Under 50 U.S.C.§ 403-3a, “under ordinary circumstances, it is desirable” that either the Director or the Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence be an active-duty commissioned officer in the armed forces or have training or experience in military intelligence activities and requirements. Only one of the two positions can be held by a military officer at any given time. The statute does not specify what rank the commissioned officer will hold during his or her tenure in either position, but historically a four-star general or admiral has served. On July 20, 2010, President Obama nominated retired Lt. (three-star) Gen. James R. Clapper for the position. Clapper was confirmed by the Senate on August 5, 2010, and replaced acting Director David C. Gompert. The prior DNI was retired Navy four-star admiral Dennis C. Blair, whose resignation became effective May 28, 2010.[5]
The 9/11 Commission recommended establishing the DNI position in its 9/11 Commission Report, not released until July 22, 2004, as it had identified major intelligence failures that called into question how well the intelligence community was able to protect U.S. interests against foreign terrorist attacks.
Senators Dianne Feinstein, Jay Rockefeller and Bob Graham introduced S. 2645 on June 19, 2002, to create the Director of National Intelligence position. Other similar legislation soon followed. After considerable debate on the scope of the DNI’s powers and authorities, the United States Congress passed the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 by votes of 336–75 in the House of Representatives, and 89–2 in the Senate. President George W. Bush signed the bill into law on December 17, 2004. Among other things, the law established the DNI position as the designated leader of the United States Intelligence Community and prohibited the DNI from serving as the CIA Director or the head of any other Intelligence Community element at the same time. In addition, the law required the CIA Director to “report” his agency’s activities to the DNI.
Donald M. Kerr was confirmed by the U.S. Senate to be Principal Deputy Director of National Intelligence on October 4, 2007 and sworn in on October 9, 2007. Kerr, from Virginia, was most recently the Director of the National Reconnaissance Office, and previously the Duty Director for Science and Technology at the US CIA and earlier in his career the Assistant Director of the Justice Department’s FBI.
Declan McCullagh at News.com wrote on August 24, 2007, that the DNI site was configured to repel all search engines to index any page at DNI.gov. This effectively made the DNI website invisible to all search engines and in turn, any search queries.[8] Ross Feinstein, Spokesman for the DNI, said that the cloaking was removed as of September 3, 2007. “We’re not even sure how (the robots.txtfile) got there” – but it was again somehow hidden the next day. Another blog entry by McCullagh on September 7, states that the DNI site should now be open to search engines.[9] This explanation is plausible because some software used for web development has been known to cause servers to automatically generate and re-generate robots.txt, and this behavior can be difficult to turn off. Therefore, if the web developers working for the DNI had tried to solve the issue by simply removing robots.txt, it would have looked like it worked at first, but then fail once the server had undergone a self-check for the robots.txt file.[10]http://dni.gov/robots.txt has been configured to allow access to all directories for any agent.
In September 2007, the Office of the DNI released “Intelligence Community 100 Day & 500 Day Plans for Integration & Collaboration”. These plans include a series of initiatives designed to build the foundation for increased cooperation and reform of the U.S. Intelligence Community.[11]
Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)
The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 established the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) as an independent agency to assist the DNI. The ODNI’s goal is to effectively integrate foreign, military and domestic intelligence in defense of the homeland and of United States interests abroad.[12] The budget for the ODNI – and the Intelligence Community for fiscal year 2013 was $52.6 billion[13] and the base request for fiscal year 2014 was $48.2 billion.[14] The Military Intelligence Program (MIP) base budget request for fiscal year 2014, excluding overseas contingency funds, is $14.6 billion, which together with the NIP, comprise an Intelligence Community budget request of $62.8 billion for fiscal year 2014.[15] The ODNI has about 1,750 employees.[2]
On March 23, 2007, DNI Mike McConnell announced organizational changes, which include:
Elevating acquisition to a new Deputy DNI position
Creating a new Deputy DNI for Policy, Plans, and Requirements (replacing the Deputy DNI for Requirements position)
Establishing an Executive Committee
Designating the Chief of Staff position as the new Director of the Intelligence Staff
The ODNI continued to evolve under succeeding directors, culminating in a new organization focused on intelligence integration across the community. The ODNI has six centers and 15 Offices that, together with the centers, support the Director of National Intelligence as the head of the Intelligence Community (IC) in overseeing and directing implementation of the NIP and acting as the principal advisor to the President, the National Security Council, and the Homeland Security Council for intelligence matters related to national security. The six ODNI centers include:
Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Agency (IARPA)
Information Sharing Environment (ISE)
National Counterproliferation Center (NCPC)
National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC)
National Intelligence Council (NIC)
Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive (ONCIX).
ODNI organization
The ODNI is divided into core, enabling, and oversight offices. The Principal Duty Director (PDDNI) to the DNI, in a role similar to that of a Chief Operating Officer, oversees operation of ODNI offices, manages Intelligence Community (IC) coordination and information sharing, reinforces the DNI’s intelligence-integration initiatives, and focuses on IC resource challenges.
Core missio
The core mission functions of the ODNI are organized under the Deputy DNI for Intelligence Integration (DDNI/II). The DDNI/II facilitates information sharing and collaboration through the integration of analysis and collection, and leads execution of core mission functions. These include:
Mission enablers include policy, engagement, acquisition, resource, human capital, financial, and information offices.
Oversight
Oversight offices include the General Counsel, civil liberties, public affairs, Inspector General, Equal Employment Opportunity, and legislative affairs functions.[12] 78
Daniel Ray “Dan” Coats (born May 16, 1943) is an American politician who served as a United States Senator from Indiana from 1989 to 1999, and again from 2011 to 2017.
After retiring from the Senate, Coats served as U.S. Ambassador to Germany from 2001 to 2005, and then worked as a lobbyist in Washington, D.C. He was re-elected to the Senate by a large margin in 2010, succeeding Bayh, who announced his own retirement shortly after Coats declared his candidacy. Coats declined to run for re-election in 2016, and was succeeded by Todd Young.
Coats was born in Jackson, Michigan, the son of Vera (Nora) Elisabeth (née Swanlund) and Edward Raymond Coats. His father was of English and German descent, and his maternal grandparents emigrated from Sweden.[2] Coats attended local public schools, and graduated from Jackson High School in 1961. He then studied at Wheaton College in Illinois, where he earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in political science in 1965. At Wheaton, he was an active student athlete on the soccer team. He served in the United States Army from 1966 to 1968, and earned a Juris Doctor from the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law in Indianapolis in 1972, where he was also the associate editor of the Indiana Law Review.[3] He also served as assistant vice president of a Fort Wayne life insurance company.
When Quayle resigned from the Senate after being elected Vice President of the United States in 1988, Coats was appointed to Quayle’s former seat. Coats was subsequently elected to the seat in 1990 and 1992 and served in the Senate until January 1999, when Evan Bayh became the new Senator. Coats announced on February 3, 2010, he would run [4] for his old Senate seat and on February 16, 2010, Bayh announced his intention to retire.[5] Coats went on to win that Senate seat. He announced in March 2015 that he would not run for re-election in 2016.
Political positions
Gun laws
On multiple occasions, Coats has supported gun control measures. In 1991, he voted in favor of the Biden-Thurmond Violent Crime Control Act of 1991. This act, which did not become law, would have created a waiting period for handgun purchases and placed a ban on semi-automatic firearms. Subsequently, he supported the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act that President Clinton signed into law in 1993.[6] The legislation imposed a waiting period before a handgun could be transferred to an individual by a licensed dealer, importer, or manufacturer. This waiting period ended when the computerized instant check system came online. Coats also supported Feinstein Amendment 1152 to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1993.[7] The purpose of the Feinstein Amendment was to “restrict the manufacture, transfer, and possession of certain semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices”.[8]
In April 2013, Coats was one of forty-six senators to vote against passage of a bill which would have expanded background checks for gun buyers. Coats voted with 40 Republicans and 5 Democrats to stop the passage of the bill.[9]
Taxes
In 1995 Senator Coats introduced S. 568: Family, Investment, Retirement, Savings, and Tax Fairness Act[10] which would provide “family tax credits, increase national savings through individual retirement plus accounts, indexing for inflation the income thresholds for taxing social security benefits, etc”.[11] The bill did not become law.
LGBT issues
In 1993, Coats emerged as an opponent of President Clinton’s effort to allow LGBT individuals to serve openly in the armed forces.[12] Coats was one of the authors of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy and opposed its 2011 repeal. He does not support same-sex marriage but opposes interference with “alternative lifestyles“.[13]
Other
Coats cosponsored, with former Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Christopher Dodd, and James Jeffords, S.2206: Coats Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1998. This bill, which was enacted into law, “amended the Head Start Act, the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Act of 1981, and the Community Services Block Grant Act…in order to provide an opportunity for persons with limited means to accumulate assets.”[14]
In 1996, Coats cosponsored the Line Item Veto Act of 1996 which President Clinton signed into law. The bill allowed the President to “rewrit[e] legislation by vetoing single items of spending or specific tax breaks approved by Congress.”[15] The Supreme Court of the United States declared the law unconstitutional in Clinton v. City of New York in a 6-3 decision.
Coats made headlines in August 1998, when he publicly questioned the timing of President Bill Clinton’s cruise missile attacks on Afghanistan and Sudan, suggesting they might be linked to the Lewinsky scandal: “While there is clearly much more we need to learn about this attack and why it was ordered today, given the president’s personal difficulties this week, it is legitimate to question the timing of this action.”[16]
From August 15, 2001, to February 28, 2005, Coats was the United States Ambassador to Germany.[17][18] As ambassador during the lead-up to the Iraq war, he pressured the German government not to oppose the war, threatening worsened US relations with Germany.[19] As Ambassador he also played a critical role in establishing robust relations with then opposition leader Angela Merkel and in the construction of a new United States Embassy in the heart of Berlin next to the Brandenburg Gate.[20]
In 2005, Coats drew attention when he was chosen by President George W. Bush to shepherd Harriet Miers‘s failed nomination to the Supreme Court through the Senate. Echoing Senator Roman Hruska‘s famous 1970 speech in defense of Harrold Carswell, Coats said to CNN regarding the nomination: “If [being a] great intellectual powerhouse is a qualification to be a member of the court and represent the American people and the wishes of the American people and to interpret the Constitution, then I think we have a court so skewed on the intellectual side that we may not be getting representation of America as a whole.”[21]
In 2007, Coats served as co-chairman of a team of lobbyists for Cooper Industries, a Texas corporation that moved its principal place of business to Bermuda, where it would not be liable for U.S. taxes. In that role, he worked to block Senate legislation that would have closed a tax loophole, worth hundreds of millions of dollars to Cooper Industries.[22]
The NYT also reported that Coats was co-chairman of the Washington government relations office of King & Spalding, with a salary of $603,609.[22]
On February 10, 2010, Coats confirmed that he would return to Indiana to run for the seat held by incumbent Evan Bayh in the 2010 United States Senate election.[23][24] Bayh had made no previous announcements and was fully expected to run for another term, but after Coats announced his candidacy, Bayh announced his retirement on February 15, 2010. On May 4, 2010, Coats won the Republican primary over state Sen. Marlin Stutzman and former Congressman John Hostettler.[25][26]
Coats defeated Democratic Rep. Brad Ellsworth by a fifteen-point margin to return to the Senate.[28]
Coats became the senior senator from Indiana after Richard Lugar lost a challenge in the 2012 Republican primary election and subsequently was not re-elected to the Senate in 2012. Coats is currently serving with Democrat Joe Donnelly.
Personal life
Coats is married to Marsha Coats, Indiana’s female representative to the Republican National Committee. During the 2016 presidential campaign she endorsed Donald Trump, saying, “I truly believe the office will change Donald Trump. I believe it will humble him. And, I think even Donald will be impelled to turn to God for guidance. . . I believe our party needs to give Donald Trump a chance.”[29]
Coats is affiliated with the Fellowship, an informal association of Christian lawmakers. Coats lives in Fort Wayne, Indiana.[30] Coats received Big Brothers Big Sisters of America’s Charles G. Berwind Lifetime Achievement Award in 2012 for his decades of involvement with the organization. He also frequently donates to charity and has even helped underprivlaged Youth such as rising YouTuber Dhommay[31]
Following the 2010 leaks, the United States government launched a criminal investigation into WikiLeaks and asked allied nations for assistance.[4] In November 2010, a request was made for Assange’s extradition to Sweden, where he had been questioned months earlier over allegations of sexual assault and rape.[5] Assange continued to deny the allegations, and expressed concern that he would be extradited from Sweden to the United States due to his perceived role in publishing secret American documents.[6][7] Assange surrendered himself to UK police on 7 December 2010 and was held for ten days in solitary confinement before being released on bail. Assange sought and was granted asylum by Ecuador in August 2012. Assange has since remained in the Embassy of Ecuador in London, and is unable to leave without being arrested for breaching his bail conditions.[8]
Assange was born in the north Queensland city of Townsville,[9][10] to Christine Ann Hawkins (b. 1951),[11] a visual artist,[12] and John Shipton, an anti-war activist and builder.[13] The couple had separated before Assange was born.[13]
When he was a year old, his mother married Richard Brett Assange,[14][15][16] an actor, with whom she ran a small theatre company.[17] They divorced around 1979. Christine Assange then became involved with Leif Meynell, also known as Leif Hamilton, a member of Australian cult The Family, with whom she had a son before the couple broke up in 1982.[9][18][19] Assange had a nomadic childhood, and had lived in over thirty[20][21] different Australian towns by the time he reached his mid-teens, when he settled with his mother and half-brother in Melbourne, Victoria.[14][22]
In September 1991, Assange was discovered hacking into the Melbourne master terminal of Nortel, a Canadian multinationaltelecommunications corporation.[15] The Australian Federal Police tapped Assange’s phone line (he was using a modem), raided his home at the end of October,[31] and eventually charged him in 1994 with thirty-one counts of hacking and related crimes.[15] In December 1996, he pleaded guilty to twenty-five charges (the other six were dropped), was ordered to pay reparations of A$2,100 and released on a good behaviour bond,[29][32] avoiding a heavier penalty due to the perceived absence of malicious or mercenary intent and his disrupted childhood.[32][33][34][35][36]
Programming
Assange, c. 2006
In 1993 Assange gave technical advice to the Victoria Police Child Exploitation Unit and assisted with prosecutions.[37] In the same year he was involved in starting one of the first public Internet service providers in Australia, Suburbia Public Access Network.[14][38] He began programming in 1994, authoring or co-authoring the Transmission Control Protocol port scanner strobe.c (1995);[39][40] patches to the open-source database PostgreSQL (1996);[41][42] the Usenet caching software NNTPCache (1996);[43] the Rubberhosedeniable encryption system (1997),[44][45] which reflected his growing interest in cryptography;[46] and Surfraw, a command-line interface for web-based search engines (2000).[47] During this period he also moderated the AUCRYPTO forum;[46] ran Best of Security, a website “giving advice on computer security” that had 5,000 subscribers in 1996;[48] and contributed research to Suelette Dreyfus’sUnderground (1997), a book about Australian hackers, including the International Subversives.[27][49] In 1998, he co-founded the company Earthmen Technology.[35]
In 1999 Assange registered the domain leaks.org, but, as he put it, “I didn’t do anything with it.”[35][unreliable source?] He did, however, publicise a patent granted to the National Security Agency in August 1999 for voice-data harvesting technology: “This patent should worry people. Everyone’s overseas phone calls are or may soon be tapped, transcribed and archived in the bowels of an unaccountable foreign spy agency.”[46] Systematic abuse of technology by governments against fundamental freedoms of world citizens remained an abiding concern — more than a decade later in the introduction to Cypherpunks (2012) Assange summarised “the Internet, our greatest tool for emancipation, has been transformed into the most dangerous facilitator of totalitarianism we have ever seen”.[50]
Assange and Daniel Domscheit-Berg at the 26C3 in Berlin, December 2009
After his period of study at the University of Melbourne, Assange and others established WikiLeaks in 2006. Assange is a member of the organisation’s advisory board[51] and describes himself as the editor-in-chief.[52] From 2007 to 2010, Assange travelled continuously on WikiLeaks business, visiting Africa, Asia, Europe and North America.[15][21][53][54][55]
WikiLeaks published secret information, news leaks,[56] and classified media from anonymous sources.[57] By 2015 WikiLeaks had published more than 10 million documents and associated analyses, and was described by Assange as “a giant library of the world’s most persecuted documents”.[58] The published material between 2006 and 2009 attracted various degrees of publicity,[59] but it was only after it began publishing documents supplied by Chelsea Manning that Wikileaks became a household name.[60] The Manning material included the Collateral Murder video (April 2010)[2] which showed US soldiers shooting dead 18 people from a helicopter in Iraq,[3] the Afghanistan war logs (July 2010), the Iraq war logs (October 2010), a quarter of a million diplomatic cables (November 2010), and the Guantánamo files (April 2011).
The year 2010 culminated with the Sam Adams Award, which Assange accepted in October,[93] and a string of distinctions in December—the Le Monde readers’ choice award for person of the year,[94][95] the Time readers’ choice award for person of the year (he was also a runner-up in Time’s overall person of the year award),[96][97] a deal for his autobiography worth at least US$1.3 million,[98][99][100] and selection by the Italian edition of Rolling Stone as “rockstar of the year”.[101][102]
Assange speaks on the steps of St Paul’s Cathedral in London, 16 October 2011
After WikiLeaks released the Manning material, US authorities began investigating WikiLeaks and Assange personally with a view to prosecuting them under the Espionage Act of 1917.[120] In November 2010 US Attorney-GeneralEric Holder said there was “an active, ongoing criminal investigation” into WikiLeaks.[4] It emerged from legal documents leaked over the ensuing months that Assange and others were being investigated by a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia.[121][122][123] An email from an employee of intelligence consultancy Strategic Forecasting, Inc. (Stratfor) leaked in 2012 said, “We have a sealed indictment on Assange.”[124] The US government denies the existence of such an indictment.[125][126]
In December 2011 prosecutors in the Chelsea Manning case revealed the existence of chat logs between Manning and an alleged WikiLeaks interlocutor they claimed to be Assange;[127][128] he denied this,[129][130] dismissing the alleged connection as “absolute nonsense”.[131] The logs were presented as evidence during Manning’s court-martial in June–July 2013. The prosecution argued that they show WikiLeaks helping Manning reverse-engineer a password.[132][133] The evidence that the interlocutor was Assange is circumstantial, however, and Manning insists she acted alone.[123][133]
Assange was being examined separately by “several government agencies” in addition to the grand jury, most notably the FBI.[134] Court documents published in May 2014 suggest that Assange was still under “active and ongoing” investigation at that time.[135]
Moreover, some Snowden documents published in 2014 show that the United States government put Assange on the “2010 Manhunting Timeline”,[136] and in the same period they urged their allies to open criminal investigations into the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks.[137] In the same documents there was a proposal by the NSA to designate WikiLeaks as a “malicious foreign actor”, thus increasing the surveillance against it.
On 26 January 2015, WikiLeaks revealed that three members of the organisation received notice that “Google had handed over all their emails and metadata to the United States government”.[138] In the notifications, there was the list of possible charges that originated the warrant to Google and that the secret grand jury intends to use against WikiLeaks and likely Assange too. They were espionage, conspiracy to commit espionage, theft or conversion of property belonging to the United States government, violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and general conspiracy. They carry up to a minimum of 45 years in prison, if they amount to one charge per these five types; otherwise, even more years could be added.
The United States investigation confirmed its ongoing proceedings against WikiLeaks in a 15 December 2015 court submission.[139]
Swedish sexual assault allegations
Demonstration in support of Assange in front of Sydney Town Hall, 10 December 2010
Assange visited Sweden in August 2010, where he became the subject of sexual assault allegations from two women with whom he had sex. He was questioned, the case was closed, and he was told he could leave the country. In November 2010, however, the case was re-opened by a special prosecutor who said she wanted to question Assange over two counts of sexual molestation, one count of unlawful coercion and one count of “lesser-degree rape” (mindre grov våldtäkt). Assange denied the allegations and said he was happy to face questions in Britain.[5][140]
In 2010, the prosecutor said Swedish law prevented her from questioning anyone by video link or in the London embassy. In March 2015, after public criticism from other Swedish law practitioners, she changed her mind and agreed to interrogate Mr Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, with interviews finally beginning on 14 November 2016.[141]
On 18 August 2015, the statute of limitations expired on all three of the less serious allegations, as the Swedish prosecutor still had not interviewed Assange. However, he is still wanted for questioning over the allegation of “lesser degree rape”, and the statute of limitations for this will not expire until 2020.[142][143][144][145][146]
On 14 November 2016, Police, Swedish Prosecutors, and Ecuadorian officials met with Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London about the sexual assault allegations.[147]
Political asylum and life at the Ecuadorian embassy
Julian Assange on a balcony in the Ecuadorian embassy in London
Assange and his supporters state he is concerned not about any proceedings in Sweden as such, but that his deportation to Sweden could lead to politically motivated deportation to the United States, where he could face severe penalties, up to the death sentence, for his activities related to WikiLeaks.[3]
Ecuadoran Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño met with Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy on 16 June 2013.
On 16 August 2012, Foreign Minister Patiño announced that Ecuador was granting Assange political asylum because of the threat represented by the United States secret investigation against him and several calls for assassination from many American politicians.[152][153][154][155] In its formal statement, Ecuador reasoned that “as a consequence of [Assange’s] determined defense to freedom of expression and freedom of press… in any given moment, a situation may come where his life, safety or personal integrity will be in danger”.[156] Latin American states expressed support for Ecuador.[157][158][159][160] Ecuadorian PresidentRafael Correa confirmed on 18 August that Assange could stay at the embassy indefinitely,[161][162][163] and the following day Assange gave his first speech from the balcony.[164][165][166][167] Assange’s supporters forfeited £293,500 in bail[168] and sureties.[168][169] His home since then has been an office converted into a studio apartment, equipped with a bed, telephone, sun lamp, computer, shower, treadmill, and kitchenette.[170][171][172]
Just before Assange was granted asylum, the UK Government wrote to Foreign Minister Patiño stating that the police were entitled to enter the embassy and arrest Assange under UK law.[173] Patiño criticised what he said was an implied threat, stating that “such actions would be a blatant disregard of the Vienna Convention“. Officers of the Metropolitan Police Service were stationed outside the building from June 2012 to October 2015 in order to arrest Assange for extradition and for breach of bail, should he leave the embassy. The police guard was withdrawn on grounds of cost in October 2015, but the police said they would still deploy “a number of overt and covert tactics to arrest him”. The cost of the policing for the period was reported to have been £12.6 million.[174]
In April 2015, during a video conference to promote the documentary Terminal F about Edward Snowden, Bolivia‘s ambassador to Russia, María Luisa Ramos Urzagaste, accused Assange of putting the life of Bolivian president Evo Morales at risk by intentionally providing the United States with false rumours that Snowden was on the president’s plane when it was forced to land in Vienna in July 2013. “It is possible that in this wide-ranging game that you began my president did not play a crucial role, but what you did was not important to my president, but it was to me and the citizens of our country. And I have faith that when you planned this game you took into consideration the consequences,” the ambassador told Assange. Assange stated that the plan “was not completely honest, but we did consider that the final result would have justified our actions. We weren’t expecting this outcome. The result was caused by the United States’ intervention. We can only regret what happened.”[175] Later, in an interview[176] with Democracy Now!, Assange explained the story of the grounding of Morales’ plane, saying that after the United States cancelled Snowden’s passport, WikiLeaks thought about other strategies to take him to Latin America, and they considered private presidential jets of those countries which offered support. The appointed jet was that of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, but Assange stated that “our code language that we used deliberately swapped the presidential jet that we were considering for the Bolivian jet […] and in some of our communications, we deliberately spoke about that on open lines to lawyers in the United States. And we didn’t think much more of it. […] We didn’t think this was anything more than just distracting.” Eventually, the plan was not pursued and, under Assange’s advice, Snowden sought asylum in Russia.
Demonstration outside the Ecuadorian embassy to free Assange, 16 June 2013
Paris newspaper Le Monde in its edition of 3 July 2015 published an open letter from Assange to French President François Hollande in which Assange urged the French government to grant him refugee status.[177] Assange wrote that “only France now has the ability to offer me the necessary protection against, and exclusively against, the political persecution that I am currently the object of.”[178] In the letter Assange wrote, “By welcoming me, France would fulfill a humanitarian but also probably symbolic gesture, sending an encouragement to all journalists and whistleblowers … Only France is now able to offer me the necessary protection … France can, if it wishes, act.”[177][178]
In a statement issued by the Élysée Palace on 3 July 2015 in response to this letter, the French President said: “France cannot act on his request. The situation of Mr Assange does not present an immediate danger.”[179]
On 4 July 2015, in response to the denial of asylum by France, a spokesman for Assange denied that Assange had actually “filed” a request for asylum in France. Speaking on behalf of Assange, Baltasar Garzón, head of his legal team, said that Assange had sent the open letter to French president Francois Hollande; but Assange had only expressed his willingness “to be hosted in France if and only if an initiative was taken by the competent authorities”.[178]
On 16 August 2016, Assange’s lawyer in the UK, John Jones, was found dead, according to the first reports after being hit by a train in an apparent suicide.[180] An inquest into his death found that the lawyer was accepted since March to a private psychiatric hospital with several issues of mental health, including bipolar disorder, and closed-circuit television cameras showed no-one was near him when he jumped before the train.[181] The death of both lawyers in such a short time span sparked conspiracy theories, and a tweet by WikiLeaks on 21 August said that an inquest rules it was not suicide, implying that he was assassinated.[182]
The next day, on 22 August, a man scaled the embassy’s walls, but was caught by the embassy’s security.[183]
On 17 October 2016 WikiLeaks announced that a “state party” had severed Assange’s internet connection at the Ecuadorian embassy.[184] The Ecuadorian government stated that it had “temporarily” severed Assange’s internet connection because of WikiLeaks’ release of documents “impacting on the U.S. election campaign”.[185] In an interview published Dec 29, Assange said,”“The internet has been returned”.[186]
UNWGAD ruling
On 5 February 2016, the UN’s Working Group on Arbitrary Detention decided that Assange had been subject to arbitrary detention by the UK and Swedish Governments since 7 December 2010, including his time in prison, on conditional bail and in the Ecuadorian embassy. According to the group, Assange should be allowed to walk free and be given compensation.[187][188]
During the 2016 presidential election, Assange repeatedly criticised Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party, promoted conspiracy theories about Clinton and the Democratic Party, released emails from Clinton campaign staff and the DNC on Wikileaks, expressed only muted criticism of Donald Trump and did not release any content on Wikileaks damaging to the Trump campaign or the Republican Party.
Criticism of Clinton and the Democratic Party
Assange wrote on WikiLeaks in February 2016: “I have had years of experience in dealing with Hillary Clinton and have read thousands of her cables. Hillary lacks judgement and will push the United States into endless, stupid wars which spread terrorism. … she certainly should not become president of the United States.”[195] On 25 July, following the Republican National Convention (RNC), during an interview by Amy Goodman, Assange was quoted saying, “You’re asking me, do I prefer cholera or gonorrhea? … Personally, I would prefer neither.”[196][197][198] WikiLeaks editor, Sarah Harrison, has stated that the site is not choosing which damaging publications to release, rather releasing information that is available to them.[199]
During the presidential election, Wikileaks popularised conspiracies about the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton, such as tweeting an article which suggested Clinton campaign chairperson John Podesta engaged in satanic rituals, which was later revealed to be false[200][201][202] implying that the Democratic Party had Seth Rich killed,[203] stating that Hillary Clinton wanted to drone strike Assange,[204] promoting conspiracy theories about Clinton’s health,[205][206][207] and promoting a conspiracy theory from a Donald Trump-related internet community tying the Clinton campaign to child kidnapper Laura Silsby.[208] According to Harvard political scientist Matthew Baum and College of the Canyons political scientist Phil Gussin, Wikileaks strategically released e-mails related to the Clinton campaign whenever Clinton’s lead expanded in the polls.[209]
On 26 August, Assange spoke to Fox News and said that Clinton was causing “hysteria about Russia”. This statement was repeated in the Russian media outlet RT.[210]
Leaks
On 4 July 2016, during the Democratic Party presidential primaries, WikiLeaks hosted information and content of emails sent or received by candidate Hillary Clinton from her private email server when she was Secretary of State[211] as originally released by the State Department in February 2016, based on a FOIA request.
On 4 October 2016, in a WikiLeaks anniversary meeting in Berlin with Assange teleconferencing from his refuge in the Ecuador embassy in London, reporters spoke of a supposed promise to reveal further information against Hillary Clinton which would bring her candidacy down, calling this information “The October Surprise”.[207]
On October 7, Assange posted a press release on WikiLeaks exposing over 2000 emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.[216] The emails, ranging from 2007-2016, revealed excerpts of Clinton’s paid Goldman Sachs speech in 2013.[217] In the emails, she explained her relationship to Wall Street and how she had previously represented the community: “even though I represented [people in finance] and did all I could to make sure they continued to prosper, I called for closing the carried interest loophole and addressing skyrocketing CEO pay. So when I raised early warnings about subprime mortgages and called for regulating derivatives and over complex financial products, I didn’t get some big arguments, because people sort of said, no, that makes sense.”[218][219]
On 9 October 2016, during the second presidential debate, Clinton accused Russian hackers for the leak of information to WikiLeaks, presumably working under the orders of Vladimir Putin: “… But you know, let’s talk about what’s really going on. Because our intelligence community said the Kremlin, meaning Putin and the Russian government, are directing the attacks, the hacking, on American accounts to influence our election … And believe me, they’re not doing it to get me elected. They’re doing it to try to influence the election for Donald Trump”.[220] While the two candidates faced off during the third and final presidential debate, Hillary Clinton criticised the Russian government for giving private information to WikiLeaks: “…this is such an unprecedented situation, we’ve never had a foreign government trying to interfere in our election. We have 17, 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyber attacks come from the highest levels of the Kremlin and they are designed to influence our election.” [221]
On the topic of WikiLeaks, host Chris Wallace directly asked Donald Trump if he would denounce Russia’s actions if the country actually interfered with the American election. Although Trump did not condemn Putin, he did express that he would not condone hacking “By Russia or anybody else.”[222][221] On the eve of the general presidential election, Assange wrote a press release addressing the criticism around publishing Clinton material on WikiLeaks.”We publish material given to us if it is of political, diplomatic, historical or ethical importance and which has not been published elsewhere. When we have material that fulfills this criteria, we publish.” He explains that the website received pertinent information related to the DNC Leaks and Clinton political campaign, but never received any information on Trump, Jill Stein, or Gary Johnson’s campaign, and therefore could not publish what they did not have.[223]
Allegations of anti-Semitism
In 2011, the British magazine Private Eye reported that one of Assange’s associates in Russia was a Holocaust denier. The magazine further reported that the WikiLeaks founder said that Jewish journalists in Britain were trying to discredit his organisation.[224][225] Assange responded that the magazine’s allegations of anti-semitism are false and stem from “distortions” on the part of its editor, Ian Hislop. On 1 March 2011, Assange released a statement in which he said, “Hislop has distorted, invented or misremembered almost every significant claim and phrase. In particular, ‘Jewish conspiracy’ is completely false, in spirit and in word. It is serious and upsetting. We treasure our strong Jewish support and staff, just as we treasure the support from pan-Arab democracy activists and others who share our hope for a just world.”[226][227]
In July 2016, Wikileaks suggested that the parentheses bracketing, or (((echoes))) — a tool used by neo-Nazis to identify Jews on Twitter, appropriated by Jews across the Twittersphere — had been used as a way for “establishment climbers” to identify one another.[228][229]Haaretz reported that this led to anti-Semitism allegations towards Assange.[224] Assange denied making claims of a Jewish conspiracy, stating, “‘Jewish conspiracy’ is completely false, in spirit and in word. It is serious and upsetting”.[224]
Writings
Assange is an advocate of information transparency and market libertarianism.[230] He has written a few short pieces, including “State and terrorist conspiracies” (2006),[231] “Conspiracy as governance” (2006),[232]“The hidden curse of Thomas Paine” (2008),[233] “What’s new about WikiLeaks?” (2011),[234] and the foreword to Cypherpunks (2012).[50] He also contributed research to Suelette Dreyfus’sUnderground (1997),[27]and received a co-writer credit for the Calle 13 song “Multi_Viral” (2013).
Assange’s book, When Google Met WikiLeaks, was published by OR Books on 18 September 2014.[235] The book recounts when Google CEO Eric Schmidt requested a meeting with Assange, while he was under house arrest in rural Norfolk, UK. Schmidt was accompanied by Jared Cohen, director of Google Ideas; Lisa Shields, vice-president of the Council on Foreign Relations; and Scott Malcomson, the communications director for the International Crisis Group. Excerpts were published on the Newsweek website, while Assange participated in a Q&A event that was facilitated by the Reddit website and agreed to an interview with Vogue magazine.[236][237][238]
Personal life
While in his teens, Assange married a woman named Teresa, and in 1989 they had a son, Daniel Assange, now a software designer.[14][26][239] The couple separated and initially disputed custody of their child.[15]Assange was Daniel’s primary carer for much of his childhood.[240] In an open letter to French President François Hollande, Assange stated his youngest child lives in France with his/her mother. He also said that his family had faced death threats and harassment due to his work, forcing them to change identities and reduce contact with him.[241]
Rand Paul Disgusted at NSA Spying on Congress and Israel | Fox News
Report: NSA captured conversations of Congress members with Israeli leaders
Report Says NSA Captured Conversations Of Congress Members With Israeli Leaders
Report: NSA Wiretapped Conversations Between Israeli PM And Members Of Congress
What NSA Eavesdropping On Israel Reveals About Relations
Wall Street Journal: NSA spied on Israeli leaders
WSJ: NSA Spied Not Only On Israel But Congress During Nuke Talks – America’s Newsroom
NSA spied on Israel amid Iran talks, caught some US lawmakers’ US talks
Through a PRISM, Darkly – Everything we know about NSA spying [30c3]
Edward Snowden, v 1.0: NSA Whistleblower William Binney Tells All
NSA Surveillance and What To Do About It
ShmooCon 2014: The NSA: Capabilities and Countermeasures
Bruce Schneier: “Data and Goliath: The Hidden Battles to Collect Your Data and Control Your World”
JACOB APPELBAUM EXPOSES NSA TOOLS HACKING YOUR COMPUTER-BACK DOORS & MALWARE
Jacob Appelbaum Interview – Discusses Edward Snowden, The NSA, TOR, WikiLeaks
William Binney – NSA Hiding Extent of Surveillance From FISA Courts & Congress
NSA Whistleblower: Everyone in US under virtual surveillance, all info stored, no matter the post
He told you so: Bill Binney talks NSA leaks
William Binney – The Government is Profiling You (The NSA is Spying on You)
William Binney: NSA had 9/11 foreknowledge
NSA Spying on All Americans Part 1
NSA Spying on All Americans Part 2
How the NSA Spies on Americans (Jim Harper)
The NSA: Future Crime Unit (Jim Harper)
NSA Whistleblower William Binney the 3 words that will put you on the NSA List
NSA whistleblower William Binney Keynote at HOPE Number Nine
NSA Whistleblower William Binney: The Future of FREEDOM
Alex Jones interviews William Binney December 22nd 2015
The Alex Jones Show (3rd HOUR-VIDEO Commercial Free) Wednesday December 30 2015: Seymour Hersh
Operation “Toto” Pulling Back The Curtain: Full NSA Interview
FULL Senate Debate On NSA Spying On ALL Americans
Spying on the Homefront-PBS Frontline
State of Surveillance: Police, Privacy and Technology
The USA Freedom Act | True News
Next Future Terrifying Technology Will Blow Your Mind
Enemy of the State Movie Will Smith (1998)
Encryption as Fast As Possible
Why the NSA is breaking our encryption — and why we should care | Matthew Green | TEDxMidAtlantic
U.S. Spy Net on Israel Snares Congress
NSA’s targeting of Israeli leaders swept up the content of private conversations with U.S. lawmakers
By ADAM ENTOUS and DANNY YADRON
President Barack Obama announced two years ago he would curtail eavesdropping on friendly heads of state after the world learned the reach of long-secret U.S. surveillance programs.
But behind the scenes, the White House decided to keep certain allies under close watch, current and former U.S. officials said. Topping the list was Israeli Prime MinisterBenjamin Netanyahu.
The U.S., pursuing a nuclear arms agreement with Iran at the time, captured communications between Mr. Netanyahu and his aides that inflamed mistrust between the two countries and planted a political minefield at home when Mr. Netanyahu later took his campaign against the deal to Capitol Hill.
The National Security Agency’s targeting of Israeli leaders and officials also swept up the contents of some of their private conversations with U.S. lawmakers and American-Jewish groups. That raised fears—an “Oh-s— moment,” one senior U.S. official said—that the executive branch would be accused of spying on Congress.
The White House kept certain allies including Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu under surveillance after President Obama announced the U.S. would curtail surveillance on friendly heads of state. WSJ’s Adam Entous has details on Lunch Break. Photo: Getty
White House officials believed the intercepted information could be valuable to counter Mr. Netanyahu’s campaign. They also recognized that asking for it was politically risky. So, wary of a paper trail stemming from a request, the White House let the NSA decide what to share and what to withhold, officials said. “We didn’t say, ‘Do it,’ ” a senior U.S. official said. “We didn’t say, ‘Don’t do it.’ ”
Explore more than 60 countries that have or are building cyberwar tools
WSJ’s Adam Entous explains how the U.S. determined which world leaders to spy on after announcing it would curtail surveillance. Photo: Getty
Stepped-up NSA eavesdropping revealed to the White House how Mr. Netanyahu and his advisers had leaked details of the U.S.-Iran negotiations—learned through Israeli spying operations—to undermine the talks; coordinated talking points with Jewish-American groups against the deal; and asked undecided lawmakers what it would take to win their votes, according to current and former officials familiar with the intercepts.
In closed-door debate, the Obama administration weighed which allied leaders belonged on a so-called protected list, shielding them from NSA snooping. French President François Hollande, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and other North Atlantic Treaty Organization leaders made the list, but the administration permitted the NSA to target the leaders’ top advisers, current and former U.S. officials said. Other allies were excluded from the protected list, including Recep Tayyip Erdogan, president of NATO ally Turkey, which allowed the NSA to spy on their communications at the discretion of top officials.
Privately, Mr. Obama maintained the monitoring of Mr. Netanyahu on the grounds that it served a “compelling national security purpose,” according to current and former U.S. officials. Mr. Obama mentioned the exception in his speech but kept secret the leaders it would apply to.
Israeli, German and French government officials declined to comment on NSA activities. Turkish officials didn’t respond to requests Tuesday for comment. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the NSA declined to comment on communications provided to the White House.
The White House stopped directly monitoring the private communications of German Chancellor Angela Merkel but authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on her top advisers.PHOTO: ODD ANDERSEN/AGENCE FRANCE-
This account, stretching over two terms of the Obama administration, is based on interviews with more than two dozen current and former U.S. intelligence and administration officials and reveals for the first time the extent of American spying on the Israeli prime minister.
Taking office
After Mr. Obama’s 2008 presidential election, U.S. intelligence officials gave his national-security team a one-page questionnaire on priorities. Included on the form was a box directing intelligence agencies to focus on “leadership intentions,” a category that relies on electronic spying to monitor world leaders.
The NSA was so proficient at monitoring heads of state that it was common for the agency to deliver a visiting leader’s talking points to the president in advance. “Who’s going to look at that box and say, ‘No, I don’t want to know what world leaders are saying,’ ” a former Obama administration official said.
In early intelligence briefings, Mr. Obama and his top advisers were told what U.S. spy agencies thought of world leaders, including Mr. Netanyahu, who at the time headed the opposition Likud party.
Michael Hayden, who led the NSA and the Central Intelligence Agency during the George W. Bush administration, described the intelligence relationship between the U.S. and Israel as “the most combustible mixture of intimacy and caution that we have.”
The NSA helped Israel expand its electronic spy apparatus—known as signals intelligence—in the late 1970s. The arrangement gave Israel access to the communications of its regional enemies, information shared with the U.S. Israel’s spy chiefs later suspected the NSA was tapping into their systems.
When Mr. Obama took office, the NSA and its Israeli counterpart, Unit 8200, worked together against shared threats, including a campaign to sabotage centrifuges for Iran’s nuclear program. At the same time, the U.S. and Israeli intelligence agencies targeted one another, stoking tensions.
“Intelligence professionals have a saying: There are no friendly intelligence services,” said Mike Rogers, former Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.
Early in the Obama presidency, for example, Unit 8200 gave the NSA a hacking tool the NSA later discovered also told Israel how the Americans used it. It wasn’t the only time the NSA caught Unit 8200 poking around restricted U.S. networks. Israel would say intrusions were accidental, one former U.S. official said, and the NSA would respond, “Don’t worry. We make mistakes, too.”
Convinced Mr. Netanyahu would attack Iran without warning the White House, U.S. spy agencies ramped up their surveillance, with the assent of Democratic and Republican lawmakers serving on congressional intelligence committees.
By 2013, U.S. intelligence agencies determined Mr. Netanyahu wasn’t going to strike Iran. But they had another reason to keep watch. The White House wanted to know if Israel had learned of the secret negotiations. U.S. officials feared Iran would bolt the talks and pursue an atomic bomb if news leaked.
The NSA had, in some cases, spent decades placing electronic implants in networks around the world to collect phone calls, text messages and emails. Removing them or turning them off in the wake of the Snowden revelations would make it difficult, if not impossible, to re-establish access in the future, U.S. intelligence officials warned the White House.
Instead of removing the implants, Mr. Obama decided to shut off the NSA’s monitoring of phone numbers and email addresses of certain allied leaders—a move that could be reversed by the president or his successor.
There was little debate over Israel. “Going dark on Bibi? Of course we wouldn’t do that,” a senior U.S. official said, using Mr. Netanyahu’s nickname.
One tool was a cyber implant in Israeli networks that gave the NSA access to communications within the Israeli prime minister’s office.
Given the appetite for information about Mr. Netanyahu’s intentions during the U.S.-Iran negotiations, the NSA tried to send updates to U.S. policy makers quickly, often in less than six hours after a notable communication was intercepted, a former official said.
Despite NSA surveillance, Obama administration officials said they were caught off guard when Mr. Boehner announced the invitation on Jan. 21.
Soon after, Israel’s lobbying campaign against the deal went into full swing on Capitol Hill, and it didn’t take long for administration and intelligence officials to realize the NSA was sweeping up the content of conversations with lawmakers.
The message to the NSA from the White House amounted to: “You decide” what to deliver, a former intelligence official said.
NSA rules governing intercepted communications “to, from or about” Americans date back to the Cold War and require obscuring the identities of U.S. individuals and U.S. corporations. An American is identified only as a “U.S. person” in intelligence reports; a U.S. corporation is identified only as a “U.S. organization.” Senior U.S. officials can ask for names if needed to understand the intelligence information.
The Obama administration included French President François Hollande on a so-called protected list, shielding him from NSA snooping.PHOTO: PHILIPPE WOJAZER/REUTERS
The rules were tightened in the early 1990s to require that intelligence agencies inform congressional committees when a lawmaker’s name was revealed to the executive branch in summaries of intercepted communications.
A 2011 NSA directive said direct communications between foreign intelligence targets and members of Congress should be destroyed when they are intercepted. But the NSA director can issue a waiver if he determines the communications contain “significant foreign intelligence.”
The NSA has leeway to collect and disseminate intercepted communications involving U.S. lawmakers if, for example, foreign ambassadors send messages to their foreign ministries that recount their private meetings or phone calls with members of Congress, current and former officials said.
“Either way, we got the same information,” a former official said, citing detailed reports prepared by the Israelis after exchanges with lawmakers.
During Israel’s lobbying campaign in the months before the deal cleared Congress in September, the NSA removed the names of lawmakers from intelligence reports and weeded out personal information. The agency kept out “trash talk,” officials said, such as personal attacks on the executive branch.
Administration and intelligence officials said the White House didn’t ask the NSA to identify any lawmakers during this period.
“From what I can tell, we haven’t had a problem with how incidental collection has been handled concerning lawmakers,” said Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat and the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. He declined to comment on any specific communications between lawmakers and Israel.
The NSA reports allowed administration officials to peer inside Israeli efforts to turn Congress against the deal. Mr. Dermer was described as coaching unnamed U.S. organizations—which officials could tell from the context were Jewish-American groups—on lines of argument to use with lawmakers, and Israeli officials were reported pressing lawmakers to oppose the deal.
“These allegations are total nonsense,” said a spokesman for the Embassy of Israel in Washington.
A U.S. intelligence official familiar with the intercepts said Israel’s pitch to undecided lawmakers often included such questions as: “How can we get your vote? What’s it going to take?”
NSA intelligence reports helped the White House figure out which Israeli government officials had leaked information from confidential U.S. briefings. When confronted by the U.S., Israel denied passing on the briefing materials.
The agency’s goal was “to give us an accurate illustrative picture of what [the Israelis] were doing,” a senior U.S. official said.
Just before Mr. Netanyahu’s address to Congress in March, the NSA swept up Israeli messages that raised alarms at the White House: Mr. Netanyahu’s office wanted details from Israeli intelligence officials about the latest U.S. positions in the Iran talks, U.S. officials said.
A day before the speech, Secretary of State John Kerry made an unusual disclosure. Speaking to reporters in Switzerland, Mr. Kerry said he was concerned Mr. Netanyahu would divulge “selective details of the ongoing negotiations.”
The State Department said Mr. Kerry was responding to Israeli media reports that Mr. Netanyahu wanted to use his speech to make sure U.S. lawmakers knew the terms of the Iran deal.
Intelligence officials said the media reports allowed the U.S. to put Mr. Netanyahu on notice without revealing they already knew his thinking. The prime minister mentioned no secrets during his speech to Congress.
In the final months of the campaign, NSA intercepts yielded few surprises. Officials said the information reaffirmed what they heard directly from lawmakers and Israeli officials opposed to Mr. Netanyahu’s campaign—that the prime minister was focused on building opposition among Democratic lawmakers.
The NSA intercepts, however, revealed one surprise. Mr. Netanyahu and some of his allies voiced confidence they could win enough votes.
“Encrypt” redirects here. For the film, see Encrypt (film).
This article is about algorithms for encryption and decryption. For an overview of cryptographic technology in general, see Cryptography.
In cryptography, encryption is the process of encoding messages or information in such a way that only authorized parties can read it.[1] Encryption does not of itself prevent interception, but denies the message content to the interceptor.[2]:374 In an encryption scheme, the intended communication information or message, referred to as plaintext, is encrypted using an encryption algorithm, generating ciphertext that can only be read if decrypted.[2] For technical reasons, an encryption scheme usually uses a pseudo-random encryption key generated by an algorithm. It is in principle possible to decrypt the message without possessing the key, but, for a well-designed encryption scheme, large computational resources and skill are required. An authorized recipient can easily decrypt the message with the key provided by the originator to recipients, but not to unauthorized interceptors.
Types of encryption
Symmetric key encryption
In symmetric-key schemes,[3] the encryption and decryption keys are the same. Communicating parties must have the same key before they can achieve secure communication.
In public-key encryption schemes, the encryption key is published for anyone to use and encrypt messages. However, only the receiving party has access to the decryption key that enables messages to be read.[4] Public-key encryption was first described in a secret document in 1973;[5] before then all encryption schemes were symmetric-key (also called private-key).[2]:478
A publicly available public key encryption application called Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) was written in 1991 by Phil Zimmermann, and distributed free of charge with source code; it was purchased by Symantec in 2010 and is regularly updated.[6]
Uses of encryption
Encryption has long been used by military and governments to facilitate secret communication. It is now commonly used in protecting information within many kinds of civilian systems. For example, the Computer Security Institute reported that in 2007, 71% of companies surveyed utilized encryption for some of their data in transit, and 53% utilized encryption for some of their data in storage.[7] Encryption can be used to protect data “at rest”, such as information stored on computers and storage devices (e.g. USB flash drives). In recent years there have been numerous reports of confidential data such as customers’ personal records being exposed through loss or theft of laptops or backup drives. Encrypting such files at rest helps protect them should physical security measures fail. Digital rights management systems, which prevent unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted material and protect software against reverse engineering (see also copy protection), is another somewhat different example of using encryption on data at rest.[8]
Encryption, by itself, can protect the confidentiality of messages, but other techniques are still needed to protect the integrity and authenticity of a message; for example, verification of amessage authentication code (MAC) or a digital signature. Standards for cryptographic software and hardware to perform encryption are widely available, but successfully using encryption to ensure security may be a challenging problem. A single error in system design or execution can allow successful attacks. Sometimes an adversary can obtain unencrypted information without directly undoing the encryption. See, e.g., traffic analysis, TEMPEST, or Trojan horse.[11]
Digital signature and encryption must be applied to the ciphertext when it is created (typically on the same device used to compose the message) to avoid tampering; otherwise any node between the sender and the encryption agent could potentially tamper with it. Encrypting at the time of creation is only secure if the encryption device itself has not been tampered with.
Story 1: Is President Obama Sabotaging The Federal Bureau of Investigation Of Hillary Clinton’s Handling of Classified Documents? American People Want To Know — Will Hillary Clinton Be Indicted or Nominated? Yes Hillary Will Be Indicted For Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 793 and §798 and §1924 — Biden Backup to Replace Hillary Clinton — California Governor Jerry Brown To Enter Race? — Videos
FBI Probe: Hillary Clinton Could Face 10 Years In Prison
Obama Calls Clinton Secret Server A “Mistake,” Says Questions About Her Actions “Legitimate”
Firebrand Trey Gowdy Dismantles Ex-Staffer’s Claim That Benghazi Committee Is Partisan
MSNBC Panel: Even The President Says Hillary Clinton’s Emails Are A Legitimate Issue
Top Republican: Hillary Clinton still withholding Benghazi emails
Hillary Clinton’s Favorability Numbers at the Lowest Since 1992
Obama: Criticism Of Hillary Clinton’s Private Email ‘Ginned Up’ Because Of Politics
FBI FURY: OBAMA SABOTAGING HILLARY INVESTIGATION
Rand Paul: Clinton Fired an ambassador for using a private email server; 10-16-2015
Obama Tells ‘60 Minutes’ Hillary Clinton Made Email ‘Mistake’
MSNBC: CIA’s Most Closely Guarded Information Passed Through Clinton Email
Wife of Imprisoned CIA Whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling Speaks Out October 15, 2015
Unprecedented News Conference: Thursday, October 15, 2015, National Press Club, Washington
Jeffrey Sterling was convicted under the Espionage Act as a source for New York Times reporter James Risen’s book State of War. He began serving his three-and-a-half year prison sentence in June. His wife’s news conference was the first time the spouse of a CIA whistleblower has made such an appearance.
National Press Club President John Hughes opened the conference, which featured:
* Thomas Drake
* Delphine Halgand
* Ray McGovern
* Jesselyn Radack
Clinton’s Deleted Emails On ‘Cloud’ Server
The saga over Hillary Clinton’s private use of an email server continues. The FBI is now investigating deleted emails from a “cloud” storage system. On Friday October 2, 2015 Platte River and Clinton’s officials gave written consent for Datto Inc. (a Connecticut-based tech company) to release Clinton’s emails to the FBI. Deputy Press Secretary at the Republican National Committee, Raffi Williams, discusses what this means for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. OANN’s Matt Schuck has this story.
Uh Oh! Hillary’s Emailgate Just Got Worse! MUCH WORSE! FBI Expands…
Could Hillary Clinton face prosecution over email scandal?
Minute Memo #174 – Clinton Hiding Benghazi Emails
Newly released emails of Hillary Clinton show new legal trouble up ahead.
According to investigative reporter Sharyl Attkinsson, Clinton deliberately hid information on the Benghazi terror attack in blatant violation of Freedom of Information Act requests.
According to Attkinsson:
“The newly-released batch of Hillary Clinton emails provides further proof that Freedom of Information (FOI) law has been blatantly violated.
The documents include material directly responsive to a FOI request I made back in 2012 after the Benghazi terrorist attacks on the U.S. compounds.
However, the material was not produced at the time, as required by law.
Once again, there appears to be nobody who holds government officials and agencies accountable for their routine violation of this law. So the infractions occur frequently and with impunity.
If nobody polices our government officials and agencies–if they are above the law–then how does a lawful society function?”
Judge Napolitano: FBI Will Recommend Hillary Clinton Be Indicted
Mark Levin: Hillary Clinton in Violation of Espionage Act • Hannity • 9/2/15 •
Newsmax Prime | Alan Dershowitz talks about the FBI investigating Hillary Clinton’s email server
Hillary Jokes About FBI Investigation
September 24, 2015: Sen. Tom Cotton questions NSA Director about Clinton Emails
‘Under Penalty of Perjury’: Judge Nap on Latest Twist in Hillary’s Email Scandal
Judge Andrew Napolitano appeared on “The Kelly File” tonight to weigh in on the latest developments in the Hillary Clinton email scandal.
A federal judge has demanded that Clinton and two of her most trusted aides go on the record “under penalty of perjury” regarding the private email server Clinton used during her time as Secretary of State.
Judge Napolitano noted that when the government suspected that Gen. Petraeus kept secure documents in his home, they raided it.
In Clinton’s case, Judge Napolitano pointed out, the government doesn’t suspect she has secure documents. It’s a known fact.
Not only that, but she gave a thumb drive with that secure information to her lawyer, Judge Napolitano added.
“Mrs. Clinton should be treated like anybody else who is obviously violating the law by failing to secure classified documents and keeping them in insecure venues not approved by the government,” Judge Napolitano stated.
He said that the federal judge’s use of the phrase “under penalty of perjury” is extremely significant, because it reminds Clinton that for the first time, she will be under oath.
Morrell confirms at least one foreign country have what was on Hillary’s email server.
Hillary Emails – Trey Gowdy Lays It Out
13 hours in Benghazi FULL VERSION INTERVIEW 5 parts combined
White House Covers Up Benghazi Terrorist Attack (INCLUDING NEW REPORTS)
CIA Contractor: I Told State Department Rep. Benghazi Was Terrorist Attack
White House Covers Up Benghazi Terrorist Attack – New BBC Science Documentary HD
Obama LIED About Benghazi Attack!!! (Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer Interview)
CIA Gun Runner: Hillary’s Benghazi Crimes Confirmed
SYRIA Retired General Suspects A US Covert Operation For Running Libya Arms To Syria
Treason Exposed! Obama Used Benghazi Attack to Cover Up Arms Shipments to Muslim Brotherhood
Source: FBI probe of Clinton email focused on ‘gross negligence’ provision
By Catherine Herridge, Pamela Browne
Three months after Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email address and server while secretary of state was referred to the FBI, an intelligence source familiar with the investigation tells Fox News that the team is now focused on whether there were violations of an Espionage Act subsection pertaining to “gross negligence” in the safekeeping of national defense information.
Under 18 USC 793 subsection F, the information does not have to be classified to count as a violation. The intelligence source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity citing the sensitivity of the ongoing probe, said the subsection requires the “lawful possession” of national defense information by a security clearance holder who “through gross negligence,” such as the use of an unsecure computer network, permits the material to be removed or abstracted from its proper, secure location.
Subsection F also requires the clearance holder “to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer. “A failure to do so “shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”
The source said investigators are also focused on possible obstruction of justice. “If someone knows there is an ongoing investigation and takes action to impede an investigation, for example destruction of documents or threatening of witnesses, that could be a separate charge but still remain under a single case,” the source said. Currently, the ongoing investigation is led by the Washington Field Office of the FBI.
A former FBI agent, who is not involved in the case, said the inconsistent release of emails, with new documents coming to light from outside accounts, such as that of adviser Sidney Blumenthal, could constitute obstruction. In addition, Clinton’s March statement that there was no classified material on her private server has proven false, after more than 400 emails containing classified information were documented.
Clinton and her team maintain the use of a private account was allowed, and the intelligence was not classified at the time, but later upgraded. The latter claim is disputed by the intelligence community Inspector General, who represents the agencies involved, which concluded the information was classified from the start.
One of Clinton’s primary defenses is that the emails containing classified information, did not carry classification markings, but a leading national security defense attorney says that is no excuse under the law.
“The fact that something’s not marked or that the person may not know that it was classified would not be relevant at all in a prosecution under the Espionage Act,” defense attorney Edward MacMahon Jr. recently told Fox.
It is not known what relevant evidence, if any, has been uncovered by the FBI, or whether any charges will ultimately be brought, but Director James Comey told reporters in Washington D.C. on Oct. 1, “If you know my folks… they don’t give a rip about politics.”
On Thursday, a group of national security whistleblowers held a news conference in Washington at the National Press Club to highlight what they characterized as a double standard in these types of cases.
NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake was indicted in 2010 under the Espionage Act for sharing unclassified material with a Baltimore Sun reporter. Drake, who also went to Congress with his concerns about the NSA, said his goal was to expose government misconduct.
“This is the secretary of state, one of the most targeted individuals by other intelligence entities and agencies in the world using a private server to traffic highly sensitive information and no doubt including classified information and no doubt including info about sources and methods,”Drake said at Thursday’s event.
He added the whistleblowers’ treatment shows there is a law for the average citizen, and apparently a different set of rules for the powerful.
“But hey, I’m secretary of state,” Drake said in a sarcastic tone. ”Even Obama gave her cover.”
The charges against Drake were eventually dropped. He pled guilty to a misdemeanor, but in the process lost his ability to work in national security and depleted his life savings to mount a defense.
Former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling also went to Congress with his complaints, but was sentenced in May to three-and-a-half years in prison for violating the Espionage Act by giving classified information to a New York Times reporter. Sterling, who is appealing the case, was also convicted on obstruction of justice charges because a single email was missing from his account, even though the government could not show he was responsible for that.
Clinton has acknowledged deleting some 30,000 emails she considered personal.
In 2015, former CIA Director General David Petraeus pled guilty to a misdemeanor admitting he mishandled classified materials by sharing notebooks with his former mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell.
He also was ordered to pay a $100,000 fine. Sterling’s supporters said he shared far less classified information with the New York Times.
“Powerful and politically connected individuals accused of the same and much worse conduct receive, at most, a slap on the wrist. Like General David Petraeus who gave away more secret information, classified at a much higher level, to his mistress and received a sweetheart plea deal for a minor misdemeanor,”Jesselyn Radack, a whistleblower and former ethics adviser to the Department of Justice, said Thursday.
“Or Hillary Clinton – she got a primetime TV apologist political spin interview from President Obama himself,” Radack added.
Eight Laws Hillary Clinton Could Be Indicted For Breaking
Kenneth P. Bergquist
Brigadier General, U.S. Army (Ret)
As a former Justice Department official, I have, of late, been asked by both Democratic and Republican friends whether Hillary Clinton could be indicted for her email related actions. The simple answer is yes — she, and perhaps some of her senior staff, could be indicted for violating a number of federal criminal statutes. But for reasons that will be discussed later, it is unlikely that she will be.
Nevertheless, it is well worth discussing the various criminal provisions of federal law that she and others may have been violated based on mainstream news reports. Remember that news reporting can be incorrect or incomplete — and that Hillary Clinton, and anyone else involved, deserves every presumption of innocence. Also keep in mind that an indictment is not a conviction but rather the informed opinion of a grand jury that probable cause exists to believe one or more violations of federal criminal statutes have transpired.
This intellectual and legal research exercise should commence with a brief review of the basics of criminal jurisprudence: There are two elements of a criminal offense: the prohibited conduct as defined in statute; and the mens rea or mental intent of the individual or individuals engaging in the prohibited conduct. Thus, to gain a conviction on a criminal count in an indictment, a prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) the prohibited conduct occurred, (2) the prohibited conduct was undertaken by the defendant, and (3) the defendant had the requisite mens rea or intent at the time.
1.) 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information 18 U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information
A federal prosecutor would naturally focus first on the most serious allegations: willfully transmitting or willfully retaining Top Secret and Compartmented (TS/SCI) material using a private server system. The individual who transmits and the individual who receives and retains TS/SCI information on a private server jointly share the culpability for risking the compromise and exploitation of the information by hostile intelligence services. The prosecutor’s charging document would likely include felony counts under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and under 18 U.S. Code § 798 against each transmitting individual as well as separate counts against each receiving and retaining individual. Violation of either provision of the U.S. Code cited above is a felony with a maximum prison term of ten years.
The prohibited conduct is the insecure transmission of highly classified information, as well as the receipt and retention of highly classified information in an unapproved manner. The requisite mens rea is the willful commission of the prohibited conduct and the knowledge that compromised information could result in prejudice or injury to the United States or advantage to any foreign nation. Proof of intent to disclose the classified information is not required.
2.) U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
If the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and an accused person has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and 18 U.S. Code § 798 may be “pled-down” to a single or to multiple misdemeanor counts under 18 U.S. Code § 1924. A misdemeanor conviction would probably result in a period of probation and a less significant fine. The prohibited conduct is the unauthorized removal of classified information from government control or its retention in an unauthorized location. The mens rea required is the intent to remove from government control or the intent to store the classified information in an unauthorized location.
3.) 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
To sustain a charge under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b), a federal prosecutor need only prove that the accused transferred and held the only copies of official government records (whether classified or not), the very existence of which was concealed from government records custodians. The mens rea required is that an accused knows that official government records were transferred or removed from the control of government records custodians. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) is a felony with a maximum prison term of three years.
4.) 18 U.S. Code § 641 – Public money, property or records
Again, if the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and accused has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) can be “pled down” to a misdemeanor under 18 U.S. Code § 641. The prohibited conduct is the conversion of official records (whether classified or not) to the accused’s exclusive use and the mens rea is simply the intent to do so. Conviction on the lesser misdemeanor charge would likely result in a period of probation and the imposition of a fine.
5.) 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
If it can be proven that an accused destroyed, withheld, or concealed the existence of official records being sought under subpoena by a committee of Congress, the accused can be convicted of obstruction under 18 U.S. Code § 1505. The prohibited conduct includes destruction, concealment and withholding of documents, thereby impeding or obstructing the committee’s rightful pursuit of information. The mens rea is knowledge of the committee’s interest in obtaining the official records in the accused’s custody or control. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1505 is a felony with a maximum prison term of five years.
6.) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations
If it can be proven that an accused knowingly concealed the existence of official records being sought by the Department of State Inspector General (DOS/IG) or by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), such accused can be convicted of obstruction. The prohibited conduct is the concealment and withholding of documents that impede or obstruct an investigation. The mens rea is the intent to conceal or withhold. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1519 is a felony with a maximum prison term of twenty years.
7.) 18 U.S. Code § 1031 — Fraud against the United States
18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television
18 U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”
18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States
If it can be proven that an accused arranged for the Department of State to hire an Information Technology (IT) specialist to primarily administer and maintain a private server system owned by the accused, then the accused can be convicted of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and probably wire fraud. The prohibited conduct is having the United States pay an employee salary and/or official travel funds for performing private services on behalf of accused. The mens rea is simply the knowledge of the employee’s status as a public servant and that the government was not fully reimbursed for the costs to the government of such services. The wire fraud conviction can be sought if it can be proven that accused used electronic means of communication in undertaking such scheme or artifice to defraud.
8.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense
If any accused and any third party can be proven to have colluded in any violation of federal, criminal law, then all involved can be charged with criminal conspiracy as well as being charged with the underlying offense.
Indictment?
The old adage, that a good prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted, is bad news for any public servant who risks the compromise of classified information or otherwise violates any of the other federal criminal statutes listed above. Specifically, this Administration has a history of vigorously prosecuting and winning convictions in the mishandling of classified information and other criminal violations of the public trust.
However, Hillary Clinton is anything but a ham sandwich; and she knows it. She and her senior aides will not even be formally investigated by this Justice Department, much less indicted. The president will allow Hillary Clinton and her aides to “tough it out” for as long it is politically possible. However, if and when the political and public opinion costs of a “tough it out” tactic become too great, President Obama will simply use that famous pen of his to issue a succinct pardon and make formal mockery of the concept of equal justice.
Kenneth Bergquist served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the United States Department of Justice during the Reagan Administration and serves now as pro bono legal counsel to the Special Operations Education Fund (OPSEC).
Story 1: Stop Believing The Lying Lunatic Left: Hillary Clinton: “It Was Allowed.”, Receiving And Sending Classified Documents on Personal Email Server Is Not Allowed — It is A Serious Federal Crime Under Title 18 U.S. Code § 1924 and § 793 — Hillary Clinton’s Race To The White House or Sing Sing Prison — October Surprise on October 22 in Congressional Hearing on Benghazi! — Videos
Savannah Guthrie Grills Hillary on Emails
NBC’s Savannah Guthrie grilled Hillary Clinton during a Today show town hall Monday, asking pointedly if she realized how bad her private email looked to an outside observer.
Guthrie noted that while Clinton had apologized for using a private email, she also kept saying that it was an invented issue used by Republicans to attack her. “And I guess my question to you is, which is it?” she said. “If you’re blaming the Republicans, some might wonder how genuine is that apology?”
“Well, actually it’s both,” Clinton said. “I mean, I’m sorry that I made a choice that has resulted in this kind of situation, and I’ve said I’ve made a mistake. Obviously if I had to do it over again, I wouldn’t. It was allowed and everybody has confirmed that. But it’s also, as we now know very clearly, the way that the Republicans are trying to bring my– as they admit– poll numbers down.”
“So it’s really both, Savannah,” Clinton said. “It’s both, ‘Hey, you know what, turn the clock back, it was allowed.’ I was thinking about many other things [than] my email account when I became Secretary of State.”
“It’s allowed, but you know, anybody who works in government knows it’s really not encouraged to use your personal email. And I just — do you get how bad it looks?” Guthrie asked.
“It looks like you set up a personal server, you set up your own email so that you would have control of those emails and you and you alone would decide when to release, whether to release them. And that’s in fact what happened,” she continued.
“Well, Savannah, first of all, it was allowed,” Clinton said. “And I’ve said it wasn’t the best choice. And every government official gets to decide what is personal and work-related.”
Another Tech Company Joins FBI Clinton Email Probe
Democrats on the Select Committee on Benghazi released a new video and fact sheet rebutting claims made by Chairman Trey Gowdy that the Committee is not focused on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. The new video and fact sheet come after Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy admitted on national television that the purpose of the Select Committee has always been to damage Hillary Clinton’s bid for President.
Admit | Hillary Clinton
Kevin McCarthy Admits Benghazi Committee Formed to Beat Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton Likely to Face Felony Charges for Her Reckless Email Handling & Lying about It
New Batch Of Hillary Clinton Emails Includes Classified Information – Making Money
New Clinton email count: 305 documents with potentially classified information
Inspector Finds Top Secret Emails Were On Hillary Clinton’s Server Trey Gowdy Benghazi Gate
Will Hillary Clinton Be Charged in the Email Scandal? One Judge Says Yes
Judge Napolitano: Gaps in Hillary Clinton Emails Include 2-Month Period Following Benghazi Attack
Tempers Flare At Hearing On Benghazi Terror Attack Trey Gowdy Lou Dobbs
Ex-Counter Intel Agent Nails Hillary Clinton With Two Laws She Broke
Chris Farrell, a former Army counterintelligence agent and now director of investigations for Judicial Watch, argues Hillary Clinton has violated two national security laws.
The first is Title 18 of U.S. Code Sec. 1924 which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.
The second is Title 18 of U.S. Code Sec. 793, a more serious felony, which outlaws people from misusing national defense information, and carries a sentence of up to 10 years in prison.
Liberal media not buying Hillary Clinton’s email excuses?
Judge Orders State Dept To Help FBI Recover Hillary Clinton’s Deleted Emails America’s News HQ
Hillary Clinton Explains What’s in Her Classified Emails
Rep. Trey Gowdy on Hillary Clinton’s widening email scandal – FoxTV Political News
• Criminal Charges Hang Over Clinton • “Hillary Blew It” – Chuck Todd • 7/24/15 •
NSA Whistleblower: Everyone in US under virtual surveillance, all info stored, no matter the post
NSA Whistleblower William Binney on how they target us, abuse us, spy on us
NSA Whistleblower William Binney: The Future of FREEDOM
A 36-year veteran of America’s Intelligence Community, William Binney resigned from his position as Director for Global Communications Intelligence (COMINT) at the National Security Agency (NSA) and blew the whistle, after discovering that his efforts to protect the privacy and security of Americans were being undermined by those above him in the chain of command.
The NSA data-monitoring program which Binney and his team had developed — codenamed ThinThread — was being aimed not at foreign targets as intended, but at Americans (codenamed as Stellar Wind); destroying privacy here and around the world. Binney voices his call to action for the billions of individuals whose rights are currently being violated.
William Binney speaks out in this feature-length interview with Tragedy and Hope’s Richard Grove, focused on the topic of the ever-growing Surveillance State in America.
On January 22, 2015: (Berlin, Germany) – The Government Accountability Project (GAP) is proud to announce that retired NSA Technical Director and GAP client, William “Bill” Binney, will accept the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence Award today in Berlin, Germany. The award is presented annually by the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) to a professional who has taken a strong stand for ethics and integrity. http://whistleblower.org/press/nsa-wh…
Obama Admin. Was Likely Running Arms To Islamic Jihadists Through Benghazi
Treason Exposed! Obama Used Benghazi Attack to Cover Up Arms Shipments to Muslim Brotherhood
Uncovering the Benghazi Cover-up: Obama was Watching Siege After Drone Arrived (10/28/12)
Obama LIED About Benghazi Attack!!! (Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer Interview)
SYRIA Retired General Suspects A US Covert Operation For Running Libya Arms To Syria
Benghazi-Gate: Connection between CIA and al-Qaeda in Libya and Syria, with Turkey’s Help
(FULL) 13 Hours in Benghazi: Fox News Special Report
Russia Hacks Pentagon + China Hack = 25 Million Records. Fed Judge Requests All Clinton Emails
Trusted Surveillance Part 4/8 – Enemy of The State
Enemy of the State (1998) Movie Full HD (English Subtitles) | Will Smith Movies Full Length
Gowdy: Clinton to testify in October before Benghazi panel, all questions ‘asked’ and ‘answered’
South Carolina Rep. Trey Gowdy said Sunday that Hillary Clinton will indeed testify Oct. 22 about her activities as secretary of state at the time of the Benghazi attacks but suggested that her demand for a one-time appearance will result in a long, hard day.
“We have agreed on the date,” Gowdy, a Republican and chairman of House’s Select Committee on Benghazi, told “Fox News Sunday.”
“And the ground rules are simple: You’re going to stay there until all of the questions are asked and answered with respect to Benghazi,” he continued. “If she’s going to insist that she’s only coming once, I’m going to insist that once be fully constructed, which means she’s going to be there for a while.”
Gowdy said questions about Clinton’s growing email controversy will be part of the hearing only because they’re relevant to his task of finding out what Clinton knew prior to the fatal Sept. 11, 2012, terror attacks on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya.
U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the attacks.
Clinton was secretary of state from 2009 to 2013. Among questions still being pursued are how much did the Obama administration know about the possibility of a terror attack and did the outpost have adequate security.
The email controversy essentially centers on Clinton using a private server and email accounts while serving as the country’s top diplomat.
“Had she not had this email arrangement with herself, you wouldn’t be talking to me this morning,” Gowdy told Fox on Sunday. “So, my focus is on the four murdered Americans in Benghazi. But before I can write the final definitive accounting of that, I have to make sure that the public record is complete.”
Clinton, the front running Democratic presidential candidate, has said she had no knowledge of sending or receiving information marked as classified, that she has done nothing wrong and intends to cooperate with investigations.
However, thousands of pages of her emails publicly released in recent months show she received messages later marked classified, including some that contained material regarding the production and dissemination of U.S. intelligence information.
And a recent inspector general probe raised concerns about whether classified information had traversed the email system, resulting in a counterintelligence referral being sent to the Justice Department. However, the referral did not allege criminal wrongdoing.
Intentionally transmitting classified information through an unsecured system would appear to be a violation of federal regulations.
This weekend, Clinton suggested the email controversy is also politically motivated.
“I won’t get down in the mud with them,” she said. “I won’t play politics with national security or dishonor the memory of those who we lost. I won’t pretend that this is anything other than what it is, the same old partisan games we’ve seen so many times before.”
Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor, has repeatedly declined to comment on whether he thinks Clinton broke federal law with what he calls her “unique email arrangement.”
However, he said Sunday that he has confidence in the FBI’s handling of the server, which Clinton turned over last week, after repeated requests, and that the agency will be the neutral observer for which he has asked.
“I think (the FBI is) the premiere law enforcement agency in the world,” Gowdy said. “I think that they’re as apolitical as anything can be in this culture, and I think they’re going to go wherever the facts take them.”
Clinton will testify before Benghazi panel on Oct. 22
Circle Oct. 22 with a red pen on the calendar: That’s when Hillary Clinton will testify before the Select Committee on Benghazi, the panel confirmed on Wednesday.
The former Secretary of State will answer questions about her role in the events that led up to the 2012 Benghazi, Libya terrorist attack that left four Americans dead — and, more than likely, her email practices that have come under fire in recent weeks.
Story Continued Below
“Secretary Clinton’s attorney, Mr. David Kendall, late today confirmed she has accepted the Select Committee’s offer to appear before the committee, which will take place Oct. 22nd,” spokesman Jamal Ware said in a statement. “Members of the Committee will question the former Secretary about Libya, Benghazi and her email arrangement consistent with the scope and jurisdiction of the Committee laid out in the House Resolution.”
Clinton’s campaign had made a similar announcement last Saturday following a series of reports calling into question the 2016 Democratic front-runner’s handling of classified information.
But the panel balked at the announcement, saying Kendall and the panel hadn’t agreed on the scope of what could be asked. They worried Kendall would demand that the panel stay away from questions about her email practices. Clinton used a home-brewed email server for work instead of a State.gov account as is required under government transparency rules.
Second IT firm agrees to give Clinton’s server data to FBI
Former secretary of state hired Datto Inc. to provide a private cloud backup of her emails
FBI asked the Connecticut company to turn over data. It agreed.
State Department also asking again whether she turned over all of her business emails
BY GREG GORDON AND ANITA KUMAR
Hillary Clinton hired a Connecticut company to back up her emails on a “cloud” storage system, and her lawyers have agreed to turn whatever it contains over to the FBI, a person familiar with the situation said Tuesday.
The disclosure came as a Republican Senate committee chairman, Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, also asked the firm to turn over to the committee copies of any Clinton emails still in its possession.
There were conflicting accounts as to whether the development could lead to recovery of any of Clinton’s more than 31,000 personal emails, which she said she deleted from her private server upon turning over her work-related emails to the State Department, at its request, in December 2014.
Congressional Republicans have voiced skepticism as to whether the 30,940 business emails that the Democratic presidential candidate handed over represented all of those related to her position as secretary of state. The FBI is separately investigating whether Clinton’s arrangement put classified information at risk but has yet to characterize it as a criminal inquiry.
Datto Inc., based in Norwalk, Conn., became the second data storage firm to become entangled in the inquiry into Clinton’s unusual email arrangement, which has sparked a furor that has dogged her campaign. In August, Clinton and the firm that had managed her server since June 2013, Colorado-based Platte River Networks, agreed to surrender it for examination by the FBI.
On Friday, Clinton’s attorney, David Kendall, and Platte River agreed to allow Datto to turn over the data from the backup server to the FBI, said the person familiar with Datto’s storage, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.
Datto said in a statement that “with the consent of our client and their end user, and consistent with our policies regarding data privacy, Datto is working with the FBI to provide data in conjunction with its investigation.”
The source said, however, that Platte River had set up a 60-day retention policy for the backup server, meaning that any emails to which incremental changes were made at least 60 days prior would be deleted and “gone forever.” While the server wouldn’t have been “wiped clean,” the source said, any underlying data likely would have been written over and would be difficult to recover.
Since Clinton has said she deleted all of her personal emails, the configuration might complicate any attempt by FBI forensics experts to resurrect emails from the backup. However, Bloomberg reported recently that the FBI has recovered some of Clinton’s emails, apparently from the server they seized from Platte River.
In laying out facts gathered by the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which he chairs, Johnson offered the first public confirmation that Clinton or her representatives had arranged for a backup of her email server after she left office in early 2013.
His letter also cited internal emails recounting requests in late 2014 and early 2015 from Clinton representatives for Colorado-based Platte River Networks, the firm managing Clinton’s primary server, to direct Datto to reduce the amount of her emails it was backing up. These communications led a Platte River employee to air suspicions that “this whole thing really is covering up some shaddy (sic) shit,” according to an excerpt of an email cited by Johnson.
The controversy seems sure to come up on Oct. 22, when Clinton is scheduled to testify to a House committee investigating the fatal 2012 attacks on U.S. facilities in Benghazi, Libya. It was the panel’s chairman who first declared last March that she had “wiped” her server clean based on a letter from Clinton’s attorney.
Spokesmen for Clinton’s campaign declined to respond to requests for comment about Johnson’s letter Tuesday.
On May 31, 2013, four months after Clinton left office, the Clinton Executive Service Corp., which oversaw her email server contracts, hired Platte River to maintain her account. Its New Jersey-based server replaced the server in her New York home that had handled her emails throughout her tenure as secretary of state.
Several weeks ago, Platte River employees discovered that her private server was syncing with an offsite Datto server, he said.
When Datto acknowledged that was the case, a Platte River employee replied in an email: “This is a problem.”
Johnson said that “Datto apparently possessed a backup of the server’s contents since June 2013.”
Upon that discovery, Platte River “directed Datto to not delete the saved data and worked with Datto to find a way to move the saved information . . . back to Secretary Clinton’s private server.”
CLINTON WILL TESTIFY ON CAPITOL HILL ABOUT HER EMAIL PRACTICES OCT. 22
The letter also noted that Platte River employees were directed to reduce the amount of email data being stored with each backup. Late this summer, Johnson wrote, a Platte River employee took note of this change and inquired whether the company could search its archives for an email from Clinton Executive Service Corp. directing such a reduction in October or November 2014 and then again around February, advising Platte River to save only emails sent during the most recent 30 days.
Those reductions would have occurred after the State Department requested that Clinton turn over her emails.
IT IS UNCLEAR WHY SECRETARY CLINTON’S REPRESENTATIVES APPARENTLY DIRECTED (PLATTE RIVER) TO REDUCE THE BACKUP TIME PERIOD OF HER EMAILS AROUND THE SAME TIME PERIOD OR IN THE MONTHS FOLLOWING THE STATE DEPARTMENT’S REQUEST.
Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, in letter to Datto
It was here that a Platte River employee voiced suspicions about a cover-up and sought to protect the company. “If we have it in writing that they told us to cut the backups,” the employee wrote, “and that we can go public with our statement saying we have had backups since day one, then we were told to trim to 30 days, it would make us look a WHOLE LOT better,” according to the email cited by Johnson.
In the letter to Austin McChord, Datto’s CEO, Johnson asked the firm to produce copies of all communications it had relating to Clinton’s server, including those with Platte River and the Clinton firm.” He also asked whether Datto and its employees were authorized to store and view classified information and for details of any cyberattacks on the backup server.
In an ongoing review of Clinton’s work emails, the State Department and intelligence agencies have found more than 400 containing classified information, including at least two declared “Top Secret,” the most sensitive national security data. Clinton has said none of the emails were marked classified during her tenure although some communications by their nature are classified at creation.
In other developments, the State Department is asking Clinton to search again for any emails, regardless of format, from the first two months of her tenure, according to a document filed Tuesday by the State Department in response to a lawsuit about her emails.
The request to Clinton attorney David Kendall, dated Oct. 2, comes weeks after the State Department obtained a series of emails that Clinton did not turn over despite her claim that she sent the agency all her work-related correspondence.
TO THE EXTENT HER EMAILS MIGHT BE FOUND ON ANY INTERNET SERVICE AND EMAIL PROVIDERS, WE ENCOURAGE YOU TO CONTACT THEM.
Patrick Kennedy, under secretay of state for management
The chain of emails, dating from Jan. 10, 2009 to Feb. 1, 2009, were exchanged with former Gen. David Petraeus when he headed the military’s U.S. Central Command, responsible for running the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and mostly relate to personnel matters.
“These emails are now in our possession and will be subject to Freedom of Information Act requests,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said last week. “Furthermore, we asked the IG to incorporate this matter into the review Secretary Kerry requested in March. We have also informed Congress of this matter.”
Clinton said she was unable to turn over emails she sent or received from late January to March 18, 2009, because she continued to use the AT&T Blackberry account she had when she was a senator. But after the Petraeus emails surfaced and showed she had not turned over emails sent or received on her new account, aides said said she could not turn over emails because they had not been captured on her private server.
Clinton’s campaign and Kendall did not immediately respond to questions about Johnon’s letter or the State Department’s new request.
18 U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
(a)
Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
(b)
For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a).
(c)
In this section, the term “classified information of the United States” means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.
18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
(a)
Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or
(b)
Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, and with like intent or reason to believe, copies, takes, makes, or obtains, or attempts to copy, take, make, or obtain, any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, document, writing, or note of anything connected with the national defense; or
(c)
Whoever, for the purpose aforesaid, receives or obtains or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain from any person, or from any source whatever, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note, of anything connected with the national defense, knowing or having reason to believe, at the time he receives or obtains, or agrees or attempts to receive or obtain it, that it has been or will be obtained, taken, made, or disposed of by any person contrary to the provisions of this chapter; or
(d)
Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(e)
Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(f)
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
(g)
If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.
(h)
(1)
Any person convicted of a violation of this section shall forfeit to the United States, irrespective of any provision of State law, any property constituting, or derived from, any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, from any foreign government, or any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, as the result of such violation. For the purposes of this subsection, the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.
(2)
The court, in imposing sentence on a defendant for a conviction of a violation of this section, shall order that the defendant forfeit to the United States all property described in paragraph (1) of this subsection.
(3)The provisions of subsections (b), (c), and (e) through (p) of section 413 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 853(b), (c), and (e)–(p)) shall apply to—
(A)
property subject to forfeiture under this subsection;
(B)
any seizure or disposition of such property; and
(C)
any administrative or judicial proceeding in relation to such property,
if not inconsistent with this subsection.
(4)
Notwithstanding section 524(c) of title 28, there shall be deposited in the Crime Victims Fund in the Treasury all amounts from the forfeiture of property under this subsection remaining after the payment of expenses for forfeiture and sale authorized by law.
In 1970, the name of the facility was changed to “Ossining Correctional Facility” and, in 1985, it received its present name.[3] “Sing Sing” was derived from the name of a Native American Nation, “Sinck Sinck” (or “Sint Sinck”), from whom the land was purchased in 1685.[4]
Sing Sing prison confines about 1,700 prisoners.[5] There are plans to convert the original 1825 cell block into a time specific museum.[6]
Story 1: Hillary Clinton Has A History of Using Private Investigators — Imagine What She Would Do If Elected President With The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and National Security Agency (NSA) — Hillary Would Turn The Key Of NSA’s Turnkey Tyranny — Indict Hillary Clinton For Her Crimes of Destroying Government Documents and Obstructing Justice! — Videos
Kurtz: Sid Blumenthal’s shadowy role
New revelation in the Clinton email scandal
Impact of the Clinton emails on the Benghazi investigation
John King: Hillary Clinton ‘Has Only Herself to Blame’ for Private Email Scandal
America’s Forum | Dick Morris discusses the Hillary Clinton email scandal
Dick Morris: Beware hillary’s abuse of women + power
The Hard Line | Dick Morris discusses Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, and Martin O’Malley
Hillary Clinton Cold Open – SNL
Bernie Sanders gaining momentum in presidential race
Bernie Sanders Says He’ll Win New Hampshire, Iowa, and the White House
Bernie Sanders Speaks With Katie Couric – Full Interview
Bernie Sanders Rally in Madison, Wisconsin
Hillary Clinton Exposed, Movie She Banned From Theaters Full Movie
Hillary’s Flawed Strategy! Dick Morris TV: Lunch ALERT!
America’s Forum | Dick Morris discusses Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton
President Bill Clinton on the resignation of aide Dick Morris
NSA Whistleblower: Everyone in US under virtual surveillance, all info stored, no matter the post
He told you so: Bill Binney talks NSA leaks
William Binney – Inside NSA
NSA Whistleblower William Binney: The Future of FREEDOM
Enemy Of The State 1998 (1080p) (Full movie)
Through a PRISM, Darkly – Everything we know about NSA spying [30c3]
Published on Dec 30, 2013
Through a PRISM, Darkly
Everything we know about NSA spying
From Stellar Wind to PRISM, Boundless Informant to EvilOlive, the NSA spying programs are shrouded in secrecy and rubber-stamped by secret opinions from a court that meets in a faraday cage. The Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Kurt Opsahl explains the known facts about how the programs operate and the laws and regulations the U.S. government asserts allows the NSA to spy on you.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-profit civil society organization, has been litigating against the NSA spying program for the better part of a decade. EFF has collected and reviewed dozens of documents, from the original NY Times stories in 2005 and the first AT&T whistleblower in 2006, through the latest documents released in the Guardian or obtained through EFF’s Freedom of Information (government transparency) litigation. EFF attorney Kurt Opsahl’s lecture will describe how the NSA spying program works, the underlying technologies, the targeting procedures (how they decide who to focus on), the minimization procedures (how they decide which information to discard), and help you makes sense of the many code names and acronyms in the news. He will also discuss the legal and policy ramifications that have become part of the public debate following the recent disclosures, and what you can do about it. After summarizing the programs, technologies, and legal/policy framework in the lecture, the audience can ask questions.
Speaker: Kurt Opsahl
EventID: 5255
Event: 30th Chaos Communication Congress [30c3] by the Chaos Computer Club [CCC]
Location: Congress Centrum Hamburg (CCH); Am Dammtor; Marseiller Straße; 20355 Hamburg; Germany
Language: english
Has Clinton Dispatched Oppo Researchers to UVM’s Sanders Archive?
By PAUL HEINTZ @PAULHEINTZ
Librarians at the University of Vermont’s special collections say interest is spiking in the “Bernard Sanders papers” — 30 boxes of meticulously organized material documenting Sanders’ eight years as mayor of Burlington.
That should come as no surprise, given the independent senator’s rapid rise in the polls in New Hampshire and Iowa, which hold the nation’s first presidential nominating contests.
Media outlets, such as the Guardian, have drilled deep into the archives and unearthed tasty tidbits — but they’re not the only ones interested in getting to know the senator.
Last Thursday, two casually dressed twentysomethings were spotted combing through the Sanders files and decades-old Vermont newspapers. As they were on their way out the door at the end of the day, Seven Days asked what they were doing.
“No comment,” said one of the young men, dressed in a T-shirt and flannel. “No comment.”
As they emerged into the sunlight outside Bailey/Howe Library, Seven Dayspressed again: “Come on! We’re all doing the same thing.”
“No, we’re not,” Flannel Man shot back.
“We’re just looking,” said the other one, dressed in a white shirt with black stripes.
“Looking at what?”
“Old newspapers,” Stripy said. “Vermont history.”
So who were these mysterious characters? Opposition researchers working for one of Sanders’ rivals? Earlier that day a super PAC supporting former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley launched the first negative ad of the race targeting Sanders.
Asked if Team O’Malley had dispatched Flannel Man and Stripy to Burlington, campaign spokeswoman Lis Smith said, “We have not, and they are not affiliated with our campaign.”
But wait! Here’s a clue: That T-shirt Flannel Man was wearing? It read, “New Hampshire for Jeanne Shaheen.”
Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton absorbed much of Shaheen’s political operation to run her Granite State campaign: state director Mike Vlacich, senior political aide Kari Thurman and spokesman Harrell Kirstein.
Asked if Flannel Man and Stripy belonged to Team Clinton, Kirstein did not respond.
Welcome to Burlington, Hillary. Next time, tell your people to leave their Shaheen shirts at home.
Story 1: National Security Agency Is Still Massively Collecting All Your Communications — The USA Freedom Act Is At Best A Baby Step Towards Restoring Your Fourth Amendment Constitutional Rights — Fire Your Representatives For Betraying Their Oath Of Office — NSA Turnkey Tyranny Totalitarian Targeting of American People — Videos
USA Freedom Act passed by Senate and signed by President Obama, limiting NSA surveillance
Freedom Act Changes NSA Rules For Data Collection
Senate Passes USA Freedom Act, Stops NSA Phone Data Gathering Special Report 1st Segment
Bill Binney: We Are A Gov’t With A Country
Freedom Act: Edward Snowden speaks out on surveillance reform
Politics Panel: Cowards! The Freedom Act is Passed
William Binney’s Heartfelt Plea to the American People
Operation “Toto” Pulling Back The Curtain: Full NSA Interview
_visits_Mobile_Army_Surgical_Hospital_in_Bosnia-Herzegovina_in_1996.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Is President Obama Sabotaging The Federal Bureau of Investigation Of Hillary Clinton’s Handling of Classified Documents? American People Want To Know — Will Hillary Clinton Be Indicted or Nominated? Yes Hillary Will Be Indicted For Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 793 and §798 and §1924 — Biden Backup to Replace Hillary Clinton — California Governor Jerry Brown To Enter Race? — Videos
Posted on October 17, 2015. Filed under: American History, Blogroll, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), College, Communications, Computers, Congress, Corruption, Crime, Crisis, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Documentary, Education, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Communications Commission, government spending, history, Homicide, Islam, Islam, Law, liberty, Life, Links, Literacy, Money, National Security Agency (NSA_, People, Philosophy, Photos, Police, Politics, Presidential Candidates, Security, Shite, Spying, Strategy, Sunni, Talk Radio, Terrorism, Video, War, Wealth, Welfare, Wisdom, Writing | Tags: 16 October 2015, 18 U.S. Code § 793 and §798 and §1924, 22 October 2015 Hearings, America, articles, Audio, Benghazi, Breaking News, Broadcasting, capitalism, Cartoons, Charity, Citizenship, Clarity, Classical Liberalism, Classified Documents, Collectivism, Commentary, Commitment, Communicate, Communication, Concise, Congress, Convincing, Courage, Crimes, Culture, Current Affairs, Current Events, economic growth, economic policy, Economics, Education, Emails, Evil, Experience, Faith, Family, FBI, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Felonies, First, fiscal policy, free enterprise, freedom, freedom of speech, Friends, Give It A Listen, God, Good, Goodwill, Growth, Hillary Clinton, Hope, Individualism, Knowledge, liberty, Life, Love, Lovers of Liberty, monetary policy, MPEG3, National Security Agency, News, NSA, Opinions, Peace, Photos, Podcasts, Political Philosophy, Politics, President Barack Obama, prosperity, Radio, Raymond Thomas Pronk, Representative Republic, Republic, Resources, Respect, rule of law, Rule of Men, Show Notes, Talk Radio, The Pronk Pops Show, The Pronk Pops Show 555, Trey Gowd, Truth, Tyranny, U.S. Constitution, United States of America, Videos, Virtue, War, Wisdom |
The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts
Pronk Pops Show 555: October 16, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 554: October 15, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 553: October 14, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 552: October 13, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 551: October 12, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 550: October 9, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 549: October 8, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 548: October 7, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 547: October 5, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 546: October 2, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 545: October 1, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 544: September 30, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 543: September 29, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 542: September 28, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 541: September 25, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 540: September 24, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 539: September 23, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 538: September 22, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 537: September 21, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 536: September 18, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 535: September 17, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 534: September 16, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 533: September 15, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 532: September 14, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 531: September 11, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 530: September 10, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 529: September 9, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 528: September 8, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 527: September 4, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 526: September 3, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 525: September 2, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 524: August 31, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 523: August 27, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 522: August 26, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 521: August 25, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 520: August 24, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 519: August 21, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 518: August 20, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 517: August 19, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 516: August 18, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 515: August 17, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 514: August 14, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 513: August 13, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 512: August 12, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 511: August 11, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 510: August 10, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 509: July 24, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 508: July 20, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 507: July 17, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 506: July 16, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 505: July 15, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 504: July 14, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 503: July 13, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 502: July 10, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 501: July 9, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 500: July 8, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 499: July 6, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 498: July 2, 2015
Pronk Pops Show 497: July 1, 2015
Story 1: Is President Obama Sabotaging The Federal Bureau of Investigation Of Hillary Clinton’s Handling of Classified Documents? American People Want To Know — Will Hillary Clinton Be Indicted or Nominated? Yes Hillary Will Be Indicted For Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 793 and §798 and §1924 — Biden Backup to Replace Hillary Clinton — California Governor Jerry Brown To Enter Race? — Videos
FBI Probe: Hillary Clinton Could Face 10 Years In Prison
Obama Calls Clinton Secret Server A “Mistake,” Says Questions About Her Actions “Legitimate”
Firebrand Trey Gowdy Dismantles Ex-Staffer’s Claim That Benghazi Committee Is Partisan
MSNBC Panel: Even The President Says Hillary Clinton’s Emails Are A Legitimate Issue
Top Republican: Hillary Clinton still withholding Benghazi emails
Hillary Clinton’s Favorability Numbers at the Lowest Since 1992
Obama: Criticism Of Hillary Clinton’s Private Email ‘Ginned Up’ Because Of Politics
FBI FURY: OBAMA SABOTAGING HILLARY INVESTIGATION
Rand Paul: Clinton Fired an ambassador for using a private email server; 10-16-2015
Obama Tells ‘60 Minutes’ Hillary Clinton Made Email ‘Mistake’
MSNBC: CIA’s Most Closely Guarded Information Passed Through Clinton Email
Wife of Imprisoned CIA Whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling Speaks Out October 15, 2015
Unprecedented News Conference: Thursday, October 15, 2015, National Press Club, Washington
Jeffrey Sterling was convicted under the Espionage Act as a source for New York Times reporter James Risen’s book State of War. He began serving his three-and-a-half year prison sentence in June. His wife’s news conference was the first time the spouse of a CIA whistleblower has made such an appearance.
National Press Club President John Hughes opened the conference, which featured:
* Thomas Drake
* Delphine Halgand
* Ray McGovern
* Jesselyn Radack
Clinton’s Deleted Emails On ‘Cloud’ Server
The saga over Hillary Clinton’s private use of an email server continues. The FBI is now investigating deleted emails from a “cloud” storage system. On Friday October 2, 2015 Platte River and Clinton’s officials gave written consent for Datto Inc. (a Connecticut-based tech company) to release Clinton’s emails to the FBI. Deputy Press Secretary at the Republican National Committee, Raffi Williams, discusses what this means for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. OANN’s Matt Schuck has this story.
Uh Oh! Hillary’s Emailgate Just Got Worse! MUCH WORSE! FBI Expands…
FBI’s Hillary email net expands
Judge Says Hillary Clinton’s Private Emails Were Classified, Violated Policy – America’s Newsroom
Could Hillary Clinton face prosecution over email scandal?
Minute Memo #174 – Clinton Hiding Benghazi Emails
Newly released emails of Hillary Clinton show new legal trouble up ahead.
According to investigative reporter Sharyl Attkinsson, Clinton deliberately hid information on the Benghazi terror attack in blatant violation of Freedom of Information Act requests.
According to Attkinsson:
“The newly-released batch of Hillary Clinton emails provides further proof that Freedom of Information (FOI) law has been blatantly violated.
The documents include material directly responsive to a FOI request I made back in 2012 after the Benghazi terrorist attacks on the U.S. compounds.
However, the material was not produced at the time, as required by law.
Once again, there appears to be nobody who holds government officials and agencies accountable for their routine violation of this law. So the infractions occur frequently and with impunity.
If nobody polices our government officials and agencies–if they are above the law–then how does a lawful society function?”
Judge Napolitano: FBI Will Recommend Hillary Clinton Be Indicted
Mark Levin: Hillary Clinton in Violation of Espionage Act • Hannity • 9/2/15 •
Newsmax Prime | Alan Dershowitz talks about the FBI investigating Hillary Clinton’s email server
Hillary Jokes About FBI Investigation
September 24, 2015: Sen. Tom Cotton questions NSA Director about Clinton Emails
‘Under Penalty of Perjury’: Judge Nap on Latest Twist in Hillary’s Email Scandal
Judge Andrew Napolitano appeared on “The Kelly File” tonight to weigh in on the latest developments in the Hillary Clinton email scandal.
A federal judge has demanded that Clinton and two of her most trusted aides go on the record “under penalty of perjury” regarding the private email server Clinton used during her time as Secretary of State.
Judge Napolitano noted that when the government suspected that Gen. Petraeus kept secure documents in his home, they raided it.
In Clinton’s case, Judge Napolitano pointed out, the government doesn’t suspect she has secure documents. It’s a known fact.
Not only that, but she gave a thumb drive with that secure information to her lawyer, Judge Napolitano added.
“Mrs. Clinton should be treated like anybody else who is obviously violating the law by failing to secure classified documents and keeping them in insecure venues not approved by the government,” Judge Napolitano stated.
He said that the federal judge’s use of the phrase “under penalty of perjury” is extremely significant, because it reminds Clinton that for the first time, she will be under oath.
Morrell confirms at least one foreign country have what was on Hillary’s email server.
Hillary Emails – Trey Gowdy Lays It Out
13 hours in Benghazi FULL VERSION INTERVIEW 5 parts combined
White House Covers Up Benghazi Terrorist Attack (INCLUDING NEW REPORTS)
CIA Contractor: I Told State Department Rep. Benghazi Was Terrorist Attack
White House Covers Up Benghazi Terrorist Attack – New BBC Science Documentary HD
Obama LIED About Benghazi Attack!!! (Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer Interview)
CIA Gun Runner: Hillary’s Benghazi Crimes Confirmed
SYRIA Retired General Suspects A US Covert Operation For Running Libya Arms To Syria
Treason Exposed! Obama Used Benghazi Attack to Cover Up Arms Shipments to Muslim Brotherhood
Source: FBI probe of Clinton email focused on ‘gross negligence’ provision
By Catherine Herridge, Pamela Browne
Three months after Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email address and server while secretary of state was referred to the FBI, an intelligence source familiar with the investigation tells Fox News that the team is now focused on whether there were violations of an Espionage Act subsection pertaining to “gross negligence” in the safekeeping of national defense information.
Under 18 USC 793 subsection F, the information does not have to be classified to count as a violation. The intelligence source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity citing the sensitivity of the ongoing probe, said the subsection requires the “lawful possession” of national defense information by a security clearance holder who “through gross negligence,” such as the use of an unsecure computer network, permits the material to be removed or abstracted from its proper, secure location.
Subsection F also requires the clearance holder “to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer. “A failure to do so “shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.”
The source said investigators are also focused on possible obstruction of justice. “If someone knows there is an ongoing investigation and takes action to impede an investigation, for example destruction of documents or threatening of witnesses, that could be a separate charge but still remain under a single case,” the source said. Currently, the ongoing investigation is led by the Washington Field Office of the FBI.
A former FBI agent, who is not involved in the case, said the inconsistent release of emails, with new documents coming to light from outside accounts, such as that of adviser Sidney Blumenthal, could constitute obstruction. In addition, Clinton’s March statement that there was no classified material on her private server has proven false, after more than 400 emails containing classified information were documented.
Clinton and her team maintain the use of a private account was allowed, and the intelligence was not classified at the time, but later upgraded. The latter claim is disputed by the intelligence community Inspector General, who represents the agencies involved, which concluded the information was classified from the start.
One of Clinton’s primary defenses is that the emails containing classified information, did not carry classification markings, but a leading national security defense attorney says that is no excuse under the law.
“The fact that something’s not marked or that the person may not know that it was classified would not be relevant at all in a prosecution under the Espionage Act,” defense attorney Edward MacMahon Jr. recently told Fox.
It is not known what relevant evidence, if any, has been uncovered by the FBI, or whether any charges will ultimately be brought, but Director James Comey told reporters in Washington D.C. on Oct. 1, “If you know my folks… they don’t give a rip about politics.”
On Thursday, a group of national security whistleblowers held a news conference in Washington at the National Press Club to highlight what they characterized as a double standard in these types of cases.
NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake was indicted in 2010 under the Espionage Act for sharing unclassified material with a Baltimore Sun reporter. Drake, who also went to Congress with his concerns about the NSA, said his goal was to expose government misconduct.
“This is the secretary of state, one of the most targeted individuals by other intelligence entities and agencies in the world using a private server to traffic highly sensitive information and no doubt including classified information and no doubt including info about sources and methods,”Drake said at Thursday’s event.
He added the whistleblowers’ treatment shows there is a law for the average citizen, and apparently a different set of rules for the powerful.
“But hey, I’m secretary of state,” Drake said in a sarcastic tone. ”Even Obama gave her cover.”
The charges against Drake were eventually dropped. He pled guilty to a misdemeanor, but in the process lost his ability to work in national security and depleted his life savings to mount a defense.
Former CIA officer Jeffrey Sterling also went to Congress with his complaints, but was sentenced in May to three-and-a-half years in prison for violating the Espionage Act by giving classified information to a New York Times reporter. Sterling, who is appealing the case, was also convicted on obstruction of justice charges because a single email was missing from his account, even though the government could not show he was responsible for that.
Clinton has acknowledged deleting some 30,000 emails she considered personal.
In 2015, former CIA Director General David Petraeus pled guilty to a misdemeanor admitting he mishandled classified materials by sharing notebooks with his former mistress and biographer, Paula Broadwell.
He also was ordered to pay a $100,000 fine. Sterling’s supporters said he shared far less classified information with the New York Times.
“Powerful and politically connected individuals accused of the same and much worse conduct receive, at most, a slap on the wrist. Like General David Petraeus who gave away more secret information, classified at a much higher level, to his mistress and received a sweetheart plea deal for a minor misdemeanor,”Jesselyn Radack, a whistleblower and former ethics adviser to the Department of Justice, said Thursday.
“Or Hillary Clinton – she got a primetime TV apologist political spin interview from President Obama himself,” Radack added.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/10/15/source-fbi-probe-clinton-email-focused-on-gross-negligence-provision/
Eight Laws Hillary Clinton Could Be Indicted For Breaking
Kenneth P. Bergquist
Brigadier General, U.S. Army (Ret)
As a former Justice Department official, I have, of late, been asked by both Democratic and Republican friends whether Hillary Clinton could be indicted for her email related actions. The simple answer is yes — she, and perhaps some of her senior staff, could be indicted for violating a number of federal criminal statutes. But for reasons that will be discussed later, it is unlikely that she will be.
Nevertheless, it is well worth discussing the various criminal provisions of federal law that she and others may have been violated based on mainstream news reports. Remember that news reporting can be incorrect or incomplete — and that Hillary Clinton, and anyone else involved, deserves every presumption of innocence. Also keep in mind that an indictment is not a conviction but rather the informed opinion of a grand jury that probable cause exists to believe one or more violations of federal criminal statutes have transpired.
This intellectual and legal research exercise should commence with a brief review of the basics of criminal jurisprudence: There are two elements of a criminal offense: the prohibited conduct as defined in statute; and the mens rea or mental intent of the individual or individuals engaging in the prohibited conduct. Thus, to gain a conviction on a criminal count in an indictment, a prosecutor must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) the prohibited conduct occurred, (2) the prohibited conduct was undertaken by the defendant, and (3) the defendant had the requisite mens rea or intent at the time.
1.) 18 U.S. Code § 793 – Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
18 U.S. Code § 798 – Disclosure of classified information
A federal prosecutor would naturally focus first on the most serious allegations: willfully transmitting or willfully retaining Top Secret and Compartmented (TS/SCI) material using a private server system. The individual who transmits and the individual who receives and retains TS/SCI information on a private server jointly share the culpability for risking the compromise and exploitation of the information by hostile intelligence services. The prosecutor’s charging document would likely include felony counts under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and under 18 U.S. Code § 798 against each transmitting individual as well as separate counts against each receiving and retaining individual. Violation of either provision of the U.S. Code cited above is a felony with a maximum prison term of ten years.
The prohibited conduct is the insecure transmission of highly classified information, as well as the receipt and retention of highly classified information in an unapproved manner. The requisite mens rea is the willful commission of the prohibited conduct and the knowledge that compromised information could result in prejudice or injury to the United States or advantage to any foreign nation. Proof of intent to disclose the classified information is not required.
2.) U.S. Code § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
If the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and an accused person has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 793 and 18 U.S. Code § 798 may be “pled-down” to a single or to multiple misdemeanor counts under 18 U.S. Code § 1924. A misdemeanor conviction would probably result in a period of probation and a less significant fine. The prohibited conduct is the unauthorized removal of classified information from government control or its retention in an unauthorized location. The mens rea required is the intent to remove from government control or the intent to store the classified information in an unauthorized location.
3.) 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
To sustain a charge under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b), a federal prosecutor need only prove that the accused transferred and held the only copies of official government records (whether classified or not), the very existence of which was concealed from government records custodians. The mens rea required is that an accused knows that official government records were transferred or removed from the control of government records custodians. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) is a felony with a maximum prison term of three years.
4.) 18 U.S. Code § 641 – Public money, property or records
Again, if the federal prosecutors are of a charitable disposition and accused has been cooperative, the felony charges under 18 U.S. Code § 2071(b) can be “pled down” to a misdemeanor under 18 U.S. Code § 641. The prohibited conduct is the conversion of official records (whether classified or not) to the accused’s exclusive use and the mens rea is simply the intent to do so. Conviction on the lesser misdemeanor charge would likely result in a period of probation and the imposition of a fine.
5.) 18 U.S. Code § 1505 – Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
If it can be proven that an accused destroyed, withheld, or concealed the existence of official records being sought under subpoena by a committee of Congress, the accused can be convicted of obstruction under 18 U.S. Code § 1505. The prohibited conduct includes destruction, concealment and withholding of documents, thereby impeding or obstructing the committee’s rightful pursuit of information. The mens rea is knowledge of the committee’s interest in obtaining the official records in the accused’s custody or control. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1505 is a felony with a maximum prison term of five years.
6.) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in federal investigations
If it can be proven that an accused knowingly concealed the existence of official records being sought by the Department of State Inspector General (DOS/IG) or by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), such accused can be convicted of obstruction. The prohibited conduct is the concealment and withholding of documents that impede or obstruct an investigation. The mens rea is the intent to conceal or withhold. Violation of 18 U.S. Code § 1519 is a felony with a maximum prison term of twenty years.
7.) 18 U.S. Code § 1031 — Fraud against the United States
18 U.S. Code § 1343 – Fraud by wire, radio or television
18 U.S. Code § 1346 — Definition of “scheme or artifice to defraud”
18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to defraud the United States
If it can be proven that an accused arranged for the Department of State to hire an Information Technology (IT) specialist to primarily administer and maintain a private server system owned by the accused, then the accused can be convicted of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud and probably wire fraud. The prohibited conduct is having the United States pay an employee salary and/or official travel funds for performing private services on behalf of accused. The mens rea is simply the knowledge of the employee’s status as a public servant and that the government was not fully reimbursed for the costs to the government of such services. The wire fraud conviction can be sought if it can be proven that accused used electronic means of communication in undertaking such scheme or artifice to defraud.
8.) 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit a federal offense
If any accused and any third party can be proven to have colluded in any violation of federal, criminal law, then all involved can be charged with criminal conspiracy as well as being charged with the underlying offense.
Indictment?
The old adage, that a good prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted, is bad news for any public servant who risks the compromise of classified information or otherwise violates any of the other federal criminal statutes listed above. Specifically, this Administration has a history of vigorously prosecuting and winning convictions in the mishandling of classified information and other criminal violations of the public trust.
However, Hillary Clinton is anything but a ham sandwich; and she knows it. She and her senior aides will not even be formally investigated by this Justice Department, much less indicted. The president will allow Hillary Clinton and her aides to “tough it out” for as long it is politically possible. However, if and when the political and public opinion costs of a “tough it out” tactic become too great, President Obama will simply use that famous pen of his to issue a succinct pardon and make formal mockery of the concept of equal justice.
Kenneth Bergquist served as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the United States Department of Justice during the Reagan Administration and serves now as pro bono legal counsel to the Special Operations Education Fund (OPSEC).
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/21/eight-laws-hillary-clinton-could-be-indicted-for-breaking/#ixzz3omBYzjeq
The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 546-555
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 538-545
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 532-537
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 526-531
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 519-525
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 510-518
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 500-509
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 490-499
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 480-489
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 473-479
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 464-472
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 455-463
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 447-454
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 439-446
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 431-438
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 422-430
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 414-421
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 408-413
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 400-407
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 391-399
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 383-390
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 376-382
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 369-375
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 360-368
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 354-359
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 346-353
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 338-345
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 328-337
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 319-327
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 307-318
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 296-306
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 287-295
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 277-286
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 264-276
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 250-263
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 236-249
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-235
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 202-210
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15
Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09
Read Full Post | Make a Comment ( None so far )