Obamagate zal als Russiagate nooit tot een bevredigende conclusie leiden: Washington is één grote stinkende politieke put

Caitlin Johnstone heeft een artikel geschreven over Obamagate* en concludeert dat dit nooit tot iets van enig belang zal leiden. Sinds 2016 beroepen beide partijen, de Democraten zowel als de Republikeinen, die samen met het bedrijfsleven, de financiële sector en de geheime diensten het land besturen, zich erop dat de andere partij ieder moment kan vallen door een enorm schandaal, terwijl beide partijen de beschuldigingen van de ander afdoen als nonsens.....

Volgens de Democraten gebruikt Trump 'Obamagate' om daarmee de aandacht af te leiden van de enorme blunders van de Trump administraite op het Coronadossier...... Johnstone gelooft daar duidelijk niet in, terwijl er wel degelijk een vorm van waarheid inzit. 

Voor de claim van de Democraten dat de Russen de servers van het Democratic National Committee (DNC) zouden hebben gehackt (een onderdeel van Russiagate), is geen schijn aan bewijs geleverd en toch blijft men daar volhouden dat dit wel het geval was, e.e.a. gesteund door de reguliere westerse (massa-) media, die in deze op de hand van de Democraten zijn......(en media van wie de spuugrijke eigenaren Rusland het liefst zoveel mogelijk gedemoniseerd willen zien.....)

Je zou denken dat dit allemaal van weinig of geen belang is, echter het gaat hier wel om de VS, het machtigste land ter wereld, met meer dan 800 militaire bases over de wereld, een land dat desgewenst morgen weer een illegale oorlog kan beginnen op basis van leugens en false flag operaties......** 

Als je ziet hoe smerig men in de VS bezig is om elkaar de loef af te steken en dat geheel in het openbaar, voedt dit de vrees dat de VS tot alles in staat is***, zelfs het voeren van een zogenaamde beperkte kernoorlog (een contradictio in terminis, immers ieder gebruik van kernwapens zal tot een wereldwijde kernoorlog leiden waarbij men elkaar zal proberen te vernietigen en zal men de aarde voor de mens en een enorm aantal diersoorten onbewoonbaar maken, althans als een aantal van deze mensen en dieren zo'n oorlog al kunnen overleven....).... 

De ruzie tussen de Democraten en de Republikeinen toont m.i. nog eens aan dat men zelfs lak heeft aan de eigen bevolking, men liegt er keihard op los en hoopt zo de burgers over te halen om in november op de kandidaat van hun keus te stemmen...... Ofwel men heeft schijt aan de kiezer, liegt die 4 jaar lang voor en doet er nog een schep bovenop als de verkiezingen in aantocht zijn......

En toch doet men alles om nog enigszins aan te tonen dat men ethisch en moreel zuiver handelt, waarden die men ook gebruikt om aan te tonen dat de VS weer een massamoord moet plegen om 'democratie te brengen en corruptie uit te bannen' in het land van keuze (dat ofwel een strategische ligging heeft, dan wel bodemschatten heeft die de VS voor zich wil houden, neem Venezuela dat voor beide zaken opgaat.....)

Why “Obamagate” Will Never Lead To Anything Of Significance

by Caitlin Johnstone

The word "Obamagate" was thrust into mainstream attention by the concerted efforts of Trump and his surrogates after new details on the early days of the Trump-Russia collusion investigation emerged. These details include Obama officials (including Joe Biden) requesting the unmasking of a conversation between Flynn and Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak, the FBI's then-counterintelligence director discussing trying to get Michael Flynn to lie during his interrogation about the Kislyak call, and the revelation that there was never any concrete evidence that Russia hacked the DNC.

These are important revelations that are worthy of mainstream attention, but like basically everything else in this stupid, stupid timeline this issue has instead been reduced to the stagnation of vapid partisan squabbling. Democrats and their allied media are finger wagging at Trump for using "conspiracy theories" to distract from his coronavirus failures, and "MAGA"**** pundits once again beating the tired old drum that this scandal is going to bring down major Deep State players and drain the swamp once and for all.

Ever since 2016 both of America's mainstream political parties have been taking turns screaming at the top of their lungs that earth-shattering revelations are right around the corner which are about to obliterate the other party any minute now, and if you're still buying into this show I highly recommend you also take up watching WWE*****, because you'll definitely love it.

Consortium News @Consortiumnews

RAY McGOVERN: New House Documents Sow Further Doubt That Russia Hacked the DNC https://consortiumnews.com/2020/05/09/ray-mcgovern-new-house-documents-sow-further-doubt-that-russia-hacked-the-dnc/ …

RAY McGOVERN: New House Documents Sow Further Doubt That Russia Hacked the DNC  For two and a half years the House Intelligence Committee knew CrowdStrike didn't have the goods on Russia. Now the public knows too. Twin Pillars of Russiagate Crumble By Ray McGovern Special to... consortiumnews.com

33  1:26 AM - May 12, 2020

"By any normal standard, former FBI Director Comey would now be in serious legal trouble, as should [former Director of National Intelligence James] Clapper, former CIA Director John Brennan, et al," Ray McGovern wrote for Consortium News the other day. "Additional evidence of FBI misconduct under Comey seems to surface every week — whether the abuses of FISA, misconduct in the case against Gen. Michael Flynn, or misleading everyone about Russian hacking of the DNC. If I were attorney general, I would declare Comey a flight risk and take his passport. And I would do the same with Clapper and Brennan."

Indeed, this would be the "normal standard", yet it hasn't happened. Neither Comey nor Clapper nor Brennan are in any legal trouble at all, nor will they be, nor will any other major player responsible for leading America on a crazy collusion wild goose chase which accomplished nothing but distracting from real issues and manufacturing consent for mountains of cold war escalations against Russia.

You will never see Obama or his administration officials brought down by "Obamagate" for the same reason Trump wasn't brought down by the Mueller investigation: the swamp protects its own. Both Obama and Trump administrations are packed full of crooks and mass murderers who could and should be imprisoned for any number of offenses, but they won't be, because that would require a prosecutorial body that is separate from the swamp of corruption with which both of America's mainstream parties are inexorably interwoven. You cannot use the swamp to drain the swamp.

Do you know why Trump never made good on his campaign platform of locking up Hillary Clinton? Besides the fact that their entire conflict has always been fake, I mean? The Trump administration could easily have found grounds upon which to prosecute Clinton if they wanted to, but going after a loyal establishment swamp monster would have brought the wrath of the entire swamp down upon him. As soon as he had a political opponent in office, if not before, Trump would himself be facing criminal prosecution. By collaborating with the swamp you ensure your own protection, and by attacking it you ensure your destruction.

Aaron Maté ✔ @aaronjmate

A fundamental point that many Russiagate-peddling left pundits -- including fake "adversarial" voices like @mehdirhasan -- cannot process in their minds, because doing so would threaten their club membership. Russiagate helps clarify where priorities really lie. https://twitter.com/MarkSaw43180398/status/1260285597173735424 …

 

Mark Sawyer @MarkSaw43180398

Replying to @aaronjmate and 2 others

Russiagate was obviously the way for the DNC to cosmetically attack Trump without pushing back against Trump policies. Russiagate sidelined pushbacks against the Trump tax cut, and a litany of other substantive issues... issues that DNC elites actually agreed with Trump about...

668   11:53 PM - May 13, 2020

That's why no serious attempt has ever been made to remove Trump from office; he's been playing nice with existing power structures without challenging them in any meaningful way. Everyone who knew anything was aware that the Mueller collusion would never go anywhere, and anyone who could count Senate seats knew impeachment would fizzle. It was all kayfabe conflict so that Trump's "opposition" could present the appearance of opposition without interfering in agendas they themselves support or prosecuting crimes of which they themselves are also guilty.

It's also why Obama never had any intention of prosecuting Bush's heinous war crimes, citing "a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards". In reality Obama always understood that in order to play the "president" role (and enjoy its massive perks for the rest of his life), he'd need to collaborate with establishment power structures rather than upsetting them. He knew that if he were to go after Bush he'd ensure his own destruction; under "normal standards" prosecution is the only sane and normal response to war crimes, but in the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) environment of establishment corruption, there are no normal standards.

I point this out because it's painful to watch people on both sides continually getting their hopes up that the big KABOOM is right around the corner which will finally vindicate their worldview and punish their partisan rivals. It will not happen. Trump will not drain the swamp, and neither will Biden or whatever soulless swamp monster inhabits the White House next. You were lied to. It's good to be aware of surveillance abuses, mass-scale psyops and media malpractice, but definitely abandon hope that any of this will lead to any major changes in the establishment itself.

If we want real change, it cannot and will not come from either of the two mainstream political factions whose primary job is preventing real change. It's going to have to come from the people; we're going to have to find a way to punch through the propaganda brainwashing, wake up to reality, and use the power of our numbers to force the changes which will benefit us past all the oligarchic safeguards that have been placed in front of us to prevent us from doing so.

This is a lot less pleasant than believing some magical hero in a white hat is going to ride in and do all our work for us and all we need to do is relax and "trust the plan". It's a lot less comfortable than expunging the fake two-party worldview from our minds which vast fortunes and years of conditioning have gone into manufacturing. But it is reality.

______________________

Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics onTwitter, checking out my podcast on either Youtube, soundcloud, Apple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemit, throwing some money into my hat on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my books Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.

Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Caitlin Johnstone | May 14, 2020 at 1:25 am | Tags: #Trump, caitlin johnstone, Flynn, Mueller, Obamagate, Politics, Russiagate, swamp | Categories: Article | URL: https://wp.me/p9tj6M-28W

=================================
*     Obamagate is m.i. niets anders dan een andere benaming voor Russiagate, een term die Trump eerder gebruikte nadat de Democraten hem beschuldigden van samenwerking met Rusland, waarvoor men geen steekhoudend bewijs kon leveren. Onlangs werd dit woord geherintroduceerd door Trump nadat Obama zich in het openbaar met zijn Coronabeleid bemoeide.

**    Een false flag operatie is het begaan van een zware misdaad en de schuld daarvoor in de schoenen schuiven van een ander (veelal democratisch gekozen) bewind, een bewind dat men in de VS wil vervangen voor desnoods een dictator, zolang deze maar doet wat de VS wil dat er gebeurt in dat land en die voorts fungeert als een lakei die de belangen van de VS behartigt (bijvoorbeeld grote VS bedrijven vrijbaan geven...)....

***   Dezelfde VS dat alleen deze eeuw al 4 illegale oorlogen is begonnen, waarbij tot nu toe meer dan 2,5 mensen zijn omgekomen, ofwel die zijn in feite vermoord door de VS en haar hielenlikkende andere NAVO-lidstaten, zoals Nederland, dat in Hawija 70 mensen vermoordde middels een bombardement, waar volgens deskundigen het werkelijke aantal doden veel hoger moet liggen...... Schande dat hare CDA hufterigheid Bijleveld al stumperend een moetie van wantrouwen overleefde, terwijl zij alleen op basis van deze aanval de eer aan zichzelf had moeten houden, maar ja, het woord 'eer' komt in de meeste woordenboeken van politici al lang niet meer voor.....

****  WWE: World Wrestling Entertainment, je weet wel van die belachelijke worstel vertoningen, waarvan velen denken dat de aanvallen op elkaar echt gebeuren.....

***** MAGA: Make America Great Again.

Russiagate: nog overtuigd van bestaan daarvan? Lees dit!

Het hele Russiagate verhaal, al een paar jaar door de reguliere media gebruikt als zijnde een voldongen feit, is als een kaartenhuis in elkaar gestort, nadat Mueller zijn onderzoek had afgerond. Echter de reguliere media geven niet toe dat ze een paar jaar lang fake news hebben gebracht en gebruikt als zijnde de waarheid, nee men doet net of de neus bloedt en stelt als de Democratische Partij en haar achterban dat er nog steeds een 'smoking gun' verstopt zit in het rapport van Mueller.....

Deze figuren vergeten voor het gemak dat Mueller Trump maar al te graag gepakt had voor vuil spel met de Russen...... Het feit dat Mueller expres bewijzen van het tegendeel heeft achtergehouden, interesseert die media niet eens, barbertje zal hangen.......

Waarom dan, vraag je je wellicht af, wel simpel: de democraten moesten hun zwaar misdadig gedrag verbergen, het stelen van de democratische voorverkiezingen van Bernie Sanders in 2016 door Clinton en haar team, Sanders destijds de andere democratische kandidaat voor het VS presidentschap......

Overigens was er nog een netelige kwestie voor hare kwaadaardigheid Clinton, die men liever uit de pers hield en dat was het telkens weer opduikende feit dat ze haar privé mail heeft gebruikt voor staatszaken, toen ze minister van BuZa was onder Obama, een periode waarin ze tevens 'opklom' tot volwaardig oorlogsmisdadiger........

Wat beter om e.e.a te bereiken, dus misdaden uit de pers houden, dan de Russen te beschuldigen van het hacken van de servers van het DNC, het campagneteam van Clinton....... Uiteraard zou de reguliere media van dit soort verhalen onmiddellijk in de alarmstand gaan staan en zou dat weken, zo niet maandenlang de voorpagina's van de kranten en de talkshows op tv beheersen......

Lees het volgende artikel van Kevin Gosztola, waarin hij verder ingaat op de smerige spellen die het Clinton team, de FBI, de CIA en zelfs de NSA hebben gespeeld. Verder noemt Gosztola de Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) die met een paar deskundigen e.e.a. hebben onderzocht waar de tijdschaal van een aantal gegevens niet kloppen, wat er op duit dat men (in de VS) heeft gerommeld met de computers.....

Uitermate vreemd ook dat de FBI de servers niet in beslag heeft genomen voor onderzoek, standaard in dergelijk onderzoek, maar zich op de hoogte heeft laten brengen door een door de Democratische Partij ingehuurd onderzoeksbureau..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Ja mensen ik geloofde m'n ogen niet toen ik dat onder ogen kreeg, ongelofelijk!!

Lees het volgende uitstekende artikel van Gosztola, waarin hij de zaken veel beter uit de doeken doet, dan ik hierboven heb getracht. Veiligheidgordels vast?

On WikiLeaks, Mueller Ignored Findings of Former US Intelligence Officials

April 20, 2019 at 10:38 am

Written by Kevin Gosztola

(SP) — Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report on an investigation into alleged Russian efforts to meddle in the 2016 presidential election does not confirm, without a doubt, that Russian intelligence agents or individuals tied to Russian intelligence agencies passed on emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign to WikiLeaks.

Mueller’s team highlighted statements from WikiLeaks on Twitter about former Democratic National Committee (DNC) staff member Seth Rich, which seemed to relate to the alleged source of emails and documents the organization published. Yet, more explicit claims from WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange on the source of emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta were not addressed in the report.

A group of former military and intelligence officials, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), conducted their own forensic tests that received a bit of attention in the United States press because they were some of the first people with prior backgrounds in government to question the central allegations of hacking into DNC servers. They asserted their examinations of the files showed DNC emails published by WikiLeaks were leaked, not hacked.

However, the Mueller report makes no mention of the claims made by VIPS over the past two to three years—not even to debunk them.

The report stated, “Unit 26165 officers appear to have stolen thousands of emails and attachments, which were later released by WikiLeaks in July 2016.” But “appear to have” indicates the team did not have incontrovertible proof. They could only speculate.

“The Office cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries, who visited during the summer of 2016,” the report acknowledged. “For example, public reporting identified Andrew Müller-Maguhn as a WikiLeaks associate who may have assisted with the transfer of these stolen documents to WikiLeaks.”

Yet, this is wildly misleading. The source for this example is a 2018 profile of Müller-Maguhn by journalist Ellen Nakashima that was published by the Washington Post. Müller-Maguhn told Nakashima it “would be insane” for him to hand deliver sensitive files, especially when the CIA has labeled WikiLeaks a “non-state hostile intelligence service.”

“How many of you wouldn’t be scared shitless by the head of the CIA declaring you the next target?,” he said.

Müller-Maguhn, who met Assange through the Chaos Computer Club in 2007 and sits on the board of the Wau Holland foundation, characterized this allegation as a “lame attempt” by U.S. intelligence agencies to hurt the foundation so they cut off their tax-free donations to WikiLeaks in Europe.

Assange held a press conference in January 2017, where he responded to the intelligence community assessment on alleged Russian hacking. The media organization urged skepticism toward the assertion that publications of DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign emails were connected to alleged hacking operations.

“Even if you accept that the Russian intelligence services hacked Democratic Party institutions, as it is normal for the major intelligence services to hack each others’ major political parties on a constant basis to obtain intelligence,” you have to ask, “what was the intent of those Russian hacks? And do they connect to our publications? Or is it simply incidental?” Assange said.

Assange accused U.S. intelligence agencies of deliberately obscuring the timeline. He said they did not know when the DNC was hacked.

“The U.S. intelligence community is not aware of when WikiLeaks obtained its material or when the sequencing of our material was done or how we obtained our material directly. So there seems to be a great fog in the connection to WikiLeaks,” Assange declared.

He added, “As we have already stated, WikiLeaks sources in relation to the Podesta emails and the DNC leak are not members of any government. They are not state parties. They do not come from the Russian government.”

“The [Clinton campaign] emails that we released during the election dated up to March [2016]. U.S. intelligence services and consultants for the DNC say Russian intelligence services started hacking DNC in 2015. Now, Trump is clearly not on the horizon in any substantial manner in 2015,” Assange additionally concluded.

There is a statement in the Mueller report that begins, “Although it is clear that the stolen DNC and Podesta documents were transferred from the GRU to WikiLeaks…” It cuts off there because the rest was redacted to supposedly protect an “investigative technique.” The formulation of the sentence definitely suggests the Mueller team made a statement reflecting doubts around what happened with WikiLeaks.

In early 2017, Assange was willing to “provide technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the DNC releases.” He also was willing—before the release of “Vault 7” materials—to help U.S. agencies address “clear flaws in security systems” that led the U.S. cyber weapons program to be compromised.

When Democratic Senator Mark Warner learned Justice Department official Bruce Ohr was negotiating some kind of a deal for limited immunity and a limited commitment from Assange, he urged Comey to intervene.

A potential deal with Assange was killed, the “Vault 7” files were eventually published, and no testimony was ever collected that would have helped the Mueller team gain a better understanding of what happened with the DNC and Clinton campaign email publications.

Bill Binney, former National Security Agency technical director for world geopolitical and military analysis and co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research

Center, conducted forensic examinations of the files posted by the Guccifer 2.0 persona as well as WikiLeaks. He was the principal author of multiple memos that significantly undermined key allegations. But no one from Mueller’s team ever contacted Binney or Ed Loomis, who also is a former technical director at NSA, to interview them about their findings.

In a published memo addressed to Attorney General Bill Barr, the steering group for VIPS, which includes Binney and Loomis, declared, “We have scrutinized publicly available physical data — the ‘trail’ that every cyber operation leaves behind. And we have had support from highly experienced independent forensic investigators who, like us, have no axes to grind. We can prove that the conventional-wisdom story about Russian-hacking-DNC-emails-for-WikiLeaks is false.”

“Drawing largely on the unique expertise of two VIPS scientists who worked for a combined total of 70 years at the National Security Agency and became Technical Directors there, we have regularly published our findings. But we have been deprived of a hearing in mainstream media — an experience painfully reminiscent of what we had to endure when we exposed the corruption of intelligence before the attack on Iraq 16 years ago,” the group added.

The DNC files published by WikiLeaks, according to a forensic examination by VIPS, show data was “transferred to an external storage device, such as a thumb drive, before WikiLeaks posted them.”

VIPS drew this conclusion based on something called the File Allocation Table (FAT) system property. This is a “method of organization.” If the files were received as a hack, “the last modified times on the files would be a random mixture of odd-and-even-ending numbers.” However, the “last modified” time stamps for the WikiLeaks DNC files each end in even numbers.

“We have examined 500 DNC email files stored on the Wikileaks site,” the memo indicated. “All 500 files end in an even number—2, 4, 6, 8 or 0. If those files had been hacked over the Internet, there would be an equal probability of the timestamp ending in an odd number. The random probability that FAT was not used is one chance in two to the 500th power. Thus, these data show that the DNC emails posted by WikiLeaks went through a storage device, like a thumb drive, and were physically moved before Wikileaks posted the emails on the World Wide Web.”

On the Podesta emails, Binney said the FAT file format was not introduced by WikiLeaks. The media organization did not have a standard procedure. But it still means the files were put on a removable storage device or CD-ROM, physically transported, and then posted.

The former officials additionally claim the Guccifer 2.0 persona published a document that was “synthetically tainted with ‘Russian fingerprints.’” Primarily, they assert this because the Guccifer 2.0 data was transferred with an Internet connection speed faster than what is possible from remote online Internet connections. The transfer rate was “as high as 49.1 megabytes per second,” which coincided with “the rate that copying onto a thumb drive could accommodate.”

As part of the “Vault 7” materials published by WikiLeaks on March 31, 2017, the media organization revealedthe Marble Framework. This was described as a tool for hampering “forensic investigators and anti-virus companies from attributing viruses, trojans, and hacking attacks to the CIA.”

“The source code shows that Marble has test examples not just in English but also in Chinese, Russian, Korean, Arabic and Farsi,” WikiLeaks described. “This would permit a forensic attribution double game, for example, by pretending that the spoken language of the malware creator was not American English, but Chinese, but then showing attempts to conceal the use of Chinese, drawing forensic investigators even more strongly to the wrong conclusion—but there are other possibilities, such as hiding fake error messages.”

VIPS contends that whoever engaged in the activity referred to as “Russian hacking” actually used an obfuscator to make it seem like the Russians were responsible.

“The timestamps we were getting from Guccifer internally in the data were showing places like east coast in the U.S. and the central time in the U.S. Also one in the west coast. So the time stamping isn’t there for being anywhere outside the U.S.,” Binney told Shadowproof.” “[But] once you have a fabricator, you have to find some way of proving everything about him, and you know we can’t really prove that that’s not also a fabrication.”

The Mueller report, however, does not contemplate the possibility that someone or a group potentially used a special tool, similar to what the CIA employs, in order to obfuscate their acts.

Most of the technical assertions around what happened with Democratic Party computers or servers are not backed up so that a person could research the claims and validate them. On the other hand, Binney points out that is not the case with VIPS claims.

“The stuff we looked at is out there on the web for everybody to go look and verify for themselves,” Binney said. “The stuff they’re talking about we don’t even see. How can you have any confidence in anything like that, especially when they don’t address the things you can see and anybody can go look at it?”

Furthermore, former FBI director James Comey said “multiple requests” were made at “different levels” for access to Democratic servers. Ultimately, these servers, or computers, that were allegedly targeted were not taken by the FBI for their own forensic examination. They relied on the conclusions of an in-house cyber-response team working for the Democrats known as CrowdStrike.

Where the Mueller report stated the FBI “later received images of DNC servers and copies of relevant traffic logs,” they were most likely referring to the material that CrowdStrike handed over for the investigation.

“Our forensics folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that’s involved, so it’s the best evidence,” Comey admitted during a Senate intelligence committee hearing. And yet, the FBI allowed the Democratic Party to rebuff their request for access.

“It’s like you’re denying. You don’t want to get the firsthand evidence because then you’ll have it, and you’ll have to address it,” Binney suggested.

He added, “You can’t say the words. You have to put down the raw data that says this is why I’m saying that, and they’re not doing that.”

***

There is good reason to demand that the Mueller team show their work. Many of these same intelligence agency officials that made claims, which form the narrative for “Russiagate,” work for agencies that fabricated intelligence around so-called weapons of mass destruction in Iraq back in 2002.

Binney and Loomis, along with Thomas Drake and Kirk Wiebe, were part of the NSA Four. They were falsely accused in 2007 of leaking. As journalist Timothy Shorrock detailed, they “endured years of legal harassment for exposing the waste and fraud behind a multibillion-dollar contract for a system called Trailblazer, which was supposed to ‘revolutionize’ the way the NSA produced signals intelligence (SIGINT) in the digital age.”

According to Binney, the government backed away from targeting them because they could show the government was engaged in a malicious prosecution. Agency officials immediately tried to “confiscate everything” on their computers and fabricated allegations for a federal judge.

But they had backed up all their data and could prove they were facing retaliation for their work. (Drake was later the target of an Espionage Act prosecution cooked up by the Justice Department.)

The claims made by VIPS members are easy to reject because they do not fit into the dominant narrative around what happened with the 2016 presidential election, but former U.S. Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA presidential briefer Ray McGovern believes Binney and Loomis ought to be taken much more seriously because they helped perfect the very systems that the government relies upon to draw technical conclusions.

“When you have people like that, they deserve a modicum of trust,” McGovern argued. “When you have these people, who have absolutely no suspicion or no secret agenda, who are indisputably the best experts in this area,” even if you don’t understand every detail, you ought to seriously consider what they say.

Finally, because of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, McGovern said the NSA would have any evidence of hacking as a result of “dragnet coverage.” If Russia hacked, “where’s the intercepts” they should have?

Binney conversely argued it cannot be NSA data that the Mueller team relied upon to draw conclusions about Guccifer and WikiLeaks. “The NSA data, once they collect data, it’s classified.

The only person that can expose classified material in the public and authorize that is the president. No one else is authorized to do that. So, if [Rod] Rosenstein and Mueller are doing that from NSA data, then they’re compromising classified information, which is a felony.”

“It’s obvious that that’s not NSA data. It is data from a third-party. It’d very likely be CrowdStrike or somebody like that,” Binney added. “Any rate, it is tainted material. They’ve never had continuous control of that information.”

The vast majority of the press throughout the world will dismiss the work of VIPS. It is quite easy because it clashes terribly with the convenient narrative that intelligence agencies and powerful elites deployed. It undermines the claims that WikiLeaks is a media organization that was compromised during the 2016 election by Russian intelligence. It fuels the notion that the Mueller team suffered from confirmation bias and then sought to find details that confirmed what intelligence agencies concluded in 2017. Anything conflicting was to be dismissed or discarded.

Yet, a review of the “Russian Hacking and Dumping Operations” does not contain much more than circumstantial evidence and speculation about WikiLeaks and Guccifer 2.0., leaving many valid questions about the timeline of events unanswered.

One small concession for Assange may be Attorney General Bill Barr’s statement that can apply to WikiLeaks as much as individuals who worked for the Trump campaign. “Under applicable law, publication of these types of materials would not be criminal unless the publisher also participated in the underlying hacking conspiracy.”

While Democrats push for the Justice Department to add further charges against Assange and extradite him to the United States for publishing Clinton campaign and DNC emails, this points to the reality that the Justice Department would have to prove WikiLeaks was involved in stealing or hacking the materials.

With the national security apparatus so invested in this “Russiagate” narrative, they probably do not want to graft on additional charges relating to the election that would allow Assange to make discovery requests that would potentially poke additional holes in their preferred theory of events.

By Kevin Gosztola / Republished with permission / Shadow Proof / Report a typo

==================================
Zie ook:
'WaPo waarschuwt voor Russische digitale controle over de hersenen van VS burgers'

'Federale rechter stelt ten overvloede dat DNC geen grond heeft voor zaak te tegen Trumps verkiezingsteam'

''Geheime diensten in westen geven toe dat spioneren via het G5 netwerk praktisch onmogelijk is........'

'Britse regering weigert RT en Sputnik voor conferentie over persvrijheid..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'1984 het boek van George Orwell: niet langer fictie.......'

'Het westen vervolgt journalist Assange, Rusland laat journalist vrij na onrust over diens gevangenschap' (zie daarin ook de links naar andere berichten over Assange)

'De sterkste beïnvloeding van de VS presidentsverkiezingen wordt als volkomen 'legaal' en normaal gezien'

'Avaaz valt met fake news en desinformatie 'fake news en desinformatie' aan......' (zie in dat bericht ook de link naar een ander artikel met een smerige rol van Avaaz)

'Rob Jetten (D66 fractievoorzitter) liegt een fikse slag in de rondte in EU verkiezingspraatje'

'EU verkiezingen: manipulatie ook door lobbyisme is misdadig, zelfs Bas Eickhout (GroenLinks) doet hieraan mee'

'Intel processors al 10 jaar zo lek als een mandje, Intel niet een bedrijf uit Rusland of China, maar uit..... de VS!'

'Robert Mueller lijdt aan dementie en maakt van Russiagate een nog belachelijker verhaal'

'Putin vraagt en Trump levert: een lijst met 'alle goede zaken die Trump voor Rusland regelde''

'Russiagate: VS en buitenlandse geheime diensten hebben de VS presidentsverkiezingen in 2016 gemanipuleerd'

'Julian Assange (brekend nieuws) veroordeeld tot 50 weken gevangenisstraf......'

'Jan Kuitenbrouwer ('journalist'): Assange is een charlatan en WikiLeaks heeft beelden van de moord op 2 journalisten gemanipuleerd'

'Julian Assanges vervolging is de genadeklap voor klokkenluiders en (echte) journalisten' (en zie de links in dat bericht)

'Russiagate haat- en angstcampagne samenzweerders als FBI en Clinton moeten strafrechtelijk worden vervolgd'

'BBC verslaggever is beschaamd over de 25 jaar die hij voor deze zendgemachtigde heeft gewerkt'

'BNR 'denkt' als één van de vele mediaorganen nog steeds dat Russiagate werkelijk plaats vond'

'BBC topman waarschuwt dat de BBC haar geloofwaardigheid en reputatie kwijtraakt...... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Geen rectificaties voor meer dan 2 jaar brengen van fake news over het kwaadaardig sprookje Russiagate'

'Bedrijf dat voor 'Russische bots' waarschuwde, heeft een leger met nep-Russische bots'

'Britse militaire geheime dienst bedient zich van moddergooien en andere manipulaties om Europese en VS politiek te manipuleren, zo blijkt uit gelekte documenten'

''Fake news': alternatieve media en bloggers in het westen zouden onzin brengen, echter niet als dit soort groepen wat roepen in landen die het westen niet welgevallig zijn'

'Two More Spiegel Employees Out After Fake News Scandal Expands' Ofwel: het zoveelste 'gevalletje fake news', gebracht door de reguliere massamedia........

'Waarom de burgers van de VS de illegale oorlogen steunen'

'Democraten deden zich voor als Russen in false flag operatie om Roy Moore (Republikein) zwart te maken tijdens verkiezing.....'

'Der Spiegel, groot bestrijder van 'fake news' bracht zelf jarenlang dit soort 'nieuws''

'BBC: Rusland 'misbruikt humor' om Russiagate te ontkrachten..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Uitgelekte telefoongesprekken tussen Trump en Putin bewijzen dat 'Russiagaters gelijk hebben......''

'Russiagate en Assange: The Guardian wordt nu zelfs door collega's voor zot uitgemaakt'

The Guardian: ondanks een enorme misser (fake news) gaat men door met de valse beschuldigingen t.a.v. Assange......'

'WikiLeaks belooft The Guardian 1 miljoen dollar als het haar leugens i.z. Assange en Russiagate kan bewijzen.......'

''Banden van Trump met Rusland' gebaseerd op FBI operatie om VS 'burger' (CIA) in Iran vrij te krijgen......'

'Russiagate? Britaingate zal je bedoelen!'

'New York Times 'bewijzen' voor Russiagate vallen door de mand......'

'Facebook gebruikte 'fake news' beschuldiging om de aandacht voor schandalen af te leiden'

'Politico rapport bevestigt: Russiagate is een hoax'

'Obama gaf toe dat de DNC e-mails expres door de DNC werden gelekt naar Wikileaks....!!!!'