Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton emails

How an Internet ‘Persona’ Helped Birth Russiagate, by Ray McGovern

Guccifer 2.0 is probably a CIA cutout, meant to divert attention from what was in Hillary and the Democratic National Committee’s email. From Ray McGovern at antiwar.com:

Four years ago today, on June 15, 2016, a shadowy Internet persona calling itself “Guccifer 2.0” appeared out of nowhere to claim credit for hacking emails from the Democratic National Committee on behalf of WikiLeaks and implicate Russia by dropping “telltale” but synthetically produced Russian “breadcrumbs” in his metadata.

Thanks largely to the corporate media, the highly damaging story actually found in those DNC emails – namely, that the DNC had stacked the cards against Bernie Sanders in the party’s 2016 primary – was successfully obscured.

The media was the message; and the message was that Russia had used G-2.0 to hack into the DNC, interfering in the November 2016 election to help Donald Trump win.

Almost everybody still “knows” that – from the man or woman in the street to the forlorn super sleuth, Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, who actually based indictments of Russian intelligence officers on Guccifer 2.0.

Blaming Russia was a magnificent distraction from the start and quickly became the vogue.

The soil had already been cultivated for “Russiagate” by Democratic PR gems like Donald Trump “kissing up” to former KGB officer Vladimir Putin and their “bromance” (bromides that former President Barack Obama is still using). Four years ago today, “Russian meddling” was off and running – on steroids – acquiring far more faux-reality than the evanescent Guccifer 2.0 persona is likely to get.

Continue reading

The road not taken: Another FBI failure involving the Clintons surfaces, by John Solomon

What’s most disturbing about this story is Attorney General William Barr’s failure so far to pursue evidence that might lead to a completely different conclusion to the Hillary Clinton email investigation. Is Barr taking a dive? From John Solomon, who has done some of the best investigative work on these matters, at thehill.com:

August in Washington can be the political equivalent of an elephant graveyard: One good rain can wash away the dirt and expose the bones of scandals past.

And this August did not disappoint. Thanks to the relentless investigative work of Senate Finance Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), we are learning that the Hillary Clintonemail case may not really be settled.

A staff memo updating the two senators’ long-running probe discloses that the FBI — the version run in 2016 by the now-disgraced and fired James Comey, Andrew McCabe and Peter Strzok — failed to pursue access to “highly classified” evidence that could have resolved important questions.

The failure to look at the evidence back in 2016 occurred even though the agents believed access to the sensitive evidence was “necessary” to complete the investigation into Clinton’s improper transmission of classified emails — some top-secret — on her unsecure private email server, the memos show.

Continue reading

A Non-Hack That Raised Hillary’s Hackles, by Ray McGovern

The Democrats successfully diverted attention from what was in Hillary’s emails to a bogus story of how they were disclosed. From Ray McGovern at consortiumnews.com:

On the third anniversary of the release by WikiLeaks of the DNC emails, Ray McGovern looks back at how the DNC diverted the damaging contents into a trumped up conspiracy blaming Russia with no evidence at all.

Three years ago Monday WikiLeaks published a trove of highly embarrassing emails that had been leaked from inside the Democratic National Committee. As has been the case with every leak revealed by WikiLeaks, the emails were authentic. These particular ones, however, could not have come at a worse time for top Democratic Party officials.

The emails made it unmistakably clear that the DNC had tipped the scales sharply against Democratic insurgent Bernie Sanders, giving him a snowball’s chance in hell for the nomination. The posting of the DNC emails is also widely seen as having harmed the the electoral prospects of Hillary Clinton, who could not escape responsibility completely, while a handful of the very top DNC officials were forced to immediately resign.

Relatively few Americans read the actual emails, their attention diverted to the incessant media-fostered question: Why Did the Russians Hack the DNC to Hurt Hillary? For the millions of once enthusiastic Democrats who favored Sanders, however, the disclosure that the nomination process had been fixed came as a bitter pill, leaving a sour taste in their mouths and a passive-aggressive reluctance to promote the candidacy of one they considered a usurper. Having had a huge stake in Bernie’s candidacy, they had little trouble seeing through the diversion of attention from the content of the emails.

Clinton Prevails

A mere four days after the WikiLeaks release, a well orchestrated Democratic Convention nominated Clinton, while many Sanders supporters loudly objected. Thus, she began her campaign under a cloud, and as more and more Americans learned of the fraud that oozed through the DNC email correspondence — including the rigging of the Democratic primaries — the cloud grew larger and darker.

Continue reading

The “Resistance” Struggles To Justify Support For Trump’s Prosecution Of Assange, by Caitlin Johnstone

If Julian Assange had revealed a trove of incriminating Donald Trump emails, he would be hailed as a hero and any move to put him in a US jail would be met with fulsome resistance. From Caitlin Johnstone at caitlinjohnstone.com:

Ever since suspicions were confirmed that the Trump administration is indeed working to prosecute and imprison WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for publishing authentic documents, the so-called “Resistance” has been struggling to explain exactly why it is so enthusiastically supportive of that agenda. And when I say struggling, I am being very, very generous.

When news broke that a court document copy-paste error had inadvertently exposed the fact that the Trump administration is pursuing an agenda which experts of diverse political persuasions agreewould have devastating effects on the freedom of the press, #Resistance pundit and DC think tank operative Neera Tanden responded by tweeting, “Never mess with karma”. As of this writing if you do a Twitter search for the words “Assange” and “karma” together, you will come up with countless Democratic Party loyalists using that concept to justify their support for a Trump administration assault on the press that is infinitely more dangerous than the president being mean to Jim Acosta.

The trouble with that of course is that “karma”, as far as observable reality is concerned, is not an actual thing. It’s a Hindu religious concept that is supported by no more factual evidence than the Roman Catholic claim that a priest literally turns bread and wine into the body and blood of a Nazarene carpenter who died thousands of years ago. A Democratic pundit using the concept of “karma” to justify enthusiastic support for Trump’s fascistic attack on press freedoms is exactly the same as a Republican pundit using “God wills it” to justify the existence of poverty, and it is just as intellectually honest.

Continue reading

Federal Judge “Shocked” To Find Obama State Dept Lied To Protect Hillary From Email Server Lawsuits, by Tyler Durden

The only shocking thing about this story is that a federal judge was shocked by it. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

The noose appears to be tightening further around the law-less behaviors of the Obama administration in their frantic efforts to protect former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from lawsuits seeking information about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server and her handling of the 2012 terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

As Fox News reports, the transparency group Judicial Watch initially sued the State Department in 2014, seeking information about the response to the Benghazi attack after the government didn’t respond to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Other parallel lawsuits by Judicial Watch are probing issues like Clinton’s server, whose existence was revealed during the course of the litigation.

The State Department had immediately moved to dismiss Judicial Watch’s first lawsuit, but U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth (who was appointed to the bench by President Ronald Reagan) denied the request to dismiss the lawsuit at the time, and on Friday, he said he was happy he did, charging that State Department officials had intentionally misled him because other key documents, including those on Clinton’s email server, had not in fact been produced.

Continue reading→

China Hacked Clinton’s Private Email Server: Daily Caller, by Tyler Durden

This one story should be—it won’t, but it should be—enough to land Peter Strzok and Hillary Clinton in jail. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

A Chinese-owned firm with operations in Washington D.C. hacked Hillary Clinton’s private server “throughout her term as secretary of state and obtained nearly all her emails,” reports the Daily Callers Richard Pollock.

The Chinese firm obtained Clinton’s emails in real time as she sent and received communications and documents through her personal server, according to the sources, who said the hacking was conducted as part of an intelligence operation.

The Chinese wrote code that was embedded in the server, which was kept in Clinton’s residence in upstate New York. The code generated an instant “courtesy copy” for nearly all of her emails and forwarded them to the Chinese company, according to the sources. –Daily Caller

During a July 12 House Committee on the Judiciary hearing, Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert (R) disclosed that the Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) found that virtually all of Clinton’s emails from her homebrew server were funneled to a “foreign entity.”Gohmert did not reveal the entity’s identity – however he said it wasn’t Russia.

A government staff official briefed on the ICIG’s findings told the Daily Caller that the Chinese firm which hacked Clinton’s emails operates in Washington’s northern Virginia suburbs, and that it was not a technology firm – but a “front group” for the Chinese government.

Warnings ignored

Two ICIG officials, investigator Frank Ruckner and attorney Janette McMillan, repeatedly warned FBI officials of the Chinese intrusion during several meetings, according to the Daily Caller, citing a “former intelligence officer with expertise in cybersecurity issues who was briefed on the matter.”

Among the FBI officials warned was Peter Strzok – who was fired earlier this month from the agency over anti-Trump text messages he sent while spearheading an investigation of Trump’s 2016 campaign. Strzok did not act on the ICIG’s warning according to Gohmert – who added that Strzok and three other top FBI officials knew about an “anomaly” on Clinton’s server.

To continue reading: China Hacked Clinton’s Private Email Server: Daily Caller

Judicial Watch Calls for Re-Opening of Hillary Email Investigation After More Classified Info Found, by Joseph Jankowski

Judicial Watch continues to boldly go where no mainstream media dares. From Joseph Jankowski at planetfreewill.com:

Judicial Watching is calling for a re-opening of the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails after finding more classified information on the former Secretary of State’s non-“state.gov” email system.

On Thursday, the watchdog revealed that it had received two batches, 184 pages and 45 pagesof newly uncovered emails belonging to Hillary Clinton from the U.S. Department of State sent and received over her unsecured server.

The emails were uncovered by a FOIA lawsuit filed on May 6, 2015, after the State Department failed to respond to a March 4, 2015 FOIA request seeking all emails sent or received by Clinton in her official capacity as Secretary of State, as well as all emails by other State Department employees to Clinton regarding her non-“state.gov” email address.

Judicial Watch broke down what they found:

  • On June 7, 2011, Clinton received classified information on her non-secure email account from former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, which Blair also forwarded to Jake Sullivan, about Blair’s Middle East negotiations with Israel, the Palestinians and the French
  • On January 26, 2010, Clinton’s Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan sent classified information via his unsecure Blackberry to Huma Abedin’s State Department email account that he’d earlier sent to Clinton’s and Abedin’s non-secure @clintonemail.com email accounts about U.K. negotiations with Northern Ireland.
  • On October 28, 2010, Clinton exchanges information with her friend Marty Torrey – a congressional aide – who asks Clinton in an email if she would advise that Torrey meet with former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf. Clinton responds through her non-secure email account approving the meeting and notes that she is emailing him from Hanoi, Vietnam.
  • An email chain dated April 8, 2010, which contains a memo from Sid Blumenthal to Hillary Clinton related to the change of government in Kyrgyzstan, contains information classified “confidential” and is redacted as “foreign government information” and “foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, including confidential sources.” Blumenthal urges Clinton to “develop relations” with the new government in Kyrgyzstan.

To continue reading: Judicial Watch Calls for Re-Opening of Hillary Email Investigation After More Classified Info Found

DOJ Won’t Release Top Secret Loretta Lynch Intercepts Suggesting Secret Deal To Rig Clinton Probe, by Tyler Durden

Supposedly the reason the intercepts can’t be released is because they are, hold on, Russian disinformation. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is refusing to release intercepted material alleging that former Attorney General Loretta Lynch conspired with the Clinton campaign in a deal to rig the Clinton email investigation, reports Paul Sperry of RealClear Investigations.

The information remains so secret that Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz had to censor it from his recently released 500-plus-page report on the FBI’s investigation of Clinton, and even withhold it from Congress.

Not even members of Congress with top secret security clearance have been allowed to see the unverified accounts intercepted from presumed Russian sources in which the head of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, allegedly implicates the Clinton campaign and Lynch in the scheme.

“It is remarkable how this Justice Department is protecting the corruption of the Obama Justice Department,” notes Tom Fitton of Judicial Watch, which is suing the DOJ for the material.

Wasserman Schultz, Lynch and Clinton have denied the allegations and characterized them as Russian disinformation.

True or false, the material is consequential because it appears to have influenced former FBI Director James B. Comey’s decision to break with bureau protocols because he didn’t trust Lynch. In his recent book, Comey said he took the reins in the Clinton email probe, announcing Clinton should not be indicted, because of a “development still unknown to the American public” that “cast serious doubt” on Lynch’s credibility – clearly the intercepted material.

If the material documents an authentic exchange between Lynch and a Clinton aide, it would appear to be strong evidence that the Obama administration put partisan political considerations ahead of its duty to enforce the law. –RealClear Investigations

Then again, if the intercepts are fabricated, it would constitute Russia’s most tangible success in influencing the 2016 U.S. election – since Comey may not have gone around Lynch cleared Clinton during his July 2016 press conference – nor would he have likely publicly announced the reopening of the investigation right before the election – an act Clinton and her allies blame for her stunning loss to Donald Trump.

To continue reading: DOJ Won’t Release Top Secret Loretta Lynch Intercepts Suggesting Secret Deal To Rig Clinton Probe

Real Takeaway: The FBI Influenced the Election of a President, by Peter Van Buren

Peter Van Buren identifies the most important conclusion to emerge from Michael Horowitz’s report. From Van Buren at theamericanconservative.com:

It will be easy to miss the most important point amid the partisan bleating over what the Department of Justice Office of Inspector General report on the FBI’s Clinton email investigation really means.

While each side will find the evidence they want to find proving the FBI, with James Comey as director, helped/hurt Hillary Clinton and/or maybe Donald Trump, the real takeaway is this: the FBI influenced the election of a president.

In January 2017 the Inspector General for the Department of Justice, Michael Horowitz (who previously worked on the 2012 study of “Fast and Furious”), opened his probe into the FBI’s Clinton email investigation, including public statements Comey made at critical moments in the presidential campaign. Horowitz’s focus was always to be on how the FBI did its work, not to re-litigate the case against Clinton. Nor did the IG plan to look into anything regarding Russiagate.

In a damning passage, the 568 page report found it “extraordinary and insubordinate for Comey to conceal his intentions from his superiors… for the admitted purpose of preventing them from telling him not to make the statement, and to instruct his subordinates in the FBI to do the same. By departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and department norms, the decisions negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the department as fair administrators of justice.” Comey’s drafting of a press release announcing no prosecution for Clinton, written before the full investigation was even completed, is given a light touch though in the report, along the lines of roughly preparing for the conclusion based on early indications.

Attorney General Loretta Lynch is criticized for not being more sensitive to public perceptions when she agreed to meet privately with Bill Clinton aboard an airplane as the FBI investigation into Hillary unfolded. “Lynch’s failure to recognize the appearance problem… and to take action to cut the visit short was an error in judgment.” Her statements later about her decision not to recuse further “created public confusion and didn’t adequately address the situation.”

The report also criticizes in depth FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, who exchanged texts disparaging Trump before moving from the Clinton email to the Russiagate investigation. Those texts “brought discredit” to the FBI and sowed public doubt about the investigation, including one exchange that read, “Page: “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Strzok: “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.” Another Strzok document stated “we know foreign actors obtained access to some Clinton emails, including at least one secret message.”

To continue reading: Real Takeaway: The FBI Influenced the Election of a President

Bombshells Everywhere During Horowitz Day 2 Testimony, by Tyler Durden

How about that, Hillary Clinton was never under direct FBI scrutiny concerning her emails. No wonder she got off scott-free. From Tyler Durden at zerohedge.com:

Inspector General Michael Horowitz returned to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to answer questions at a joint hearing of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, one day after he testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

While Monday’s testimony by Horowitz and FBI Director Christopher Wray was certainly eye-opening – Congressional Investigators uncovered several game-changing bombshells on Tuesday that will re-frame the entire discussion. Hat-tip to Paul Sperry for reporting these stunning developments in real time.

  • There were no actual subjects of the Hillary Clinton email investigation, meaning that neither Hillary nor any of her top aides – including Huma Abedin and the IT guys who set up her illegal server and then used “bleachbit” to destroy evidence (for which they received immunity) – were ever under any direct FBI scrutiny. Horowitz found this “surprising.”

To continue reading: Bombshells Everywhere During Horowitz Day 2 Testimony