NSA Analyst: The FBI Investigation of EmailGate Was a Sham

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House NSA Analyst: The FBI Investigation of EmailGate Was a Sham

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #53812
    bnw
    Blocked

    The FBI Investigation of EmailGate Was a Sham

    NSA Analyst: We now have incontrovertible proof the Bureau never had any intention of prosecuting Hillary Clinton

    By John R. Schindler • 09/25/16 8:30am

    From the moment the EmailGate scandal went public more than a year ago, it was obvious that the Federal Bureau of Investigation never had much enthusiasm for prosecuting Hillary Clinton or her friends. Under President Obama, the FBI grew so politicized that it became impossible for the Bureau to do its job – at least where high-ranking Democrats are concerned.

    As I observed in early July, when Director James Comey announced that the FBI would not be seeking prosecution of anyone on Team Clinton over EmailGate, the Bureau had turned its back on its own traditions of floating above partisan politics in the pursuit of justice. “Malfeasance by the FBI, its bending to political winds, is a matter that should concern all Americans, regardless of their politics,” I stated, noting that it’s never a healthy turn of events in a democracy when your secret police force gets tarnished by politics.

    Just how much Comey and his Bureau punted on EmailGate has become painfully obvious since then. Redacted FBI documents from that investigation, dumped on the Friday afternoon before the long Labor Day weekend, revealed that Hillary Clinton either willfully lied to the Bureau, repeatedly, about her email habits as secretary of state, or she is far too dumb to be our commander-in-chief.

    Worse, the FBI completely ignored the appearance of highly classified signals intelligence in Hillary’s email, including information lifted verbatim from above-Top Secret NSA reports back in 2011. This crime, representing the worst compromise of classified information in EmailGate – that the public knows of, at least – was somehow deemed so uninteresting that nobody at the FBI bothered to ask anybody on Team Clinton about it.

    This stunning omission appears highly curious to anybody versed in counterintelligence matters, not least since during Obama’s presidency, the FBI has prosecuted Americans for compromising information far less classified than what Clinton and her staff exposed on Hillary “unclassified” email server of bathroom infamy.

    This week, however, we learned that there is actually no mystery at all here. The FBI was never able to get enough traction in its investigation of EmailGate to prosecute anybody since the Bureau had already granted immunity to key players in that scandal.

    Granting immunity is a standard practice in investigations, and is sometimes unavoidable. Giving a pass to Bryan Pagliano, Hillary’s IT guru who set up her email and server, made some sense since he understands what happened here, technically speaking, and otherwise is a small fish. The wisdom of giving him a pass now seems debatable, though, since Pagliano has twice refused to testify before Congress about his part in EmailGate, blowing off subpoenas. Just this week the House Oversight Committee recommended that Pagliano be cited for contempt of Congress for his repeated no-shows. That vote was on strictly partisan lines, with not a single Democrat on the committee finding Pagliano’s ignoring of Congressional subpoenas to be worthy of censure.

    Now it turns out the FBI granted immunity to much bigger fish in the Clinton political tank. Three more people got a pass from the Bureau in exchange for their cooperation: Hillary lawyer Heather Samuelson, State Department IT boss John Bental, and – by far the most consequential – Cheryl Mills, who has been a Clinton flunky-cum-factotum for decades.

    Mills served as the State Department’s Chief of Staff and Counselor throughout Hillary’s tenure as our nation’s top diplomat. Granting her immunity in EmailGate, given her deep involvement in that scandal – including the destruction of tens of thousands of emails so they could not be handed over to the FBI – now seems curious, to say the least, particularly because Mills sat in on Hillary’s chat with the Bureau regarding EmailGate.

    This was in fact so highly irregular that Jason Chaffetz, chair of the House Oversight Committee, pronounced himself “absolutely stunned” by the FBI’s granting of immunity to Cheryl Mills – which he learned of only on Friday. “No wonder they couldn’t prosecute a case,” Rep. Chaffetz observed of Comey’s Bureau: “They were handing out immunity deals like candy.”

    Not to mention that Mills has a longstanding and well-deserved reputation in Washington for helping the Clintons dodge investigation after investigation. When Bill and Hillary need a fixer to help them bury the bodies – as they say inside the Beltway – trusty Cheryl Mills has been on call for the last quarter-century.

    She played a key role in the Whitewater scandal of the 1990s – and so did James Comey. Fully two decades ago, when Comey was a Senate investigator, he tried to get Mills, then deputy counsel to Bill Clinton’s White House, to hand over relevant documents. Mills went full dog-ate-my-homework, claiming that a burglar had taken the files, leading Comey to unavoidably conclude that she was obstructing his investigation. Mills’ cover-up, the Senate investigators assessed, encompassed “destruction of documents” and “highly improper” behavior.

    Such misconduct is a career-ender for normal people in Washington, but not for Cheryl Mills, who over the last several decades has followed the Clintons everywhere they go. Mills has proven her loyalty to Clinton, Inc. time and again, and that loyalty has been rewarded with a pass on prosecution in EmailGate.

    To say nothing of the fact that as chief of staff at Foggy Bottom, Mills was in no way functioning as Hillary’s personal lawyer, as Clinton advocates have contended. Even her other title, State Department Counselor, has nothing to do with legal matters, despite the name. That role is traditionally assigned to an esteemed foreign policy guru who is supposed to offer sage counsel to the secretary of state. Mills’ predecessor as Counselor was Eliot Cohen, one of the country’s preeminent scholars of international relations. Leave it to the Clintons to turn that job over to one of their trusted cabal, translating Counselor in mafia fashion as consigliere.

    “The whole thing stinks,” explained a retired FBI senior official who professed dismay about the state of his former employer. “This was impossible in my time, unthinkable,” he rued, expressing shock that the Bureau allowed Mills to remain involved in the investigation, including acting as Hillary’s personal lawyer, despite her own immunity.

    How exactly Cheryl Mills got immunity, and what its terms were, is the long-awaited “smoking gun” in EmailGate, the clear indication that, despite countless man-hours expended on the year-long investigation, James Comey and his FBI never had any intention of prosecuting Hillary Clinton – or anyone – for her mishandling of classified information as secretary of state.

    Why Comey decided to give Mills a get-out-of-jail-free card is something that needs proper investigation. This is raw, naked politics in all its ugly and cynical glory. Corruption is the tamest word to describe this sort of dirty backroom deal which makes average Americans despise politics and politicians altogether.

    How high in this administration EmailGate went is the key question, and it’s been reopened by the latest tranche of redacted documents that the FBI released – on Friday afternoon, as usual. There are lots of tantalizing tidbits here, including the fact that early in Hillary’s term at Foggy Bottom, State Department officials were raising awkward legal questions about her highly irregular email and server arrangements.

    Most intriguing, however, is the revelation that Hillary was communicating with President Obama via personal email, and he was using an alias. The alias he used with Hillary, and apparently others, was withheld by the FBI, and let it be said the fact that the president wanted to disguise his identity in unclassified email is not all that odd.

    What is odd, however, is the fact that Obama previously told the media that he only learned of Hillary’s irregular email and server arrangements from “news reports.” How the president failed to notice that he was emailing his top diplomat at her personal, clintonmail.com address, not a state.gov account, particularly when they were discussing official business, is something Congress may want to find out – since certainly the FBI won’t.

    Indeed, when she was being interviewed by the Bureau, Hillary’s ever-faithful sidekick Huma Abedin, was asked about President Obama’s emailing to Hillary using an alias. “How is this not classified?” inquired the mystified Abedin.

    How indeed?

    The fact that the FBI redacted the contents of that email indicates that is was classified, although it was sent to Hillary’s personal email and transited her personal server.

    This, like so many aspects of EmailGate, seems destined to remain a mystery, at least for now. The State Department won’t release the full collection of Clinton’s emails until after our November 8 election. Just this week a Federal judge blasted Foggy Bottom for its slow-rolling: “The State Department needs to start cooperating to the fullest extent possible. They are not perceived to be doing that.” Nevertheless, the public won’t get to see all of Hillary’s emails until after Americans decide who the next president will be.

    For Hillary Clinton, winning that election may be a legal necessity to protect her from prosecution. Congress, animated by these latest revelations of illegality and corruption, will now pursue her with vigor, while an FBI in the hands of Donald Trump seems likely to show an interest in EmailGate which the Bureau never possessed under President Obama.

    Regardless, this story has emerged yet again to tar Hillary Clinton’s reputation at the worst possible time, when her campaign is lagging in the polls. We can be sure that her Republican opponent will mention EmailGate in Monday’s inaugural presidential debate. The Democratic nominee should have coherent answers about her email and server at the ready if she wants to avoid a debacle before the cameras.

    John Schindler is a security expert and former National Security Agency analyst and counterintelligence officer. A specialist in espionage and terrorism, he’s also been a Navy officer and a War College professor. He’s published four books and is on Twitter at @20committee.
    The FBI Investigation of EmailGate Was a Sham

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #53816
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    bnw,

    Tell me, if Chelsea Clinton’s husband owned a media outlet, and he published an Op Ed highly critical of Trump, you’d dismiss it, right? Out of hand. You’d say there were obvious conflicts of interest, or something like that. You basically dismiss all criticism of Trump, regardless of Clinton connections, but if someone in the Clinton family did that, it would be automatic, correct?

    Well, the owner and publisher of the observer is Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump’s husband.

    You also should google the author. A sleazy, highly authoritarian (former) NSA operative, who is always ranting against government transparency. His politics are well-known and decidedly right wing.

    #53820
    bnw
    Blocked

    bnw,

    Tell me, if Chelsea Clinton’s husband owned a media outlet, and he published an Op Ed highly critical of Trump, you’d dismiss it, right? Out of hand. You’d say there were obvious conflicts of interest, or something like that. You basically dismiss all criticism of Trump, regardless of Clinton connections, but if someone in the Clinton family did that, it would be automatic, correct?

    Well, the owner and publisher of the observer is Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump’s husband.

    You also should google the author. A sleazy, highly authoritarian (former) NSA operative, who is always ranting against government transparency. His politics are well-known and decidedly right wing.

    The issue is the sham investigation by the FBI. Even Obama lied about his knowledge of the private email server. Those are facts. Facts are facts regardless of who writes or publishes. Can’t wait for Trump to select a non-Clinton/Wall Street crime syndicate affiliated U.S. Attorney General and FBI Director.

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #53822
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    The issue is the sham investigation by the FBI. Even Obama lied about his knowledge of the private email server. Those are facts. Facts are facts regardless of who writes or publishes. Can’t wait for Trump to select a non-Clinton/Wall Street crime syndicate affiliated U.S. Attorney General and FBI Director.

    Bnw, this is really frustrating for me. I detest both parties. I don’t want either party to be anywhere near power. I can’t stand the Clintons, and they deserve a ton of criticism. A ton. Leftists have done amazing work, as far as investigative journalism regarding the Democrats, Clinton and BOTH parties.

    That said, nothing you have ever posted on this board, as a criticism of Clinton, is factual. It’s all right-wing fringe, paranoid nonsense.

    The right doesn’t offer facts. It offers fear, lies and delusion. For decades and decades, they’ve lied and smeared and slandered their opponents, destroyed lives, destroyed activists for the people, and the Alt-Right is latest iteration of this. If you are serious about finding good, honest, accurate critique of the Clintons, look to voices to the left of the mainstream. You won’t find any honest, accurate, objective voices on the hard right.

    Emailgate? It’s manufactured nonsense. If the GOP didn’t see Clinton as a future candidate, they never would have bothered relentlessly investigating her. Same goes with the other nothingburger, Benghazi. Same goes with all of the phony scandals they whipped up to try to bring Obama down. Tragically, the Dems, along with Obama and Clinton, actually have engaged in horrific actions. Trouble is, the GOP was and is complicit in all of it. They’ve always supported capitalism and its violent export, colonialism, imperialism, empire, war after war after war, the mass surveillance state, etc. etc. They’re actually even more aggressive about these things than the Dems.

    And Trump? He is too. He’s every bit the authoritarian piece of garbage that seems to pervade both parties. That you actually think he will be your champion is beyond baffling. He won’t. He’s always been for no one but himself.

    #53823
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    In short, bnw, your sources aren’t credible in the slightest. They just push fringe paranoid garbage. Decade after decade, that’s all we’ve gotten from the hard right. Lies, smears, appeals to abject fear, racism, homophobia, misogyny. You should reject Trump outright because he’s using the Alt-Right to gain power, radically increase his own wealth, and make sure his heirs never have to pay a dime in tax. He’s a crook, a serial liar and a con-artist.

    Clinton is terrible. But Trump is a fascist wannabe. The Dems are a terrible, awful, no good party. But the GOP is now under the thumb of outright fascists.

    The answer to the terrible, no good Dems is NOT the far worse, far more despicable Republicans.

    #53849
    bnw
    Blocked

    The upside to being a Rams fan is heartbreak.

    Sprinkles are for winners.

    #53852
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    bnw,

    Seriously. The record of the far right — Trump’s base — when it comes to their umpteen faux “scandals,” is soooo abysmal, so absurd, so steeped in abject paranoia and fear, they’ve discredited themselves for generations to come. Sandy Hook as a supposed “false flag” does that all by itself.

    They haven’t come close to “the truth” in centuries. Literally.

    Again, your best bet, when it comes to accurate, honest critique of the Dems and Clinton, is to find leftist sources. Chomsky is a great place to start, and someone who has perhaps the best Rolodex of critics available, anywhere. WV has been championing him for years and years, against the odds, and rightly so.

    If truth matters to you, bnw, I guarantee you this: You will never, ever find it on the right.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.