WikiLeaks’ 10 Most Damning Clinton Emails that Prove Mainstream Media is Scripted & Controlled

wikilkeaks-media-bias-clinton-msm-wikileaks Reproduced from Free Thought


Washington, D.C. – With information coming out of WikiLeaks at a fast and furious pace, it’s difficult for the average person to keep up with the many bombshell revelations being exposed. 

 This is happening so much that the most damning evidence is ending up as background noise in the 24-hour election news cycle without ever making it into the mainstream news. 

On October 7th, 2016, WikiLeaks publish thousands of emails belonging to John Podesta’s private email archives. More emails have been released in the days that followed. Podesta is Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign Chairman. He previously served as Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton and Counselor to President Barack Obama. 

The Podesta emails give insight into why there has been such little fanfare in the mainstream media regarding many of the most damning allegations against Clinton. 

The fact that most of the newsworthy information contained in the emails is not being reported by the corporate media is indicative of the incestuous relationship between the mainstream media and the Clinton campaign – and is on full display in the Podesta emails. 

While there are dozens of bombshell revelations contained within the emails –including transcripts of speeches to Wall St. banks that Clinton had refused to release, hidden policy positions, and evidence of collusion with brutal regimes – the most damning is the collusion and control of the U.S. media on display in the emails. 

Essentially, the media has been weaponized as a means of controlling public opinion by propagandizing the American people. World renowned academic Noam Chomsky, in his book “Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media,” detailed how U.S. media frequently serve as an errand boy for U.S. corporate, military and imperial interests.

Chomsky forwarded the idea of what he called a “propaganda model.” Although the book was written in 1988, it speaks precisely to what is currently taking place and clearly revealed  in the Podesta emails. 

“The media serve, and propagandize on behalf of, the powerful societal interests that control and finance them. The representatives of these interests have important agendas and principles that they want to advance, and they are well positioned to shape and constrain media policy.” -Chomsky 

With knowledge of what is currently transpiring, here are the ten most damning Clinton emails regarding the media’s collusion with her presidential campaign, with hotlinks to the original WikiLeaks release. 

  1. Clinton Staff hosts private “off-the-record cocktail party” with 38 “influential” reporters, journalists, editors, and anchors (from 16 different mainstream media outlets including CNN, NBC, CBS, NYT, MSNBC, & more) with thestated goal of “framing the race.” 
  1. Donna Brazile (CNN contributor at the time, and current DNC Chairman now)leaked CNN town hall questionsto Hillary Clinton’s staff prior to the debate. 
  1. Clinton campaign and the New York Times coordinating attack strategyagainst Trump. 
  1. Glen Thrush, POLITICO’s chief political correspondent andsenior staff writer for POLITICO Magazine, sends John Podesta an article for his approval. Writes: “Please don’t share or tell anyone I did this. Tell me if I fucked up anything.” 
  1. Huffington Post contributor Frank Islam writes to John Podesta in an email titled “My blogs in the Huffington Post”, says“I am committed to make sure she is elected the next president.”“Please let me know if I can be of any service to you.” 
  1. Clinton staffer “Placing a story” with Politico / New York Times: “place a story with a friendly journalist” “we have a very good relationship with Maggie Haberman of Politico” “we should shape likely leaks in the best light for HRC.” 
  1. John Podesta receiving drafts of New York Times articlesbefore they’re published.

         Clinton staff “placing a story with a friendly at the AP (Matt Lee or Bradley    


        More media collusion: NYT and AP “helpful” to Clinton campaign. 

  1. Clinton staff colluding with New York Times and Wall Street Journalto paint Hillary’s economic policies in a “progressive” light. 
  1. CNBC panelist colluding with John Podestaon what to ask Trump when he calls in for an interview. 

+10. Clinton staff appearing to control the release times of Associated Press articles. 

The reality revealed in these emails is one of media collusion with powerful interests, which only serve to keep the American people in the dark about what is actually transpiring. The exact opposite of transparency. 

Please share this article to wake people up to the fact that their news is scripted by powerful entities as a means of influencing people’s perceptions!


Moving Bowels “Forward Together”: Team Clinton Takes a Steamy Shit on Georgia (literally)

American Everyman

by Scott Creighton

So you want to read a story about a Clinton campaign bus relieving itself of human waste on the side of a road in Georgia? Toilet paper and foul smells left behind for the voters in the red state.

Is that Hillary poop I see in that photo? Please tell me this election has devolved to the point where we see a photo of Hillary’s foul watery dung steaming by the side of the road.

yes. Hillary’s liquefied waste waiting for some kid to come along and slip in it. how nice.

There’s the story from The Hill:

“Police in Lawrenceville, Ga., are investigating whether a Hillary Clinton campaign bus illegally dumped human waste there, according to multiple reports.

The incident occurred on Grayson Highway early Tuesday, while the vehicle promoting the Democratic presidential nominee was between campaign stops, CBS 46 News said.

CBS 46 News…

View original post 146 more words

Charles Ortel: Clinton Foundation Is Charity Fraud Of Epic Proportions”–Tyler Durden (Zero Hedge) and More!

chas-ortel Charles Ortel

Clinton Foundation Is Charity Fraud Of Epic Proportions“, Analyst Charges In Stunning Takedown

by Tyler Durden

Sep 8, 2016 5:07 AM

In early May, we introduced readers to Charles Ortel, a Wall Street analyst who uncovered financial discrepancies at General Electric before its stock crashed in 2008, and whom the Sunday Times of London described as “one of the finest analysts of financial statements on the planet” in a 2009 story detailing the troubles at AIG. Having moved on beyond simple corporate fraud, Ortel spent the past year and a half digging into something more relevant to the current US situation:”charities”, and specifically the Clinton Foundation’s public records, federal and state-level tax filings, and donor disclosures. 

Four months ago, Ortel began releasing his preliminary findings in the first of a series of up to 40 planned reports on his website. His allegation was simple: “this is a charity fraud.”

To learn more about the Clinton Foundation, Ortel decided to “take it apart and see how it worked” and he has been doing that ever since February 2015. 

“I decided, as I did with GE, let’s pick one that’s complicated,” said Ortel. “The Clinton Foundation is complicated, but it’s really very small compared to GE.”

When Ortel tried to match up the Clinton Foundation’s tax filings with the disclosure reports from its major donors, he said he started to find problems. That includes records from the foundation’s many offshoots—including the Clinton Health Access Initiative and the Clinton Global Initiative—as well as its foreign subsidiaries.

“I decided it would be fun to cross-check what their donors thought they did when they donated to the Clinton Foundation, and that’s when I got really irritated,” he said. “There are massive discrepancies between what some of the major donors say they gave to the Clinton Foundation to do, and what the Clinton Foundation said what they got from the donors and what they did with it.”x

As previously reported, last year the Clinton Foundation was forced to issue corrected tax filings for several years to correct donation errors. But Ortel said many of the discrepancies remain. “I’m against charity fraud. I think people in both parties are against charity fraud, and this is a charity fraud,” he said.

To be sure, Ortel’s efforts were to be commended: digging through the foundation’s numbers can not have been easy, considering that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put the Clinton Foundation on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits in 2015. Furthermore, the Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid. That’s because the organization spent the vast bulk of its windfall on “administration, travel, salaries and bonuses”, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

“It seems like the Clinton Foundation operates as a slush fund for the Clintons,” said Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, a government watchdog group where progressive Democrat and Fordham Law professor Zephyr Teachout was once an organizing director.* * *

Overnight, on his website, Ortel released the long-awaited executive summary of his numerous, and at time confusing, findings: “Beginning today, and regularly thereafter, numerous detailed Exhibits will examine the known public record of the Clinton Charity Network within the context of applicable state, federal, and foreign laws.”

And while we await the upcoming exhibits to his summary, here are the main highlights from the executive summary, which we urge all visitors – who have an even passing interest in the effort that has consumed the Clintons’ time and energy for the two decades, and brought them substantial wealth – to read.

* * *


Understanding the Clinton Foundation Public Record in Proper Context: 1997 to Present 

To informed analysts, the Clinton Foundation appears to be a rogue charity that has neither been organized nor operated lawfully from inception in October 1997 to date–as you will grow to realize, it is a case study in international charity fraud, of mammoth proportions. 

In particular, the Clinton Foundation has never been validly authorized to pursue tax-exempt purposes other than as a presidential archive and research facility based in Little Rock, Arkansas. Moreover, its operations have never been controlled by independent trustees and its financial results have never been properly audited by independent accountants. 

In contrast to this stark reality, Bill Clinton recently continued a long pattern of dissembling, likening himself to Robin Hood and dismissing critics of his “philanthropic” post-presidency, despite mounting concerns over perceived conflicts of interest and irregularities. 

Normally, evaluating the efficacy of a charity objectively is performed looking closely into hard facts only -specifically, determining whether monies spent upon “program service expenditures” actually have furthered the limited, authorized “tax-exempt purposes” of entities such as the Bill, Hillary, and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, its subsidiaries, its joint ventures, and its affiliates (together, the “Clinton Charity Network”). 

But, popular former presidents of the United States retain “bully pulpits” from which they certainly can spin sweet-sounding themes to a general audience and media that is not sufficiently acquainted with the strict laws and regulations that do, in fact , tether trustees of a tax-exempt organization to following only a mission that has been validly pre-approved by the Internal Revenue Service, on the basis of a complete and truthful application. 

This Executive Summary carries forward a process of demonstrating that the Clinton Foundation illegally veered from its IRS-authorized mission within days of Bill Clinton’s departure from the White House in January 2001, using publicly available information which, in certain cases, has been purposefully omitted or obscured in disclosures offered through the Clinton Foundation website, its principal public portal. 

Getting to Reality 

The question of whether a federally authorized nonprofit corporation has been validly organized and operated is a question of fact, best answered through close review of the record. 

Without having access to helpful corroborative materials (including board minutes, donor solicitation presentations, after-action reports to donors, management representation letters to accountants, internal memoranda, and communications with key counterparties), this Executive Summary previews 40 detailed Exhibits that dissect portions of the public record concerning activities of the Clinton Charity Network. 

Determined review of these 40 Exhibits that deal primarily with the period 23 October 1997 (when the Clinton Foundation was organized) through 2011 (when attempts to re-organize the Clinton Foundation were most active)demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that the Clinton Charity Network was neither organized nor operated lawfully. 

As the following IRS publication states clearly, a nonprofit corporation must pass both an “organizational test” and an “operational test” to be legitimately exempt from federal income taxes. 

“The Dual Test: Organized and Operated 

  1. IRC 501(c)(3) requires an organization to be both “organized” and “operated” exclusively for one or more IRC 501(c)(3) purposes. If the organization fails either the organizational test or the operational test, it is not exempt. Reg. 1.501(c)(3)–1(a)(1). 
  1. The organizational test concerns the organization’s articles of organization or comparable governing document. The operational test concerns the organization’s activities. A deficiency in an organization’s governing document cannot be cured by the organization’s actual operations. Likewise, an organization whose activities are not within the statute will not qualify for exemption by virtue of a well written charter. Reg. 1.501(c)(3)–1(b)(1)(iv).” 

The Clinton Foundation and each part of the Clinton Charity Network fails either the organizational test, the operational test, or both of these tests. The consequences for failing to meet either the organizational test or the operational test are severe. In normal circumstances, a charity would have its tax-exempt status revoked retroactively. 

The “charity” would then have to refile its tax returns and pay corporate income taxes upon any profits earned from the date its authorization is revoked, forward to the present. 

Donors who took tax deductions in the relevant time periods would owe personal income taxes on contributions they had made. 

And, a raft of criminal as well as civil sanctions would likely ensue, whose financial consequences might, or might not be mitigated by insurance. 

What the Public Record Reveals about Clinton Foundation Entities 

To understand the full extent of illegal activities involving Clinton Foundation entities and personnel, you must resist unvetted words and numbers published in press releases, marketing brochures, and filings to state, federal, and foreign governments, the latter having been submitted under penalties of perjury. 

Instead, you must concentrate upon “stubborn facts”–information whose veracity you can confirm, for yourself. 

Though allies of the Clinton family, and some extended family members believe otherwise, in truth: “…whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, you cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” 

What does available evidence reveal about the scale and scope of frauds committed and ongoing by the Clinton Foundation Charity Network?

* * *

At this point, Ortel previews the 40 detailed Exhibits which will be published starting September 7 on As a preview of the extensive analysis contained in these Exhibits, “these Exhibits document an escalating pattern of lawlessness and suggest that trustees of entities in the Clinton Charity Network exhibited gross negligence and reckless disregard in performance of their solemn duties.”

The exhibits can be read in their entirety in the pdf attached at the bottom of this post.

Instead, we fast forward to Ortel’s conclusion:

The scope and scale of illegal activities carried out by trustees, executives, significant donors, and professional advisors in the names of Clinton Foundation entities are only evident when you consider abundant information in the public domain and then read the body of laws that serves as a framework for regulating charities and their solicitation efforts. 

All told, declared donations to Clinton Foundation entities from 1997 through 2014 are greater than $2 billion; but this vast amount is likely a pittance when compared to sums sent to affiliated “charities” and relief efforts around the world. Though required by strict laws, no part of the Clinton Charity Network (including affiliates and joint ventures) has ever procured a comprehensive, independent, and compliant audit of its financial results. 

No part of the Clinton Charity Network is controlled by experienced and independent trustees who can defend against conflicts of interest–in consequence Clinton charities regularly are used illegally to create substantial “private gain”, and to advance the political interests of the Clinton wing of the Democratic Party. 

Unless and until an independent conservator is appointed by the Arkansas State Attorney General, the public will not know the true dimensions of a fraud that started in Bill Clinton’s home state and in Washington, D.C., then metastasized, and spread around the world. 

His stunning summary: “An educated guess, based upon ongoing analysis of the public record begun in February 2015, is that the Clinton Foundation entities are part of a network that has defrauded donors and created illegal private gains of approximately $100 billion in combined magnitude, and possibly more, since 23 October 1997.”

* * *

Ortel leaves us with some critical questions:

  • Why was the Clinton Charity Network allowed to expand the scope of its illegal activities between 20 January 2001 and 20 January 2009, when George W. Bush served as president?
  • Why has the administration of Barack Obama allowed the Clinton Charity Fraud Network to grow even more, in bold violation of state, federal, and foreign laws from 20 January 2009 to present?
  • Why did Valerie Jarrett and the Obama Administration bother with the pretense of signing a legal document, late in 2008, purporting to regulate potential conflicts of interest between Hillary Clinton in her role as Secretary of State , and the Clinton Foundation, when this document was false, misleading, incomplete, and manifestly unenforceable?
  • Why is the IRS still resisting full-scale audits of the Clinton Charity Network?

The answer is surprising and simple–once again, Americans and regulators around the world appear to have fallen victim to the “Big Lie” strategy.

* * *

Ortel’s appeal to readers is simple:

Charity fraud on international scale, led by persons who must know better, should not stand unprosecuted. Will it? 

You can make the crucial difference. Raise your voice. 

Contact government officials now who have not yet done enough to regulate the rogue Clinton Charity Network.

* * *

Ortel’s full executive summary is below (pdf link), and those who wish to follow the release of the detailed exhibits can do so atOrtel’s website


Charles Ortel interview with Greg Hunter.



FBI Insider Leaks All: Clinton Foundation Exposed! Involves Entire US Government!

0″A thread on 4chan with an FBI insider confirms everyone’s worst suspicions. The Hillary Clinton email server was merely a distraction from the Clinton Foundation and most of DC is in up to their necks in what could be the biggest scandal of all times. This inside info from someone claiming to be a high level FBI analyst whose job was to look at the records, with NOTES added to clarify some of the responses all this and more has been reveled and reported by Before Its News.
The smoking gun is about to arrive and there are “a lot of people involved”. To save everyone time, here are the choice bits with the link to the entire archive, where you can decide for yourself if this is for real or not. Looks like Trump and Putin hold some of the cards. This could be the most interesting election ever. (Lanugauge Warning):” (Continued at link below photo.)


Corruption by FBI Director Comey and Attorney General Lynch Exposed in Clinton Email Investigation by Jay Syrmopoulos

It looks as if some courageous FBI agents are about to blow the whistle on what will become the biggest scandal of the Obama administration.  The FBI Director James Comey and the Attorney General Lynch have apparently conspired with Obama and the Clinton’s to cover up the obvious crimes committed by Hillary Clinton from installing a private email server in her home to communicate official business (and Clinton Foundation business). People both in and outside of the State Department not approved to handle classified information were involved.  These high level officials apparently glossed over the fact that emails which had been requested by Congress and even subpoered were destroyed, deleted and  “lost” during the course of the investigation, obvious violations of law.  It is anticipated that since one FBI agent has come forward anonymously and blown the whistle, others will follow soon.—-Thomas Baldwin

The article that is included here is from:  The published on October 13, 2016.


BREAKING: FBI in Revolt — Top FBI Official Exposes Massive Corruption Which Let Clinton’s Crimes Slide

Jay Syrmopoulos  October 13, 2016 


Washington, D.C. – A high-ranking FBI official has blown the whistle on what they say was a politically motivated, top-down decision to not recommend Hillary Clinton face criminal charges for her mishandling of classified intelligence.

The anonymous source that worked intimately on the Clinton investigation told Fox News that FBI agents working the case, as well as DOJ attorneys on the case, unanimously believed that Clinton should have her security clearance revoked, with the “vast majority” believing she should be criminally charged.

“It was unanimous that we all wanted her [Clinton’s] security clearance yanked,” the senior FBI official told Fox news. “It is safe to say the vast majority felt she should be prosecuted. We were floored while listening to the FBI briefing because Comey laid it all out, and then said ‘but we are doing nothing,’ which made no sense to us.”

The entire team was stunned when FBI Director Comey announced on July 5 that he would not be recommending a criminal indictment to the Attorney General’s office, according to the source.

“No trial level attorney agreed, no agent working the case agreed, with the decision not to prosecute — it was a top-down decision,” said the source, whose identity and actual role in the case were vetted and verified by Fox News.

The year-long Clinton investigation involved over 100 FBI agents and analysts, as well as six attorneys from the DOJ’s National Security Division – Counter Espionage Section. Per their usual course of action, the FBI declined to comment directly on the damning allegations, referring people to their official public statements on the matter by Comey – which essentially say that politics didn’t play into the decision – a blatant and utter lie.

“I know there were many opinions expressed by people who were not part of the investigation – including people in government – but none of that mattered to us,” Comey said during his July 5 announcement that the FBI would not be recommending Clinton for prosecution. “Opinions are irrelevant, and they were all uninformed by insight into our investigation, because we did the investigation the right way. Only facts matter, and the FBI found them here in an entirely apolitical and professional way.”

But Comey’s statements seem at odds with the sentiments of a number of veteran FBI agents, who this week came forward in the New York Post to claim that FBI Director James Comey “has permanently damaged the bureau’s reputation for uncompromising investigations with his cowardly whitewash of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information using an unauthorized private email server.”

That claim also is backed up by a number of veteran FBI agents who have come forward to rebuke Comey’s politicization of a once respected law enforcement organization.

“The FBI has politicized itself, and its reputation will suffer for a long time. I hold Director Comey responsible,” Dennis V. Hughes, the first chief of the FBI’s computer investigations unit, told the NY Post.

Retired FBI agent Michael M. Biasello also noted in the Post’s report that, “Comey has singlehandedly ruined the reputation of the organization.”

Andrew Napolitano, a former judge and senior judicial analyst for Fox News, said many FBI agents involved in the investigation felt that the decision was based solely on politics, with the White House in control.

“It is well known that the FBI agents on the ground, the human beings who did the investigative work, had built an extremely strong case against Hillary Clinton and were furious when the case did not move forward,” said Napolitano. “They believe the decision not to prosecute came from The White House.”

One of the biggest points of contention amongst the FBI team that had worked so tirelessly to piece together the case was the fact that Comey had based his decision on his conclusion that the DOJ wouldn’t charge Clinton – something that should be completely irrelevant as to whether or not a prosecution recommendation is made by the FBI as the agency’s role is to simply advise on such matters.

“Basically, James Comey hijacked the DOJ’s role by saying ‘no reasonable prosecutor would bring this case,’” the Fox News source said. “The FBI does not decide who to prosecute and when, that is the sole province of a prosecutor — that never happens,” said the senior FBI official.

“I know zero prosecutors in the DOJ’s National Security Division who would not have taken the case to a grand jury,” the source added. “One was never even convened.”

The FBI investigation was fatally flawed from the beginning, because there were no subpoenas issued, no grand jury convened, and no search warrants issued – absolutely anomalous behavior in an FBI criminal investigation.

“The FBI could not seize anything related to the investigation, only request things. As an example, in order to get the laptop, they had to agree to grant immunity,” Napolitano said.

According to a report by Fox News:

In early 2015, it was revealed that Clinton had used a private email server in her Chappaqua, N.Y., home to conduct government business while serving from 2009-2013. The emails on the private server included thousands of messages that would later be marked classified by the State Department retroactively. Federal law makes it a crime for a government employee to possess classified information in an unsecure manner, and the relevant statute does not require a finding of intent.

Although Comey found that Clinton was “extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information,” he said “no charges are appropriate in this case.”

Just days before Comey’s announcement, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, who was originally appointed as a federal prosecutor by Bill Clinton, met with in secret on the tarmac of an airport runway Bill Clinton.

Another oddity of the investigation, signaling that it was intentionally being manipulated from above, was the fact that the FBI forced its agents and analysts involved in the case to sign non-disclosure agreements.

“This is unheard of, because of the stifling nature it has on the investigative process,” the source said.

Adding the strange behavior displayed by FBI during its investigation, immunity agreements granted to Clinton’s State Department aides and IT experts. Immunity agreements are par for the course in an FBI investigation, but immunity is given when charges are being brought.

Fox News reports:

Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s former chief of staff, along with two other State Department staffers, John Bentel and Heather Samuelson, were afforded immunity agreements, as was Bryan Pagliano, Clinton’s former IT aide, and Paul Combetta, an employee at Platte River networks, the firm hired to manage her server after she left the State Department.

Combetta utilized the computer program “Bleachbit” to destroy Clinton’s records, despite an order from Congress to preserve them, and Samuelson also destroyed Clinton’s emails. Pagliano established the system that illegally transferred classified and top secret information to Clinton’s private server. Mills disclosed classified information to the Clinton’s family foundation in the process, breaking federal laws.

None of these people should have been granted immunity if no charges were ultimately being brought, the source told Fox News. With no charges being brought, immunity only served to act as a cover for illicit actions.

“[Immunity] is issued because you know someone possesses evidence you need to charge the target, and you almost always know what it is they possess,” the source said. “That’s why you give immunity.”

Immunity was also given to Mills and Samuelson for what was found on their computers, which were then destroyed as a part of negotiations with the FBI – something well outside the boundary of normalcy in a criminal investigation.

“Mills and Samuelson receiving immunity with the agreement their laptops would be destroyed by the FBI afterwards is, in itself, illegal,” the source said. “We know those laptops contained classified information. That’s also illegal, and they got a pass.”

Revealing the extremely disturbing favoritism shown by the FBI to Clinton, Mills was allowed to operate as Clinton’s attorney while a witness in the actual criminal investigation – something that should never have been allowed.

“Mills was allowed to sit in on the interview of Clinton as her lawyer. That’s absurd. Someone who is supposedly cooperating against the target of an investigation [being] permitted to sit by the target as counsel violates any semblance of ethical responsibility,” the senior FBI official said.

“Every agent and attorney I have spoken to is embarrassed and has lost total respect for James Comey and Loretta Lynch,” the agent said. “The bar for DOJ is whether the evidence supports a case for charges — it did here. It should have been taken to the grand jury.”

FBI agents were incensed with the fact that Clinton’s interview took just 3½ hours with no follow-up interview ever taking place, in spite of her “40 bouts of amnesia,” during the interview. Then, three days later, Comey cleared her of any criminal wrongdoing.

The FBI source claims that the majority of FBI and DOJ staffers involved in the investigation believe Comey and Lynch were motivated not by justice, but out of personal ambition.

“Loretta Lynch simply wants to stay on as Attorney General under Clinton, so there is no way she would indict,” the source said. “James Comey thought his position [excoriating Clinton even as he let her off the hook] gave himself cover to remain on as director regardless of who wins.”

Bolstering the contention that the entire FBI investigation was simply political theater meant to appease an angry public, WikiLeaks released internal Clinton communication records this week that revealed the U.S. Department of Justice kept the Clinton campaign updated to the progress of its investigation.

“DOJ folks inform me there is a status hearing in this case this morning, so we could have a window into the judge’s thinking about this proposed production schedule as quickly as today,” Clinton press secretary Brian Fallon wrote regarding the email documentation the State Department would be required to turn over to the Justice Department.

There is a painfully obvious truth in that the FBI itself has been co-opted as a tool to legitimize the oligarchy that rules. Instead of assigning responsibility for actions, the agency has shown itself to bend to the will of the political elite.

If the FBI ever hopes to be a respected law enforcement entity again, they need a revolt from within to show the American public that they stand with them.

Where are the brave FBI agents that are unafraid to go public with their feelings about the politicization of this case and the favoritism displayed to those with money, power, and political connections?

Please share this story as a call to action in hopes that some fearless FBI agents will come together and finally take a stand for the American people! 





Podesta files: Top 10 Revelations from Leaked Clinton Campaign Emails

This publication was reproduced from which first appeared on October 13.  It represents an interim summary of some highlights resulting from Wikileaks release of Clinton emails from several thousand being released day by day.  It does not include some of the ones released between about October 10 and October 14, the date of this blog.–Thomas Baldwin

Published time: 13 Oct, 2016 06:29Edited time: 13 Oct, 2016 11:54

RT brings you a comprehensive look at the 10 most stunning revelations – from hatred for the term “everyday Americans” to extraterrestrial contacts – found in emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta that were released by WikiLeaks.

By Wednesday, WikiLeaks has released more than 7,000 emails sent or received by Podesta, offering glimpses into the workings of the Clinton campaign, as well as the Podesta-founded Center for American Progress.

Clinton’s associates have reacted angrily at the releases, with her campaign spokesman Brian Fallon accusing WikiLeaks of being “a propaganda arm of the Russian government running interference for their pet candidate, Trump.”

Here is a list of 10 strange things about the Democratic presidential hopeful found in the leaked emails.

1. Attitude towards ‘everyday Americans’

One email has in particular generated much debate, revealing that Clinton hates “everyday Americans” – or that particular phrase, anyway.

“I know she has begun to hate everyday Americans, but I think we should use it once the first time she says I’m running for president because you and everyday Americans need a champion,” Podesta wrote to Clinton’s Director of Communications Jennifer Palmieri in April 2015.

Campaign says Hillary doesn’t like everyday Americans.She is not with anyone but herself.

2. ‘Cultivating’ certain media

In an attempt to confirm Clinton’s attendance at an event on April 12, 2015, the day she announced her presidential bid, Podesta emailed Palmieri about the news website Business Insider. They both described the outlet as right wing.

“Am I right that they’re right wing? They get a fair amount of traffic,” Podesta asked.

“They are right wing, but Philippe [Reines, Clinton’s former State Department aide] weirdly has cultivated them,” Palmieri replied.

Clinton says Saudi Arabia, Qatar provide ‘clandestine’ support to ISIS – WikiLeaks 


3. Clinton knew ISIS received support from US allies Saudi Arabia and Qatar

According to another email, Clinton was well aware that Saudi Arabia and Qatar – major US allies in the Middle East – are providing  “clandestine financial and logistic support to IS [formerly ISIS/ISIL] and other radical Sunni groups in the region,”contrary to their assurances of the otherwise.

“While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” said the email she sent to Podesta.

4. Most Clinton Foundation donors are not American

In 2013, speaking to Mediacorp, Clinton admitted that the largest share of donations made to the Clinton Foundation came from abroad.

“Canadians per capita are the biggest supporters of the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Global Initiative, so it’s great to be supported by so many Canadians,” Clinton said, according to the Washington Examiner.

5. New DNC chair was the ‘mole’ leaking Bernie Sanders doc

In January, Donna Brazile – former campaign adviser to Bill Clinton in the 1990s and a high-ranking official in the Democratic National Committee – passed along to the Clinton campaign an email from the Bernie Sanders campaign revealing his strategy to reach African-American community through social media, called the ‘Twitterstorm Tuesday.’

“Thank you for the heads up on this Donna,” responded Adrienne Elrod, a Clinton campaign aide.

Brazile replaced Clinton confidante Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, who was forced to resign as DNC chair after the party files were leaked just prior to the convention in July. She tried to justify the action, saying there were “plenty of emails from me to both team Clinton and Sanders.” She has also accused those who reported on the emails of working overtime for Trump and“his Russian hackers.”

For what it’s worth, let me tell you what I know: there’s plenty of emails from me to both team Clinton & Sanders. And lots of transcripts.


6. Policy-making and ‘backroom deals’ should be concealed from voters

Among the first batch of emails were partial transcripts of speeches Clinton gave after leaving the State Department. In one such speech in 2013, Clinton said policy-making process should be concealed from voters as backroom deals it includes could make people “nervous.”

“If everybody’s watching, you know, all of the back room discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position,” Clinton said during a speech to the National Multi-Housing Council, for which she earned $225,000, according to the Washington Examiner.

‘I’m kind of far removed’: Clinton admits estrangement from middle class in Wall Street paid speech 

Photo published for ‘I’m kind of far removed’: Clinton admits estrangement from middle class in Wall Street paid speech...

‘I’m kind of far removed’: Clinton admits estrangement from middle class in Wall Street paid speech…

The struggles of the middle class are something Hillary Clinton once admitted in a paid speech she is “far removed” from, thanks to the “fortunes” she and her husband “enjoy,” a WikiLeaks-posted…


7. ‘Can’t possibly’ vet all refugees

At a luncheon for the Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago Vanguard in October 2013, Clinton said that the influx of Syrian refugees into neighboring Jordan – fueled by the ongoing civil war – makes checking identities of all asylum seekers impossible.

“And particularly with Syria which has everyone quite worried, Jordan because it’s on their border and they have hundreds of thousands of refugees and they can’t possibly vet all those refugees so they don’t know if, you know, jihadists are coming in along with legitimate refugees,” Clinton said, according to speech transcripts found in Podesta’s emails.

8. No-fly zone over Syria impractical due to ‘sophisticated anti-aircraft systems’

During the second presidential debate on Sunday evening, Clinton championed an idea of introducing a no-fly zone over certain parts of Syria. However, in a speech paid for by Goldman Sachs in June 2013, she was deeply skeptical that such measure could work in modern Syria.

“But the idea that we would have like a no fly zone—Syria, of course, did have when it started the fourth biggest Army in the world. It had very sophisticated air defense systems. They’re getting more sophisticated thanks to Russian imports,” Clinton said, according to leaked speech excerpts.

“So our missiles, even if they are standoff missiles so we’re not putting our pilots at risk – you’re going to kill a lot of Syrians.”

9. Chelsea Clinton ‘acted like a spoiled brat’

A December 2011 email from Doug Band, a lawyer who helped create the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), said that that Chelsea Clinton was hardly caring about “her role” in the office problems.

“But I’m sure Chelsea is more concerned with a mostly false story in the distinguished [NY] post about [MF Global] and Teneo not her role in what happened to Laura/Bruce, what she is doing to the organization or the several of stories that have appeared in the NY Post about her father and a multitude of women over the years,” Band wrote.

In a separate email to Podesta a month earlier, he said Chelsea was“acting like a spoiled brat kid who has nothing else to do but create issues to justify what she’s doing because she, as she has said, hasn’t found her way and has a lack of focus in her life.”

10. ‘Extraterrestrials, the highest form of intelligence working directly with God’

Aliens want to help humans but are afraid of violence on Earth, Apollo program astronaut Edgar Mitchell wrote to Podesta in 2015, citing an impending space war and the Vatican’s knowledge of alien life.

“Because the War in Space race is heating up, I felt you should be aware of several factors as you and I schedule our Skype talk,”wrote Mitchell, who died in February 2016.

Terri Mansfield, who describes herself online as “the Director of the ETI (Extraterrestrial Intelligence) Peace Task Force” has also been mentioned in one of Mitchell’s emails. Referred to as Mitchell’s “Catholic colleague,” Mansfield is also said to be attending the meeting with Podesta “to bring us up to date on the Vatican’s awareness of ETI.”

On her website, Mansfield describes ETIs as being “the highest form of intelligence working directly with God.”

How the Democrats Plan to Deal With the Assange and Hacked Documents Revealing Clinton Family Crimes

Donna Brazile, a CNN contributor and a Democratic strategist, is vice chairwoman for voter registration and participation at the Democratic National Committee. She is a nationally syndicated columnist, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and author of "Cooking With Grease: Stirring the Pots in America." She was manager for the Gore-Lieberman presidential campaign in 2000.

Donna Brazile, a CNN contributor and a Democratic strategist, is vice chairwoman for voter registration and participation at the Democratic National Committee.


It’s beginning to look like the Democratic Party and the Clinton Mob have decided a strategy to deal with Julian Assange and hackers who are releasing emails and other papers documenting Hillary Clinton’s crimes.  It remains to be seen how the FBI and James Comey will react. There are also some states, e.g. New York, who might have some interest in these through U.S. attorneys and state Attorney Generals.  I have reproduced here the first “official” Democrat opinions as offered by Donna Brazile who became the interim chairperson of the Democratic National Committee when Debbie Wasserman-Schultz had to step down with the hacked DNC emails implicating her involvement in rigging the Democratic primaries in favor of Hillary Clnton.

The Democratic Strategy in dealing with disclosed emails which the FBI and State Department had not turned over is:


—Thomas Baldwin, October 9, 2016.




Excerpted Transcript

STEPHANOPOULOS: You also heard Rudy Giuliani say something that I take is true, had this story not broken on Friday afternoon, today we’d be spending a lot of time on those emails that were released on Friday. John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, emails talking about those speeches she gave to private groups back before she started to run for president, including one where she talked about — this was one excerpt of a speech.

“My dream is a hemispheric common market with open trade and open borders some time in the future, with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the homeland. Open trade and open borders. This is the kind of thing that, had this come out, as he pointed out, Mr. Giuliani pointed out, is to have this come out during the primaries with Bernie Sanders, this would have been devastating to Hillary.

BRAZILE: You know, I was with Bernie the other day when — when some of this WikiLeaks stuff came out. And Bernie Sanders went out there to tell voters in New Hampshire that he is — he’s with Hillary Clinton and Secretary Clinton — second — I mean Senator Tim Kaine.

George, when you see something postmarked from Russia, you should be afraid to open up the document.

STEPHANOPOULOS: But these are legit, aren’t they?

BRAZILE: When you see what — I don’t know. I — I refuse to open these documents. I refuse to allow a foreign government, a foreign — or fg communities — to interfere and meddle and manipulate information. So I don’t know if it’s true or not true.

But I could tell you what she’s been saying in public about trade, what she’s been saying in public about Wall Street, what she has been saying in public about immigration reform.

I have no idea if these documents — they have been, as you know, selectively leaking and manipulating documents.

Postmark, the United States government finally acknowledged that these — that the Democratic Party, Democratic institutions have been hacked and I don’t trust any — anything that (INAUDIBLE).

STEPHANOPOULOS: So I mean you don’t — you don’t believe these are actually the excerpts of the speeches?

BRAZILE: Let me just say something, George. As you — as you well know, the reason why Secretary Clinton’s speeches became a topic in the primary is because she released her taxes, where, I mean Donald Trump has not released his taxes.

So I — I believe that that information may — I don’t know, George. I refuse to open them. And I’ve — I’ve asked the staff at the DNC and all of our democratic allies, don’t open up that crap, because it’s postmarked from Russia. 



“October Surprise”: Dracula’s Daughter Throws Hood In the Ring by adrien burke



Editor’s Note: What follows is the text of a speech given by Isadora Dracula to the Demagogue Party Convention, held this year in Transylvania, New York.  

(See credits and author’s bio at end)

My Fellow Americans, I am sure you are all very surprised to see one such as I, standing before you as your candidate for the highest office in the land. At one time, a candidate needed popular support to be considered as the standard-bearer for a political party. Those dark times, when money was not granted equality with ordinary freedom of speech or a “popular mandate,” are gone. I have gained the all-important financial support I need to run – and win. I am a member of the Trilateral Commission and a VERY influential, if unmentionable, Secret Society, like any viable modern candidate, and my once-vocal opposition within the party is, well, silent. 

The way before me – before us – is clear, and we will win. My illustrious Father always got what he wanted, and I inherited his tenacity. So please take off the garlic necklaces, my friends; I will not bite. . . . . . . .YOU. (polite laughter) 

Although the once-powerful “bleeding heart” Liberal Wing of the party opposed my candidacy, you may be sure that they will never be forgotten. Their day – the day of grassroots campaigning, of debating divisive issues, and pandering to the working class, have passed into history. Although we are still OFFICIALLY perceived as the party of the Common People, we have been for some time, the other party of The Very Rich, receiving our money and making our pacts with the same class as the Plutocrat Party. And so we have put an end to Class Warfare, and to the economic disadvantage our candidates once suffered as a result of representing the impoverished class in a system where Money is Everything: the lifeblood of our nation.  

As for the apparent drawbacks to running a Vampire for public office, the fears of the party strategists are archaic. Their superstitious prejudices will be easily overcome in the days ahead, by the obvious comparisons between me and my opponent, Godzilla. 

The facts about my occupation are well known: Vampires suck blood, it is quite simply the way we live. And because we need the Human Race in order to live, no one could be concerned more with the well-being of the people. I will cherish my country and its citizens as tenderly as the shepherdess cares for her flock. And I will not lie to you: Yes! I will suck your blood! It is a little thing. A necessary thing. 

But my opponent, Godzilla, is another matter. He needs no one; and cares for nothing. He will destroy whole cities with a single step and crush the residents beneath his huge and heavy tread. He is a dangerous Barbarian with an openly apocalyptic agenda, and we dare not be sanguine about the possibility of a Plutocrat victory. The prospects for our nation and, above all, our party, are grave. As for the occasionally annoying rise of third parties – you all know that you can’t throw your vote away by voting for a poverty-stricken, bloodless third party candidate who can’t even pay for a few paltry billion-dollar hours of tv commercials. Whatever frivolous principles such a vote might satisfy, they are NOT worth the complete Destruction of Civilization.00 

Should any such movement arise, we have no choice but to ruthlessly crush it. Even if the candidate is the Archangel Gabriel himself. Because no matter how noble the intention, a vote for the “angels” is a vote for Godzilla.  

To those who would wallow in nostalgia for a Demagogue Party that feigns sympathy for the poor, the weak, the anemic, I say: Get over it! You’re History. In another week or two of this Presidential race, the media will be conceding that SOME bloodsucking is probably necessary for the health of the system and might even be a good thing. Some of them (the more conservative among them) may even be willing to back Godzilla’s platform for Urban Renewal, and as a boost to the ailing construction industry. But we have the ultimate advantage: the American people, who will in the end choose the kinder, gentler, Demagogic draining away of their energies over the Reign of Terror that a Plutocratic victory is sure to bring.  The voters will not like it, but they will vote for the Demagogue party: they have no choice! (applause, cheering) ! 

Take heart, my fellow Demagogues, The White House is as good as won!


Author:  “adrien rain burke is a failed illustrator, writer, and housewife. She cut her journalistic teeth on a small town newspaper as a proofreader, editor, and finally, a disgrace for having figured too prominently in a failed union drive. She is way too old to get upset over politics, but she does anyway. As an anarchist, she has been living in sin for 40+ years with her man, Bird, and too many cats.” 

Note by publisher, Thomas Baldwin.  Adrien indicated on a Facebook post that she had first written this article in 1992 during Bill Clinton’s first campaign.  I asked her if we could publish this immediately and we both agreed it has as much relevance today, if not more, than 1992!  The photo was chosen from a Google search and is by Tony-the-Tiger (2845) and Tony’s collection can be seen at this URL: