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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 Caller‘s 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.
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 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 pages, of 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
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