Tag Archives: Seth Rich

Murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich was alive and conscious when found by police

Two days ago, on May 15, 2017, Rod Wheeler, a private investigator affiliated with the family of slain Democratic National Committee (DNC) staffer Seth Rich who was murdered last July in Washington, DC, told Fox 5 DC that there is tangible evidence on Rich’s laptop that confirms he was communicating with WikiLeaks prior to his death.

According to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and the hacker Guccifer 2.0, Seth Rich had supplied thousands of damaging DNC emails to WikiLeaks.

In an exchange of emails, Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign officials John Podesta and Joel Benenson vowed to “make examples of” suspected leakers, for whom there would be “stiff consequences”.

Wheeler, a former D.C. police homicide detective, believes there is a cover-up of Rich’s murder, that the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) has been told to back down from the investigation, and that neither MPD nor the FBI have been forthcoming.

See “Arkancide: Seth Rich was murdered for leaking DNC emails to WikiLeaks

On Tuesday, a day later, Fox 5 DC tweeted that “DC Police say Wheeler’s assertion that detectives instructed to stand down regarding Rich case is false.”

Now, two new developments have come to light in the assassination of Seth Rich.

(1) Seth Rich was still alive when the police found him

According to D.C. Metropolitan Police’s CCN #16113797 Public Incident Report on Seth Rich (source: ScribD):

  • On July 10, 2016, at 4:20 a.m., Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) officer Jody O’Leary responded to a gun shooting at a residential neighborhood in D.C. — the southwest corner of 2134 Flagler Place NW, Washington, DC 20001.
  • Officer O’Leary was assisted by MPD officers Robert Wingate Robinson, Derek Tarr, Shea Ellis, Benjamin Velez and Mark Lee (Velez and Lee wore body cameras).
  • The victim was Seth Conrad Rich.
  • Rich was shot in the back, not the head, and was still alive and conscious when police found him.

Note: An anonymous poster on 4chan who claims to be an ER surgeon, said Rich’s gun wounds were not fatal and was doing well after the operation, only to die several hours later under suspicious circumstances. See “ER surgeon at Seth Rich’s hospital says his wounds were not fatal“.

Here’s MPD’s “Public Narrative” on the shooting:

CIC reports the sound of gunshots at 2134 Flagler Pl. NW. Upon arriving to the scene, the decedent was laying in the Southwest corner of the intersection of W St. and Flagler Pl. NW. The decedent was conscious and breathing with apparent gunshot wound(s) to the back. The decedent was transported to local area hospital and was pronounced [sic] by attending physician at 0557 hours.

Below is a screenshot of the MPD Public Incident Report:

(2) Relative of DC police officer worked for Hillary Clinton?

Robert Wingate Robinson was one of the MPD officers on the scene of Seth Rich’s murder. On the Metropolitan Police Department’s website, he is listed as Robert Wingate-Robinson.

There’s a Nandi Robinson, 23, who lives with a Robert Robinson in Bel Air, Maryland, 57 miles from Washington, DC (Spokeo).

Nandi Robinson‘s LinkedIn page says that:

  • In 2010, she graduated with a B.A. in Economics from Michigan State University.
  • From April 2015 to April 2016, she worked as a Research Associate for Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign Hillary for America.
  • From May 2016 to present, she is an IE Deputy Research Director at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in metro D.C.

Is Nandi Robinson related to MPD Officer Robert Wingate Robinson?

Seth Rich’s parents, Joel and Mary Ann, are asking people to disregard “conspiracy theories” about their son’s death, and insist that they firmly believe Seth was the victim of a random robbery as MPD claims, although the killer(s) did not take Rich’s wallet, watch, and cell phone.

Maxwell Tani of Business Insider writes:

Many top right-leaning outlets have dismissed intelligence and law-enforcement findings that Russia hacked and leaked private DNC emails in which top staffers were hostile to Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders during the 2016 Democratic primary.

The insinuation that Rich leaked the emails has reignited the claim online that Rich’s dissatisfaction with the DNC, not Russian interference, influenced the election. On Monday, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange retweeted the Fox 5 story.

Rich’s family said Wheeler’s assertions were “unsubstantiated claims” and that they saw “no facts, we have seen no evidence, we have been approached with no emails and only learned about this when contacted by the press.”

“Even if tomorrow an email was found, it is not a high enough bar of evidence to prove any interactions as emails can be altered, and we’ve seen that those interested in pushing conspiracies will stop at nothing to do so,” the family said in a statement.

H/t Jim Stone

~Eowyn

Advertisements

Arkancide: Seth Rich was murdered for leaking DNC emails to WikiLeaks

In the midst of the Democratic National Convention last July, WikiLeaks spoiled the Demonrats’ lovefest by releasing some 2,000 Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails.

Those emails show the DNC to be thoroughly corrupt. Long before Hillary Clinton won the 2016 Democratic primary elections and became her party’s presumptive presidential nominee, the DNC had become her tool, colluding with journalists to shield her, and working to undermine her Democrat opponent Bernie Sanders. (See “Hacked emails show Democratic National Committee to be corrupt arm of Hillary”)

At about 4:19 a.m. on Sunday, July 10, 2016, a 27 year-old DNC staffer named Seth Conrad Rich was shot and killed in the 2100 block of Flagler Place NW in Washington, DC. The murder did not appear to be robbery-related because the killer(s) did not take Rich’s wallet, watch, and phone.

Rich, reportedly a supporter of Bernie Sanders, did voter outreach for the DNC.

Below is the D.C. Metropolitan Police’s poster offering a reward for information about the murder.

Ten months later, Rich’s murder is still unsolved.

Here are the reasons why the murder of Seth Rich is yet another case of Arkancide.

(1) John Podesta emailS On punishing leakers:

On February 21 and 22, 2015, there was an exchange of emails between Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign chairman John Podesta and Joel Benenson, a pollster and chief strategist of Hillary’s campaign, about damaging leaks from the campaign.

Benenson initiated the exchange with an email on the night of February 21 (sent at 10:12 PM) to Podesta, in which he bemoaned a story about Hillary or the campaign, calling it “by far the most damaging story and most damaging type of story we can have.”

The next morning, Feb. 22, Podesta responded with an email saying that the story had been leaked by “big mouths blabbing” — “someone on the inside was talking”.

Benenson replied:

“I think Robby [Mook, Hillary’s campaign manager] rightly says that a lot of our leaks are coming through job searches we’re doing…. I think we have to make examples now of people who have violated the trust of HRC and the rest of the team. People going forward need to know there are stiff consequences for leaking, self-promotion, unauthorized talking with the press.”

To which Podesta replied:

“Agree…. I’m definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it.

See the exchange of emails for yourself on WikiLeaks.

(2) Seth Rich leaked DNC emails to wikileaks

“People need to know there are stiff consequences for leaking,” wrote Hillary’s campaign chief strategist Joel Benenson.

“I’m definitely for making an example of a suspected leaker whether or not we have any real basis for it,” wrote Hillary’s campaign chair John Podesta.

Below are two pieces of evidence that point to Seth Rich as the DNC insider who leaked the damaging DNC emails to WikiLeaks, and was murdered (“stiff consequences”; “make an example of”) for it:

(A) On August 9, 2016, in an interview on Dutch television Nieuwsuur, WikiLeaks‘ founder Julian Assange effectively admits Seth Rich was the source of the leaked DNC emails. He said:

Whistleblowers have gone to significant efforts to get us material and often very significant risks, as a 27-year-old that works for the DNC was shot in the back, murdered, just two weeks ago, for unknown reasons, as he was walking down the street in Washington.”

Asked by his interviewer if Rich’s murder was a robbery, Assange says “No” and that “Our sources take risks and they become concerned to see things occurring like that.”

(B) Yesterday, Fox5 Washington, DC, reports:

Rod Wheeler, a private investigator hired by the Rich family, suggests there is tangible evidence on Rich’s laptop that confirms he was communicating with WikiLeaks prior to his death….

Wheeler, a former D.C. police homicide detective, …believes there is a cover-up and the [D.C.] police department has been told to back down from the investigation.

‘The police department nor the FBI have been forthcoming,’ said Wheeler. ‘They haven’t been cooperating at all. I believe that the answer to solving his death lies on that computer, which I believe is either at the police department or either at the FBI. I have been told both.’

When we asked Wheeler if his sources have told him there is information that links Rich to Wikileaks, he said, ‘Absolutely. Yeah. That’s confirmed.’

Wheeler also told us, ‘I have a source inside the police department that has looked at me straight in the eye and said, ‘Rod, we were told to stand down on this case and I can’t share any information with you.’ Now, that is highly unusual for a murder investigation, especially from a police department. Again, I don’t think it comes from the chief’s office, but I do believe there is a correlation between the mayor’s office and the DNC and that is the information that will come out [Tuesday].”

By “Tuesday,” Wheeler means today, May 16, 2017.

A federal investigator who reviewed an FBI forensic report detailing the contents of Seth Rich’s computer generated within 96 hours after his murder, said Rich had made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter, documentary filmmaker, and director of WikiLeaks who was living in London at the time.

“I have seen and read the emails between Seth Rich and Wikileaks,” the federal investigator told Fox News, confirming the MacFadyen connection. He said the emails are in possession of the FBI, while the stalled case is in the hands of the DC Metropolitan Department.

H/t FOTM‘s DCG and CP

See updates to this post:

See also these related posts:

~Eowyn

Trump makes 180° reversal on WikiLeaks, now called ‘a hostile agent’ in collusion with Russia

Donald Trump owes WikiLeaks no small amount for his winning the 2016 presidential election.

Were it not for WikiLeaks‘ publishing of Democrat emails — those of Hillary Clinton, Democratic National Committee (DNC), and John Podesta — the voter would not have known the corrupt pay-to-play Clinton Foundation, Hillary’s illegal private email server, the DNC’s corruption and betrayal of Hillary’s primary rival Bernie Sanders, and the satanic practices of Podesta and Pizzagate.

Throughout, Trump had been supportive and never critical of WikiLeaks. As an example, on January 4, 2017, Trump tweeted this:

In a speech on October 10, 2016, Trump declared, “I love WikiLeaks!” (New York Times)

Before he became the Trump administration’s CIA director, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kansas) similarly was approving of the WikiLeaks emails. On July 24, 2016, Pompeo tweeted this:

Then was then, now is now.

Then, Trump needed WikiLeaks. Now that he’s President, WikiLeaks has become “a hostile agent”.

Matthew Rosenberg reports for The New York Times that in his first speech as director of the CIA yesterday, April 13, 2017, Mike Pompeo attacked WikiLeaks as a stateless hostile intelligence unit eager to do the bidding of Russia and other U.S. adversaries. Pompeo said, “It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is: a nonstate hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.”

“It’s time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is: a nonstate hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.” You would think we’re still in the Obama administration or a Hillary Clinton administration.

To support his assessment, Pompeo cited as evidence of WikiLeaks‘ hostile intent the latter’s release of Democratic Party emails — the exact same emails that Pompeo had promoted in July 2016, but now insists had been stolen by Russian hackers, although both WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and hacker Guccifer 2.0 maintain the leaker was a DNC staffer named Seth Rich, 27.

On early Sunday morning, July 10, 2016, Seth was shot dead in the streets of Washington, DC. His assassination remains unsolved.

Pompeo also cited how WikiLeaks encouraged followers to join the C.I.A. and steal secrets, and how “it overwhelmingly focuses on the United States while seeking support from antidemocratic countries.”

Pompeo’s harshest words were reserved for Assange, whom Pompeo calls a “narcissist,” “a fraud — a coward hiding behind a screen,” and a “false wizard”.

There goes our hope and expectation that a President Trump would commend Assange and provide him political asylum and a safe refuge in America.

The 180° reversal is because the Trump administration now finds itself on the receiving end of WikiLeaks disclosures. Last month, the group released thousands of pages of documents describing sophisticated software tools and techniques used by the C.I.A. to break into the American people’s smartphones, computers and even internet-connected televisions.

~Eowyn

23 intelligence-military veterans demand Obama release proof of Russian hacking or admit it’s a lie

23 U.S. intelligence, military and diplomatic veterans have written an extraordinary letter calling on Obama to release the evidence that Russia had hacked the 2016 presidential election in order to elect Donald Trump, or admit that there is no proof.

You don’t and won’t see this letter on the MSM.

The 23 former officials are members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

In their letter, the former federal government officials:

  1. Point out that the Obama administration’s published intelligence report — on Russia’s alleged hacking of the election and transmittal of hacked Democrat emails to WikiLeaks to publish — lacks evidence and is unconvincing.
  2. Assert that, if Russia indeed had transmitted hacked emails to WikiLeaks, the NSA should — but does not — have the incriminating  electronic communications between the Kremlin and Wikileaks.
  3. Assert that the Democrat emails obtained by WikiLeaks were leaked, not hacked, which would explain why there are no electronic traces. By “leaked” is meant that someone(s) handed to WikiLeaks the actual physical hardcopies of the emails. (Note: That is what WikiLeaks has maintained all along. Julian Assange had implied that the source of the leak was a DNC staffer named Seth Rich, 27, who was shot and killed in a D.C. street on July 10, 2016. His murder is still unsolved. We want Justice for Seth Rich!)
  4. Convey their dismay that James Clapper, who oversees the entire U.S. intelligence system as Director of National Intelligence, is still in office despite him having lied under oath to Congress and made outright erroneous claims.

Below is their letter. You can read it in PDF format here. I supplied the red color for certain sentences and paragraphs that I believe particularly merit your attention.

James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence

James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence

MEMORANDUM FOR: President Barack Obama
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)
SUBJECT: A Key Issue That Still Needs to be Resolved

As President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take the oath of office Friday, a pall hangs over his upcoming presidency amid an unprecedentedly concerted campaign to delegitimize it. Unconfirmed accusations continue to swirl alleging that Russian President Vladimir Putin authorized “Russian hacking” that helped put Mr. Trump in the White House.

As President for a few more days, you have the power to demand concrete evidence of a link between the Russians and WikiLeaks, which published the bulk of the information in question. Lacking that evidence, the American people should be told that there is no fire under the smoke and mirrors of recent weeks. We urge you to authorize public release of any tangible evidence that takes us beyond the unsubstantiated, “we-assess” judgments by the intelligence agencies. Otherwise, we – as well as other skeptical Americans – will be left with the corrosive suspicion that the intense campaign of accusations is part of a wider attempt to discredit the Russians and those – like Mr. Trump – who wish to deal constructively with them.

Remember the Maine?

Alleged Russian interference has been labeled “an act of war” and Mr. Trump a “traitor.” But the “intelligence” served up to support those charges does not pass the smell test. Your press conference on Wednesday will give you a chance to respond more persuasively to NBC’s Peter Alexander’s challenge at the last one (on Dec. 16) “to show the proof [and], as they say, put your money where your mouth is and declassify some of the intelligence. …” You told Alexander you were reluctant to “compromise sources and methods.” We can understand that concern better than most Americans. We would remind you, though, that at critical junctures in the past, your predecessors made judicious decisions to give higher priority to buttressing the credibility of U.S. intelligence-based policy than to protecting sources and methods. With the Kremlin widely accused by politicians and pundits of “an act of war,” this is the kind of textbook case in which you might seriously consider taking special pains to substantiate serious allegations with hard intelligence – if there is any.

During the Cuban missile crisis, for instance, President Kennedy ordered us to show highly classified photos of Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba and on ships en route, even though this blew sensitive detail regarding the imagery intelligence capabilities of the cameras on our U-2 aircraft.

President Ronald Reagan’s reaction to the Libyan terrorist bombing of La Belle Disco in Berlin on April 5, 1986, that killed two and injured 79 other U.S. servicemen is another case in point. We had intercepted a Libyan message that morning: “At 1:30 in the morning one of the acts was carried out with success, without leaving a trace behind.” (We should add here that NSA’s dragnet SIGINT capability 30 years later renders it virtually impossible to avoid “leaving a trace behind” once a message is put on the network.)

President Reagan ordered the U.S. Air Force to bomb Col. Muammar Qaddafi’s palace compound to smithereens, killing several civilians. Amid widespread international consternation and demands for proof that Libya was responsible for the Berlin attack, President Reagan ordered us to make public the encrypted Libyan message, thereby sacrificing a collection/decryption capability unknown to the Libyans – until then.

As senior CIA veteran Milton Bearden has put it, there are occasions when more
damage is done by “protecting” sources and methods than by revealing them.

Where’s the Beef?

We find the New York Times– and Washington Post-led media Blitz against Trump and Putin truly extraordinary, despite our long experience with intelligence/media related issues. On Jan. 6, the day after your top intelligence officials published what we found to be an embarrassingly shoddy report purporting to prove Russian hacking in support of Trump’s candidacy, the Times banner headline across all six columns on page 1 read: “PUTIN LED SCHEME TO AID TRUMP, REPORT SAYS.

The lead article began: “President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia directed a vast cyberattack aimed at denying Hillary Clinton the presidency and installing Donald J. Trump in the Oval Office, the nation’s top intelligence agencies said in an extraordinary report they delivered on Friday to Mr. Trump.” Eschewing all subtlety, the Times added that the revelations in “this damning report … undermined the legitimacy” of the President-elect, and “made the case that Mr. Trump was the favored candidate of Mr. Putin.”

On page A10, however, Times investigative reporter Scott Shane pointed out: “What is missing from the public report is what many Americans most eagerly anticipated: hard evidence to back up the agencies’ claims that the Russian government engineered the election attack. That is a significant omission.” Shane continued, “Instead, the message from the agencies essentially amounts to ‘trust us.’ There is no discussion of the forensics used to recognize the handiwork of known hacking groups, no mention of intercepted communications between the Kremlin and the hackers, no hint of spies reporting from inside Moscow’s propaganda machinery.

Shane added that the intelligence report “offers an obvious reason for leaving out the details, declaring that including ‘the precise bases for its assessments’ would ‘reveal sensitive sources and methods and imperil the ability to collect critical foreign intelligence in the future.’”

Shane added a quote from former National Security Agency lawyer Susan Hennessey: “The unclassified report is underwhelming at best. There is essentially no new information for those who have been paying attention.” Ms. Hennessey served as an attorney in NSA’s Office of General Counsel and is now a Brookings Fellow in National Security Law.

Everyone Hacks

There is a lot of ambiguity – whether calculated or not – about “Russian hacking.” “Everyone knows that everyone hacks,” says everyone: Russia hacks; China hacks; every nation that can hacks. So do individuals of various nationalities. This is not the question.

You said at your press conference on Dec. 16 “the intelligence that I have seen gives me great confidence in their [U.S. intelligence agencies’] assessment that the Russians carried out this hack.” “Which hack?” you were asked. “The hack of the DNC and the hack of John Podesta,” you answered.

Earlier during the press conference you alluded to the fact that “the information was in the hands of WikiLeaks.” The key question is how the material from “Russian hacking” got to WikiLeaks, because it was WikiLeaks that published the DNC and Podesta emails.

Our VIPS colleague William Binney, who was Technical Director of NSA and created many of the collection systems still in use, assures us that NSA’s “cast-iron” coverage – particularly surrounding Julian Assange and other people associated with WikiLeaks – would almost certainly have yielded a record of any electronic transfer from Russia to WikiLeaks. Binney has used some of the highly classified slides released by Edward Snowden to demonstrate precisely how NSA accomplishes this using trace mechanisms embedded throughout the network. [See: “U.S. Intel Vets Dispute Russia Hacking Claims,” Dec. 12, 2016.]

NSA Must Come Clean

We strongly suggest that you ask NSA for any evidence it may have indicating that the results of Russian hacking were given to WikiLeaks. If NSA can produce such evidence, you may wish to order whatever declassification may be needed and then release the evidence. This would go a long way toward allaying suspicions that no evidence exists. If NSA cannot give you that information – and quickly – this would probably mean it does not have any.

In all candor, the checkered record of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper for trustworthiness makes us much less confident that anyone should take it on faith that he is more “trustworthy than the Russians,” as you suggested on Dec. 16. You will probably recall that Clapper lied under oath to the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 12, 2013, about NSA dragnet activities; later apologizing for testimony he admitted had been “clearly erroneous.” In our Memorandum for you on Dec. 11, 2013, we cited chapter and verse as to why Clapper should have been fired for saying things he knew to be “clearly erroneous.”

In that Memorandum, we endorsed the demand by Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner that Clapper be removed. “Lying to Congress is a federal offense, and Clapper ought to be fired and prosecuted for it,” said Sensenbrenner in an interview with The Hill. “The only way laws are effective is if they’re enforced.” Actually, we have had trouble understanding why, almost four years after he deliberately misled the Senate, Clapper remains Director of National Intelligence – overseeing the entire intelligence community.

Hacks or Leaks?

Not mentioned until now is our conclusion that leaks are the source of the WikiLeaks disclosures in question – not hacking. Leaks normally leave no electronic trace. William Binney has been emphasizing this for several months and suggesting strongly that the disclosures were from a leaker with physical access to the information – not a hacker with only remote access. This, of course, makes it even harder to pin the blame on President Putin, or anyone else. And we suspect that this explains why NSA demurred when asked to join the CIA and FBI in expressing “high confidence” in this key judgment of the report put out under Clapper’s auspices on Jan. 6, yielding this curious formulation:

We also assess Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help President-elect Trump’s election chances when possible by discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and FBI have high confidence in this judgment; NSA has moderate confidence.” (Emphasis [bold], and lack of emphasis, in original)

In addition, former U.K. Ambassador Craig Murray has said publicly he has first-
hand information on the provenance of the leaks, and has expressed surprise that no one from the New York Times or the Washington Post has tried to get in touch with him. We would be interested in knowing whether anyone from your administration, including the intelligence community, has made any effort to contact Ambassador Murray.

What to Do

President-elect Trump said a few days ago that his team will have a “full report on hacking within 90 days.” Whatever the findings of the Trump team turn out to be, they will no doubt be greeted with due skepticism, since Mr. Trump is in no way a disinterested party.

You, on the other hand, enjoy far more credibility – AND power – for the next few days. And we assume you would not wish to hobble your successor with charges that cannot withstand close scrutiny. We suggest you order the chiefs of the NSA, FBI and CIA to the White House and ask them to lay all their cards on the table. They need to show you why you should continue to place credence in what, a month ago, you described as “uniform intelligence assessments” about Russian hacking.

At that point, if the intelligence heads have credible evidence, you have the option of ordering it released – even at the risk of damage to sources and methods. For what it may be worth, we will not be shocked if it turns out that they can do no better than the evidence-deprived assessments they have served up in recent weeks. In that case, we would urge you, in all fairness, to let the American people in on the dearth of convincing evidence before you leave office. As you will have gathered by now, we strongly suspect that the evidence your intelligence chiefs have of a joint Russian-hacking-WikiLeaks-publishing operation is no better than the “intelligence” evidence in 2002-2003 – expressed then with comparable flat-fact “certitude” – of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

Obama’s Legacy

Mr. President, there is much talk in your final days in office about your legacy. Will part of that legacy be that you stood by while flames of illegitimacy rose willy-nilly around your successor? Or will you use your power to reveal the information – or the fact that there are merely unsupported allegations – that would enable us to deal with them responsibly?

In the immediate wake of the holiday on which we mark the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., it seems appropriate to make reference to his legacy, calling to mind the graphic words in his “Letter From the Birmingham City Jail,” with which he reminds us of our common duty to expose lies and injustice:

“Like a boil that can never be cured as long as it is covered up, but must be opened with all its pus-flowing ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must likewise be exposed, with all of the tension its exposing creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.”

-End of Memo-

The above memorandum to Barack Obama is signed by the following 23 former U.S. officials who represent the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS):

  1. William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military  Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)
  2. Marshall Carter-Tripp, Foreign Service Officer (ret) and former Office Director in the State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research
  3. Thomas Drake, former Senior Executive, NSA
  4. Bogdan Dzakovic, Former Team Leader of Federal Air Marshals and Red Team, FAA Security, (ret.) (associate VIPS)
  5. Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)
  6. Mike Gravel, former Adjutant, top secret control officer, Communications Intelligence Service; special agent of the Counter Intelligence Corps and former United States Senator
  7. Matthew Hoh, former Capt., USMC, Iraq & Foreign Service Officer, Afghanistan (associate VIPS)
  8. Larry Johnson, former CIA Intelligence Officer & former State Department Counter-Terrorism Official, ret.
  9. Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF (Ret.); ex-Master SERE Instructor for Strategic Reconnaissance Operations (NSA/DIA) and Special Mission Units (JSOC)
  10. Brady Kiesling, former U.S. Foreign Service Officer, ret. (Associate VIPS)
  11. John Kiriakou, Former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee
  12. Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003
  13. Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)
  14. David MacMichael, National Intelligence Council (ret.)
  15. Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA analyst (ret.)
  16. Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)
  17. Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for Middle East, CIA (ret.)
  18. Scott Ritter, former MAJ., USMC, former UN Weapon Inspector, Iraq
  19. Coleen Rowley, FBI Special Agent and former Minneapolis Division Legal Counsel (ret.)
  20. Peter Van Buren, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)
  21. Kirk Wiebe, former Senior Analyst, SIGINT Automation Research Center, NSA (ret.)
  22. Robert Wing, former Foreign Service Officer (associate VIPS)
  23. Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat

See also “Trump’s war with the CIA”.

~Eowyn

Former UK ambassador: Democrat whistleblowers leaked emails, not Russia

The “Russia intervened in 2016 election to favor Trump” conspiracy theory is the Democrats’ last-ditch effort to subvert the election by convincing the Electoral College to vote for Hillary next Monday. There’s even talk of redoing the presidential election itself.

Thus far, all we’ve heard and read is hearsay — by the Washington Post, by Obama, by this or that senator or congressman — that there is a secret CIA report on Russia’s nefarious role in the election in:

  1. Hacking the emails of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), Hillary Clinton, and her close associate, the very creepy John Podesta.
  2. Giving the hacked emails to unnamed “agents” who then supplied the emails to WikiLeaks to publish.

What the American people have not seen is the actual CIA report.

Stranger still is the fact that although several congressional committees are looking into the suspected Russian interference, U.S. intelligence agencies, including the CIA, refused a request to brief the House intelligence committee last Thursday (Dec. 15) on the cyber-attacks.

The legal dictionary defineshearsay” as “A statement made out of court that is offered in court as evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” The dictionary further explains that:

the Hearsay Rule, as outlined in the Federal Rules of Evidence, prohibits most statements made outside a courtroom from being used as evidence in court. This is because statements made out of court normally are not made under oath, a judge or jury cannot personally observe the demeanor of someone who makes a statement outside the courtroom, and an opposing party cannot cross-examine such a declarant (the person making the statement). Out-of-court statements hinder the ability of the judge or jury to probe testimony for inaccuracies caused by ambiguity, insincerity, faulty perception, or erroneous memory. Thus, statements made out of court are perceived as untrustworthy.”

And yet we are to accept that on the basis of hearsay about some secret CIA report, which no court would consider as evidence, the Electoral College should overturn the results of the 2016 election by voting for Hillary Clinton as president, despite Donald Trump having attained a majority of Electoral votes of 306 vs. Hillary’s 232.

But we do have a first-person testimony that is not hearsay — from former British ambassador Craig Murray, who claims he had received Hillary Clinton campaign emails, not from Russia, but from “disgusted” Democrat whistleblowers.

craig-murray

Alana Goodman reports for the Daily Mail that in an interview with Dailymail.com on Dec. 13, 2016, Craig Murray, who is a close associate of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, said he had flown to Washington, D.C. in September 2016 for a clandestine hand-off with one of the email sources. Murray retrieved the package during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in northwest D.C. The individual he met with was not the original person who obtained the information, but an intermediary.

Murray said:

“Neither of [the email leaks] came from the Russians. The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from [Democrat Party] inside leaks, not hacks.”

Murray said the leakers were motivated by “disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.” Murray declined to say where the sources worked and how they had access to the information, to shield their identities. He said that Podesta’s emails might be “of legitimate interest to the security services” in the U.S. due to his communications with Saudi Arabia lobbyists and foreign officials.

Murray said he was speaking out due to claims from CIA officials that Wikileaks was given the documents by Russian hackers as part of an effort to help Trump win the U.S. presidential election:

“I don’t understand why the CIA would say the information came from Russian hackers when they must know that isn’t true. Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the documents Wikileaks published did not come from that.”

Murray’s account cannot be independently verified but is in line with previous statements by Wikileaks:

seth-rich

  • In August 2016, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange intimated that DNC staffer Seth Rich was the source of the DNC emails. At about 4:19 a.m. on Sunday, July 10, 2016, 27 year-old Rich was shot and killed in the 2100 block of Flagler Place NW in Washington, DC. His murder remains unsolved to this day.
  • More recently in November in an interview with John Pilger, Assange said, “The Clinton camp has been able to project a neo-McCarthyist hysteria that Russia is responsible for everything. Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely, that 17 US intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That’s false – we can say that the Russian government is not the source.”

Murray is a controversial figure who was removed from his post as a British ambassador amid allegations of misconduct. He was a vocal critic of human rights abuses in Uzbekistan while serving as ambassador between 2002 and 2004, a stance that pitted him against the UK Foreign Office. Murray was cleared of charges of misconduct, but left the diplomatic service in acrimony.

His links to Wikileaks are well known and while his account is likely to be seen as both unprovable and possibly biased, it is also the first intervention by Wikileaks since reports surfaced last week that the CIA believes Russia had hacked the Clinton emails to help hand the election to Donald Trump.

See also:

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV

~Eowyn

Arkancide: lawyer of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange dead

The word Arkancide, probably coined by the website Arkancide, refers to potential witnesses to the Clintons’ dirty dealings in Arkansas suddenly committing suicide by shooting themselves in the back of the head.

Arkansas police and coroners, notably medical examiner Fahmy Malak who answered to then-Arkansas governor Bill Clinton, automatically called these shootings suicides. After Bill Clinton became President the phenomenon moved to Washington D.C., most notably when Hillary Clinton’s ex-lover Vincent Foster was found dead on a D.C. park bench and declared to also have committed suicide.

Now that Hillary is pursuing the presidency, Arkancides have resumed, including these recent cases:

dnc-arkancides.jpg

On August 9, 2016, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange intimated that Democratic National Committee (DNC) staffer Seth Rich, who was shot dead in Washington, DC, was the source for thousands of hacked DNC emails that expose the DNC as the corrupt arm of Hillary Clinton. WikiLeaks released the emails to the public, to the DNC’s embarassment. See:

WikiLeaks also obtained thousands of then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s supposedly-deleted emails, which WikiLeaks has been releasing piecemeal to the public. (See, for example “Hillary aide talks about animal sacrifice to demon Moloch in WikiLeaks email”)

Assange promises that emails especially damaging to Hillary’s presidential ambitions will be released right before the November election for maximum impact.

All of which makes WikiLeaks a thorn in the sides of Hillary and the DNC.

On August 15, 2016, WikiLeaks sent out a Twitter alert about another Arkancide — the strange “suicide” by train of Assange’s lawyer, John Jones, a prominent British human rights attorney.

WikiLeaks tweet on dead lawyer

Neil Tyson reports for The Sun that on April 18, 2016, John Jones, one of Britain’s top human rights lawyers who represented Assange, had died in an apparent suicide. (Assange, 44, has been holed-up for four years in the Ecuador Embassy in London, after the Swedish government tried to extradite him for questioning on rape charges.)

A spokesman for British Transport Police (BTP) said it was called to West Hampstead rail station in north London at 7:07 a.m. on Monday, April 18, after a man was struck by a train. The spokesman added that the man “was pronounced dead at the scene. The man’s death is not being treated as suspicious. A file will be prepared for the coroner.”

The man was John Jones.

John JonesBy all indications, Jones had everything to live for. He was only 48 years old, a successful, well-regarded attorney who lived in a £1.5 million home in Hendon, north London, with his beautiful and accomplished wife, 40-year-old Dr. Misa Zgonec-Rozej, director of an international law consultancy, and their two young children.

Dr. Misa Zgonec-RozejJohn Jones worked at renowned civil rights legal firm Doughty Street in central London, alongside Hollywood actor George Clooney’s wife Amal. He specialized in extradition, war crimes and counter-terrorism, taking cases from the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Lebanon and Cambodia. At the time of his Arkancide, Jones was trying to save the lives of Colonel Gaddafi’s son Saif and Libyan spy chief Abdullah al-Senussi. Both had been ordered before a firing squad in Tripoli, but Jones was trying to divert their case to the war crimes tribunal in The Hague, Holland, which does not have the death penalty.

Doughty Street said in a statement: “John was a brilliant and creative lawyer admired and appreciated for his amazing sense of humour, professionalism and deep commitment to justice. His death is a huge loss.”

See also:

UPDATE (Aug. 25, 2016):

The mystery deepens.

The coroner in John Jones’ death, Mary Hassell, says she does not believe Jones committed suicide. Here’s WikiLeaks’ tweet:

WikiLeaks tweet on John Jones' inquest

Reporting for Ham&High on Aug. 19, 2016, Rachel Roberts has more details.

At the time of his death, Jones was being treated on a voluntary basis at a private mental hospital, The Nightingale, for “obsessive ruminating disorder,” although his attending psychiatrist Dr. Pereira had also diagnosed Jones for bipolar disorder after only an hour of examination.

At his inquest, the court was told that Jones had trouble sleeping. On the morning of his death, April 18, 2016, at 5:10 am, he left The Nightingale hospital for a walk. At approximately 7 am, Jones leapt to his death at West Hampstead Thameslink train station.

The train driver gave a written statement that it appeared to be “a deliberate act”. CCTV footage of the death was not played to the court because coroner Mary Hassell said she thought it would be “too distressing” but that she had watched it, and was satisfied that “nobody else was involved”. However, Hassell said she could not be certain that Jones had intended to kill himself because the balance of his mind was affected: “John Jones died instantaneously when he jumped in front of a moving train. However, the state of his mental health at the time meant that he lacked the necessary intent to categorise this as suicide.”

Jones’ mother, Peggy, said her son talked about suicide “only in the abstract” and told her he would never take his life because of his children. She said she was “shocked” at Dr. Pereira’s treatment of her son and by John’s appearance: “I was shocked at how thin he was. He couldn’t stop shaking, and I wondered what effect the medication was having.”

Jones’ wife, Misa, was critical of the fact that her husband was allowed to isolate himself in the hospital and had not been made to engage with the various forms of therapy on offer. She told the inquest: “I feel horrified that he was allowed out so early in the morning, in such a fragile state and without having slept properly for days. I genuinely believe that John did not want to die, and that he didn’t know what he was doing (when he jumped).”

H/t Will Shanley

~Eowyn

WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange: murdered DNC staffer was source of leaked DNC emails

Last month, in the midst of the Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks spoiled the Demonrat lovefest by releasing some 2,000 Democratic National Committee (DNC) emails that had been hacked by someone(s).

Those emails show the DNC to be thoroughly corrupt. Long before Hillary Clinton won the 2016 Democratic primary elections and became her party’s presumptive presidential nominee, the DNC had become her tool, colluding with journalists to shield her, and working the undermine her fellow Democrat opponent Bernie Sanders. (See “Hacked emails show Democratic National Committee to be corrupt arm of Hillary”)

At the time, we were told that the hacker may be Guccifer 2.0. But it turns out that the source of the emails was a recently-murdered DNC staffer named Seth Rich.

At about 4:19 a.m. on Sunday, July 10, 2016, 27 year-old Seth Conrad Rich was shot and killed in the 2100 block of Flagler Place NW in Washington, DC.

Below is the D.C. Metropolitan Police’s poster offering a reward for information about the murder.

DC Metro Police poster on Seth Rich murder

The murder did not appear to be robbery-related because the killer(s) did not take Rich’s wallet, watch, and phone.

Reportedly, Rich did voter outreach for the DNC.

Shortly after the murder, Redditors and social media users pursued a lead that on the morning of his murder, Rich had planned to speak to the FBI about an “ongoing court case” possibly involving the Clinton family. However, Emily Zanotti of the libertarian news site HeatStreet claims that “Further ‘investigation’ dug up no such court case and there is no evidence whatsoever that Rich, who did voter outreach work for the DNC, had any knowledge of alleged Clinton misdeeds.”

Now, WikiLeaks‘ founder Julian Assange effectively admits Seth Rich was the source of the leaked DNC emails.

Yesterday, in an interview on Dutch television Nieuwsuur, referring to Seth Rich, Assange said:

Whistleblowers have going to significant efforts to get us [WikiLeaks] material and often very significant risks, as a 27-year-old that works for the DNC was shot in the back, murdered, just two weeks ago, for unknown reasons, as he was walking down the street in Washington.”

Asked by his interviewer if Rich’s murder was a robbery, Assange says “No” and that “Our sources take risks and they become concerned to see things occurring like that.”

The interviewer then asks if Rich was one of WikiLeaks‘ sources, Assange nods his head (0:39 mark) and says:

“We don’t comment on who our sources are…. We have to understand how high the stakes are in the United States, and that our sources face serious risks. That’s why they come to us, so we can protect their anonymity…. We are investigating, to understand what happened in that situation with Seth Rich. I think it is a concerning situation. There’s not a conclusion yet . . . but we are concerned about it. More importantly, a variety of WikiLeaks sources are concerned when that kind of thing happens.”

Yesterday, WikiLeaks offered a $20,000 reward for information on the murder of Seth Rich.

WikiLeaks also got hold of — and releasing to the public — thousands of Hillary Clinton’s supposedly deleted emails that she had refused to turn over to the State Department and the FBI. See these FOTM posts on those leaked emails:

~Eowyn