Wayne Madsen | 6 July 2016
If Israel was spying via Hillary’s servers, it would explain why FBI is backing off
Almost every time there has been a national security case involving the actual or alleged compromise of national security information to the Israelis, the offending party or parties walk free.
Although the espionage case of Jonathan Pollard was pursued vigorously by the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Joseph diGenova, and Pollard, a civilian employee of the Naval Investigative Service’s Anti-Terrorist Alert Center in Suitland, Maryland was convicted and sentenced to life in prison, the Pollard case resulted in powerful American Zionists, as well as successive Israeli prime ministers, calling for his release. Pollard was released last November.
Since the Pollard conviction, a series of cases involving actual or suspected spies for Israel have resulted in virtual slaps on the wrist or no prosecution.
With bogus charges of “anti-Semitism” swirling around the Pollard case, thanks to the intervention of such Israel apologists as lawyer Alan Dershowitz and former Representative Barney Frank, the FBI and career Justice Department prosecutors have been reluctant to jeopardize their careers by indicting those who have spied for Israel.
There are several indications that Israeli intelligence took full advantage of weaknesses in the security of Mrs. Clinton’s servers at her home in Chappaqua, New York to gain access to classified information, including, as FBI director James Comey pointed out in his July 5 press conference, Top Secret Sensitive Classified Information (SCI).
Specifically, Comey said that his agents discovered on Clinton’s servers “110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains” containing classified information at the time they were transmitted. Of those email chains, 8 were classified as top secret and 7 contained SCI material.
SCI information is the most classified information the U.S. government maintains.
The information is “compartmented” to prevent a spy from walking off with not only sensitive intelligence sources and methods, including covert agents’ identities, but also the intelligence they collect, for example, intercepted communications transcripts and surveillance imagery.
Comey announced that based on the evidence collected by the FBI, “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”
What he should have said is that no prosecutor in his right mind would want to take on a case that involved probable Israeli espionage.
The constant attacks waged against diGenova by Israel’s agents-of-influence would have convinced any prosecutor of the futility of such action against Clinton.
The ignored Israeli angle of Email-gate
After succumbing to Israeli and domestic Zionist pressure, President Obama acquiesced to the release of Pollard and his ultimate emigration to Israel.
No other president entertained such a decision, not Ronald Reagan, not George H. W. Bush, not Bill Clinton, and not even the sycophantically pro-Israeli George W. Bush.
Therefore, Obama was not about to see a prosecution of his former Secretary of State over her private e-mails, many of which involved her communications with former Bill Clinton White House aide Sidney Blumenthal.
Although Blumenthal’s son, Max Blumenthal, is a vigorous opponent of Israeli policies, his father was a major proponent of the “Arab Spring” rebellion in Libya that ousted Muammar Qaddafi and plunged Libya into a blood-soaked civil war.
Sidney Blumenthal’s coordination with Mrs. Clinton on Libya policy coincided with the anti-Qaddafi efforts of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and French Zionist Bernard-Henri Levy, among others.
Obama was well-aware of the pitfalls of a Hillary Clinton indictment when, on April 10th of this year, he said that although Clinton’s use of “a private email server” showed carelessness, Mrs. Clinton did not endanger national security.
However, in his remark on July 5, Comey stated that the FBI discovered not one server used by Mrs. Clinton for transmitting classified and sensitive information, but “multiple servers.”
When the FBI agents discovered the multiple servers, many of which had been previously taken off-line, he said recovering Clinton’s classified and sensitive emails was like a “jigsaw puzzle” containing “millions of email fragments.”
Comey maintained that this sophisticated operation by Clinton and her staffers to hide and fragment emails failed to show “criminal intent.”
Comey may want to talk to any number of prosecutors who would have smelled criminal intent right off the bat.
Obama raised no objections to a highly-questionable meeting on June 29 on a private tarmac at Phoenix’s Sky Harbor International Airport between his Attorney General Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton, who is said to have casually strolled over the Lynch’s aircraft when it landed to engage in a conversation about golf, Clinton’s grandchildren, and the well-being of Clinton’s Attorney General Janet Reno.
It was Bill Clinton who nominated Lynch as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. Clinton later said he “regretted” the meeting and Lynch admitted the meeting “cast a shadow” over her department’s investigation of the former president’s wife.
The entire ordeal, with words of “regret” and “mistakes” coming from the Clintons and their cronies, is reminiscent of the song and dance the Clintons presided over in the Monica Lewinsky and related impeachment affairs.
When the FBI interviewed Mrs. Clinton for over three-and-a half hours on the morning of July 2, a Saturday, they were in the process of wrapping up their case prior to Comey’s press announcement on July 5.
Mrs. Clinton, a lawyer, knew that it would be clear sailing as long as she did not tell a huge lie to the FBI agents, an offense that has sent many individuals to prison based only on the charge of lying to a federal law enforcement official.
The Clintons have become masters at avoiding the federal lying rap, whether it was Bill Clinton parsing the one-syllable word “is” before a special prosecutor or Mrs. Clinton testifying in 1998 before a federal grand jury in Washington over her role in the failed Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan in Arkansas.
For his part, Obama has shown no reluctance to use the arcane 1917 Espionage Act against national security whistleblowers, something Lynch and Comey refused to apply against Mrs. Clinton.
Since the administration of Woodrow Wilson, who used the Espionage Act to deter anti-war critics of his involvement in World War I on the side of imperialist Britain, Obama has used the Espionage Act against whistleblowers more than any of his predecessors combined.
Obama: the Espionage Act enforcer, except when it comes to Israel enablers
Under Reagan there was Pollard, under Richard Nixon, there was Daniel Ellsberg, and under George W. Bush, there was Lawrence Franklin.
The Franklin case involved his passing classified information to two American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) officials.
Although Franklin was convicted, the “no-go zone” involving Israel and American Zionists and espionage was not pursued by the Justice Department in keeping with recent procedure.
Under Obama, eight indictments have been brought by the Justice Department.
Charges were filed against National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling, NSA senior executive Thomas Drake, State Department adviser Stephen Jin-Woo Kim, Navy linguist contractor James Hitselberger, FBI Hebrew translator Shami K. Leibowitz (whose prosecution was primarily because he blew the whistle on Israeli espionage conducted from the Israeli embassy in Washington), CIA officer John Kiriakou, and Army intelligence analyst Chelsea, nee Bradley, Manning.
There were several other FBI investigations during the Obama administration in which criminal charges for sending or receiving national security information were pursued against Justice Department and NSA officials, as well as journalists.
One can argue whether blowing the whistle or reporting on government illegality or incompetence in all these cases showed “criminal intent,” the threshold laid down by Comey in absolving Clinton of any guilt.
In other cases involving national security, Israel’s friends in high places in the U.S. government often walk away from prison time.
Attorney General Reno declined to prosecute CIA director John Deutch after it was discovered that he was taking home CIA laptops containing classified information and using them to surf porn sites.
The CIA was concerned, and rightfully so, that cookies programs installed by the porn sites on Deutch’s classified laptops could siphon the classified information off to hostile actors.
Deutch skated free just as did Mrs. Clinton.
Do not bother trying to find details of the Deutch case on Wikipedia.
Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, a confirmed Zionist, has ensured that any such information was censored from Deutch’s encyclopedia entry.
Clinton’s national security adviser Samuel “Sandy” Berger, who, like Deutch, was a pro-Israeli Jew, was charged by the Justice Department with a single misdemeanor of unlawfully removing and retaining classified materials from the National Archives by stuffing the documents into his socks and underpants.
His guilty plea resulted in a penalty of a $50,000 fine, two years’ probation, 100 hours of community service, and the loss of his security clearance for three years.
After it was determined that General David Petraeus, a darling of pro-Israeli neocons everywhere, had provided CIA classified information to his girlfriend Paula Broadwell, while he was both chief of the U.S. Central Command and CIA director, he received the “Berger deal.”
Petraeus pleaded guilty to a single misdemeanor count of unlawfully removing and retaining classified material.
Petraeus agreed to pay a $100,000 fine and he was given two years’ probation.
Defense Secretary Ashton Carter, another pro-Israeli Zionist, refused to bust Petraeus from a four-star to a three-star general and he said that after the plea deal, he considered “the matter closed.”
However, showing criminal intent in cases involving Israel did not do much for diGenova and other prosecutors who pursued Israeli spies.
The prosecution of the Romanian hacker Marcel Lazar Lehel, also known as “Guccifer,” in the court of the U.S. Eastern District of Virginia, also known as the U.S. military-intelligence community’s “rocket docket” for quick prosecutions without the worry of classified information being disclosed during a trial, is a case in point.
U.S. Attorney Sana Boente has rejected claims by Lehel that he gained access to and copied Mrs. Clinton’s sensitive and classified emails.
Boente understands the hot potato he has on his hands with Lehel.
Anytime Israel is found to be involved in an espionage or terrorism case in the United States is a sure-fired way to bring unwanted attention upon any prosecutor.
Cyber-security specialist Morgan Wright, who has worked for such firms and Alcatel-Lucent and Cisco Systems, made it a point to tell Fox News and Politico that the foreign intelligence agencies that accessed Clinton’s private servers, included “Russia, China and Israel in that order.”
Comey did state his remarks to the press that it was “possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account.”
Comey knows full-well that those “hostile actors” include Israel.
Comey specifically wanted to street clear of Lehel — “Guccifer” — because of what he told Pando reporter Matei Rosca from a prison cell in Romania in October 2014.
Lehel had been arrested by Romanian authorities for publicizing emails between Mrs. Clinton and Sidney Blumenthal that he hacked during the time frame surrounding the attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi.
Lehel told Rosca that his hacking always seemed to result in the same finds: “Wherever I investigate I find Jews and Freemasons in the highest circles. I’ve hit upon secrets in the attempt to unmask the society of the enlightened.”
Such talk will eventually relegate someone like Lehel to the bowels of the U.S. prison complex and any other similar information he gleaned from his hacking career will be studiously avoided by any federal law enforcement official who wants to keep his or her job, including Lynch, Comey, and Boente.
Wayne Madsen is an investigative journalist who consistently exposes cover-ups from deep within the government. Want to be the first to learn the latest scandal? Go to WayneMadsenReport.com subscribe today!