans by Gaddafi to use $7 billion in secret gold and silver to prop up a new African currency. The French worried the move would undercut the currency guaranteed by the French treasury, known as CFA franc, that’s widely used in West Africa and acts as a strong link between France and many of its former African colonies. After French intelligence officials got wind of this secret plan, the Blumenthal memo reports, Sarkozy freaked out: “This was one of the factors that influenced [his] decision to commit France to the attack on Libya.”
The idea France sought to undermine Libya’s plan to start a new currency has long been a trope on conspiracy theory websites — a particularly engaging version can be found on ufo-blogger.com.
It was, however, well known in Libya watcher circles that Gaddafi had some designs to start his own monetary system.
“Qaddafi had plans to establish a Pan-African currency. But in my opinion, that is not what triggered the decision to intervene in Libya,” explained Haimzadeh. “
Sarkozy decided to intervene as early as February 21,” long before Gaddafi’s plans became known. For Haimzadeh, the timeline just doesn’t add up.
Though Blumenthal was not an employee of the State Department at the time he passed along the gold conspiracy, Hillary Clinton clearly took his views seriously, and sometimes even encouraged aides to put the information to use.
On Aug. 27, 2012, for instance, Blumenthal’s intelligence claimed that a new Libyan president would “seek a discreet relationship with Israel.” Then, Clinton forwarded on the e-mail to her top policy aide Jacob Sullivan with a note attached: “If true, this is encouraging. Should consider passing to Israelis.” Other intelligence dispatches were met with more skepticism, with Clinton aides suggesting that not all the information was credible.
Though it’s unclear what Clinton’s staff thought of the Blumenthal memo, it attributes less than flattering motives to the French President’s decision to intervene in Libya.
In the spring of 2011, Sarkozy took the lead among European nations in pushing for an air campaign against Qaddafi. As protests against the regime began to devolve into a bloody civil war, Sarkozy sent the famous French intellectual, Bernard Henri-Levy — who, the Blumenthal memo says, was considered in Libya a “self-promoter” and a “semi-useful, semi-joke figure” — to meet with rebels in the National Transition Council (NTC).
Shorter after, Sarkozy invited Council leader Mustafa Abdul Jalil to the Elysee Palace, recognized the NTC — which the Blumenthal memo refers to as “France’s client” — as the country’s official government, and began pressuring other NATO countries to take military action in Libya.
Just two weeks before Blumenthal sent the Gaddafi-gold memo, Clinton met with Sarkozy in France, where the president pressed her to back an air campaign in Libya. At the time, in justifying his enthusiasm for military intervention, Sarkozy said publicly that France had “decided to assume its role before history” to ward off a “killing spree.” The French military, he said, was determined to defend any Libyans who wanted “liberate themselves from servitude.”
The Blumenthal memo tells a very different story. Aside from fears over the new Libyan-backed African currency, Blumenthal’s sources reported to Clinton that Sarkozy was motivated by four primary concerns: Libyan oil, an opportunity to increase French influence in Northern Africa, a global stage for the French military to strut its stuff, and Sarkozy’s desire to improve his domestic standing.
It’s true that in the spring of 2011, Sarkozy was headed into an election the following year with almost 70 percent of French citizens expressing disapproval of his job performance. Some saw Sarkozy’s decision to intervene as a desperate move to recover from these record popularity lows. Statistics published by pollster TNS Sofres in February 2011 showed that 66 percent of the population supported France’s intervention in Libya.
Coincidentally, the French president was seriously tainted by a formerly cozy relationship with Libya’s dictator.
Qaddafi traveled to France in December 2007, immediately after Sarkozy’s first election as president, for a controversial five-day visit aimed at brokering a $200 million arms deal. Sarkozy proved solicitous to the Libyan dictator: he allowed him to hunt in the Rambouillet forest, once the hunting preserve of French kings, and to take a private tour of the Louvre museum with his female bodyguards. Qaddafi also requested, and got, permission to pitch a heated Bedouin tent in the gardens of the Hôtel de Marigny, which is used as a residence for state visitors. (To be fair, he was allowed the same privilege during a visit to Italy.)
According to French daily Le Monde, Sarkozy allegedly said, in private, that he could no longer bear the sight of the Libyan dictator, after Gaddafi commented on the “oppression” of women in France and urged young people in the suburbs to “rise up.”
Sarkozy’s relationship with Gaddafi took another odd turn when allegations surfaced that the Libyan leader had helped fund the president’s 2007 electoral campaign. In 2012, French investigative news site Mediapart published an official document dating back to 2006 detailing plans for the dictator to bankroll Sarkozy’s campaign to the tune of 50 million euros. The document — which was disputed by Sarkozy — surfaced among the archives of the demolished Qaddafi regime, and has been backed up by several former regime insiders.
Fabrice Arfi, a French investigative journalist at Mediapart who helped uncover the alleged links between Qaddafi and Sarkozy, is skeptical that the the Blumenthal memo captures France’s true motivations for war in Libya. “At first glance, this hypothesis [that France’s intervention was motivated by Gaddafi’s plans for a Pan-African currency] seems far-fetched,” he told VICE News by phone. “Personally, I don’t have any elements that accredit this theory, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it is false.”
The Blumenthal intelligence does, however show that American policy makers weren’t sure what motivated France’s Libya adventure. “Even in the upper reaches of American intelligence, Sarkozy’s arguments to justify this war are not taken seriously,” Arfi explained. “Even among his allies, no one seems to believe France’s version of the Libya intervention.”
There’s also plenty of circumstantial evidence to back up the connection between France’s eagerness to see Qaddafi go, and its oil interests. In 2011, French lefitst daily Libération, not sympathetic to the center-right Sarkozy, published a letter from Libya’s rebel-backed National Transitional Council, promising to reserve 35 percent of the country’s crude oil to France in return for its “total and permanent support.”
That letter was later bolstered by another, and previously released, Blumenthal memo, which informed Clinton that French intelligence services met with NTC figures in the early days of the uprising to solidify French primacy in the post-Qaddafi oil sector.
The memo, dated March 22, 2011 and titled “How the French created the National Libyan Council, ou l’argent parle,'” French for “money talks,” warned Clinton that the French intelligence service DGSE “began a series of secret meetings” with prominent Libyan opposition figures, and passed them “money and guidance.” These French spies, “speaking under orders from [Sarkozy] promised that as soon as the [council] was organized France would recognize [it] as the new government of Libya.”
Blumenthal’s intelligence did indicate that Sarkozy expected monetary gain in exchange for his early support of the rebels. “In return for their assistance… the DGSE officers indicated that they expected the new government of Libya to favor French firms and national interests, particularly regarding the oil industry in Libya.”
For his part, Sarkozy has denied France was motivated by oil interest. Indeed, in Libya’s post-Gaddafi political scene, France has not been able to profit from its oil sector. According to Reuters, the French oil company Total was producing 55,000 barrels of crude oil per day in Libya prior to the conflict. In a 2013 report on its activities, Total said its production in the country had climbed back to pre-2011 levels by 2012, but that production had stalled in 2013, following the blocking of pipelines as a result of political and social unrest. Ultimately it was Chinese and Russian companies that won the bulk of Libya’s oil contracts.
And if Sarkozy thought an overseas war would bolster his domestic appeal, he turned out to be wrong on that score as well. Even though the intervention in Libya proved popular, the president’s approval rating continued to dip, hitting yet another all-time low in May 2011. The following year, he lost his re-election bid to François Hollande….”
H. A. Goodman
Robert Gates and the Final Scenario
If a foreign hacker claimed to have hacked into Senator Barack Obama’s emails in 2008, Clinton would have won the election that year. Similarly, if Bernie Sanders owned a private server as Vermont’s Senator, there’s no doubt the Clinton campaign would have labeled him a modern-day Aldrich Ames. I addressed this phenomenon, and why Hillary Clinton is able to dodge endless political controversy, during this appearance on CNN New Day.
First, it’s important to note that Hillary Clinton has not been cleared by the FBI. In fact, the FBI hasn’t made any statements, nor has the DOJ issued a verdict on potential indictments. The Daily Banter recently reported that “according to an exclusive CNN report, sources familiar with the FBI probe of Clinton’s private e-mail server are saying that as the investigation nears the end, so far ‘investigators haven’t found evidence to prove that Clinton willfully violated the law.’”
However, “sources familiar with the FBI probe” does not mean the FBI.
It simply means the same anonymous sources Fox News quotes (saying Clinton will end up in jail after this investigating is over) have been asked their opinion. “Sources familiar” with Saddam Hussein helped Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld justify the Iraq War, so we know why this type of journalism leads to chaos. Ultimately, the only recent facts that can’t be disputed involve Huma Abedin and other top Clinton aides being interviewed by the FBI.
Again, if the top aides of Obama in 2008, or Sanders in 2016, were interviewed by the FBI, just imagine the political fallout.
Also, the future Commander in Chief according to the smartest people in the room didn’t “willfully” violate laws, so this means Clinton is qualified to run the country. What they ignore is the reality that owning a server for “convenience” is almost certainly an outright lie. Every defender of Hillary Clinton’s email use, including the unnamed sources “close” to the FBI investigation, assume Clinton’s server was only used for convenience.
In addition, not “willfully” breaking laws doesn’t mean no laws were broken. It’s a sad day for American democracy when supporters of a presidential candidate are proud that no laws were “willfully” broken. Nonetheless, even if Clinton seriously believed a private server was convenient, and there was no political motive, “gross negligence” is enough to prosecute under the Espionage Act.
Hillary Clinton deleted 31,830 emails, and most likely, not all of them were about yoga. Any government records deleted, and that’s a crime.
Then there’s the recent claims of a Romanian hacker named Marcel Lehel Lazar, also known as Guccifer. His statements are addressed in an NBC News article titled Hacker Guccifer Claims He Got Into Hillary Clinton’s Server:
The Romanian hacker who first exposed Hillary Clinton’s private email address is making a bombshell new claim — that he also gained access to the former Secretary of State’s “completely unsecured” server.
“It was like an open orchid on the Internet,” Marcel Lehel Lazar, who uses the devilish handle Guccifer, told NBC News in an exclusive interview from a prison in Bucharest.
“There were hundreds of folders.”
…As political opponents charged that national security was compromised and the FBI launched an investigation, Clinton maintained that the server was safe and there were no security breaks.
“It was a lie, clearly,” Lazar said.
NBC News asked Chris Tarbell, who broke open the Silk Road case, to review Lazar’s explanation of how he got into the server.
“It’s plausible,” Chris Tarbell said, adding that Lazar’s conviction for hacking in Romania showed he had the know-how to carry it out.
Tarbell added that he could not imagine why Lazar would make up a claim that could get him in very hot water.
“To go on television and admit to a felony you didn’t commit seems a little silly,” he said.
Guccifer is likely telling the truth, and former FBI agent Chris Tarbell states “To go on television and admit to a felony you didn’t commit seems a little silly.”
Most importantly, didn’t Clinton ever expect to send or receive Top Secret intelligence as Secretary of State? I explain here why America’s national security was likely compromised by Clinton’s server and why Guccifer just handed the nomination to Bernie Sanders.
But this is H. A. Goodman, it’s hyperbole!
When you evaluate Guccifer’s claim, alongside the viewpoint of Secretary Gates, a former FBI agent, and the head of Obama’s Defense Intelligence Agency (who believes Clinton should “drop out”), then also remember the 22 Top Secret emails. These emails are highlighted in a CNN piece from January titled State Department will not release 22 ‘top secret’ Clinton emails:
The State Department announced Friday that it will not release 22 emails from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton because they contain “top secret” information, the highest level of government classification…
If another Guccifer somewhere in the world accessed these emails, would he or she have publicized their findings?
Guccifer’s relevance in 2016 is enormous. Touching upon this impact, The Daily Beast has a brilliant article by Shane Harris titled Hillary’s Secret Email Was a Cyberspy’s Dream Weapon:
The private email address for Hillary Clinton, which became the talk of Washington this week and created her first major speed bump on her road to the White House, has actually been freely available on the Internet for a year, thanks to a colorful Romanian hacker known as Guccifer.
On March 14, 2013, Guccifer—his real name is Marcel-Lehel Lazar—broke into the AOL account of Sidney Blumenthal, a journalist, former White House aide to Bill Clinton, and personal confidante of Hillary Clinton. Lazar crowed about his exploits to journalists, disclosing a set of memos Blumenthal had written to Clinton in 2012, as well as the personal email address and domain she’s now known to have used exclusively for her personal and official correspondence…
Her email account was the ultimate hacker’s lure. It’s a common technique to impersonate a trusted source via email, in order to persuade a recipient to download spyware hidden inside seemingly innocuous attachments.
Since hackers often “impersonate a trusted source via email,” there are so many ways Clinton’s private server could have been compromised.
While Hillary supporters are dancing in the streets after hearing anonymous sources stating she didn’t “willfully” break laws, the FBI hasn’t formally concluded anything. I explain how the Clinton campaign, and its supporters, view the FBI in the following YouTube segment. Ultimately, this viewpoint, combined with the likelihood that Guccifer did indeed compromise Clinton’s server, will give Bernie Sanders the Democratic nomination.
The Full Release of the Benghazi emails
The Kremlin is debating whether to release the 20,000 emails they have hacked off of Hillary Clinton’s server.
According to a report from four days ago, beginning in 2011, the Russians began monitoring Romanian computer hacker Marcel Lazăr Lehel (aka Guccifer) after he attempted, unsuccessfully, to break into the computer system of the Russian funded RT television network.
After monitoring Guccifer, the Russians were reportedly able to record (both physically and electronically) his actions which allowed the Russian intelligence analysts, in 2013, to not only detect his breaking into the private computer of Secretary Clinton, but also break in and copy all of its contents as well.
The report notes that shortly after Russia obtained Clinton’s emails, they released a limited amount to RT TV which were published in an article in March 2013, titled Hillary Clinton’s ‘hacked’ Benghazi emails: FULL RELEASE.
Apparently no Western journalists promoted this story in 2013.
A couple of years later, in 2016, the US then brought in Guccifer for questioning related to this incident. According to the report, NBC news knew why Guccifer was being questioned but withheld this information from the American public.
The Associated Press reported in October 2015 that “Hillary Clinton’s private email server maintained in her home while serving as secretary of State was possibly hacked by Russia-tied authorities, and others, on five separate occasions.”
The AP report noted that investigators discovered among Clinton’s cache of released emails malicious software aimed at transmitting data to three overseas computers, including at least one in Russia. This malicious software was reportedly activated by clicking on it; but in October it was not clear if Clinton actually opened these messages or not, per the AP.
Recentlyseparate reportshave come out noting that Guccifer had indeed hacked Clinton’s emails. Now according to this latest report, Clinton’s server was not only compromised by Guccifer but also by Russia. Guccifer told FOX News last week that he hacked Hillary’s homebrew server andso did at least 10 others.
UPDATE: Judge Andrew Napolitano told Megyn Kelly on Monday,
“There’s a debate going on in the Kremlin between the Foreign Ministry and the Intelligence Services about whether they should release the 20,000 of Mrs. Clinton’s emails that they have hacked into.”
Some More Grist for the Mill:
“It’s also difficult to see how the FBI can ignore such an obvious violation of the law. It likewise raises questions about what was in the 30,000 emails that Clinton decided to delete. In the nearly five months remaining until the presidential election, we can expect a regular drumbeat of revelations about EmailGate, none of them flattering to the Democratic nominee.
Last week the Associated Press broke a big story about how Clinton’s “unclassified” emails included the true names of CIA personnel serving overseas under cover. This was hardly news, in fact I broke the same story four months ago in this column. However, the AP account adds detail to what Clinton and her staff did, actions that placed the lives of CIA clandestine personnel at risk. It also may be a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, a 1982 law that featured prominently in the mid-aughts scandal surrounding CIA officer Valerie Plame, which so captivated the mainstream media. More recently, former CIA officer John Kiriakou spent two years in Federal prison for violating this law.
To make matters worse for Team Clinton, last week it emerged that several of the classified emails under investigation involved discussions of impending CIA drone strikes in Pakistan. Clinton aides were careful to avoid hot-button words like “CIA” and “drone” in these “unclassified” emails, engaging in a practice that spies term “talking around” an issue.
However, the salient fact is that the CIA—which has the say here—considers this information to be Top Secret, as well as enormously sensitive. It had no business being in anybody’s unclassified emails. As the secretary of state, Ms. Clinton and her top staff had access to classified communications systems 24 hours a day. They chose not to use them here—a choice that clearly violated Federal law. Moreover, this new report demonstrates that a previous Clintonian EmailGate talking point, that discussions of drones in emails were no more than pasting press pieces, and therefore innocuous, was yet another bald-faced lie.
How the FBI can look at all this and not recommend prosecution of someone for something in EmailGate strains the imagination. Yet President Obama has clearly signaled that it’s all no big deal. Director James Comey has a tough job before him when he takes the FBI’s official recommendations regarding EmailGate to Attorney General Lynch for action, probably sometime this summer. Since Comey is now under a cloud over the FBI’s embarrassing mishandling of Omar Mateen, the Orlando jihadist mass murderer, perhaps his resignation over that matter would be welcome in the White House, which then could find a new director more willing to bend to Obama’s wishes. ….”
9054 1619 39