Clintons: The American Public Misled In a Very Deliberate Fashion
Clintons, The American Public Misled In A Very Deliberate Fashion: We will now be joined by Chris Farrell, from Judicial Watch, Director of Investigation and Research. Chris Farrell is one of the few people who has read all Clintons emails that have been released and that will continue to be released.
This is a great opportunity for the American public to get up to speed on what the real story is and not necessarily talking points from the Clinton campaign or from the Justice Department.
I come at this investigation, at this whole problem of the Clinton corruption from the perspective of an intelligence officer. As Commissioner of Army Intelligence, I became a special agent of army counterintelligence and then later on was trained as clandestine human intelligence case officer. So my view of these things is both from a defensive stand point, from counterintelligence perspective, having conducted counter espionage investigations.
But also from the point of view as an intelligence officer looking to collect against a target. So when you look at the track record, at pattern of behavior, at the conduct of the vulnerabilities that have been exposed through this entire scandal; the American public is being misled and they are being misled in a very deliberate fashion, which is not just disturbing from a factual basis, but is deeply corrosive of the public’s understanding of what’s been put at risk by Mrs. Clinton and her conduct.
So as a special agent for army counterintelligence I am directly personally responsible for neutralizing, for stopping 6 foreign intelligence service agents. Those are cases that I ran. I put people in jail, not just under the American legal system, but even under the German legal system. I worked with the Attorney General in Vanten Batenbernberg put a guy in jail for spying for espionage.
“Mrs. Clinton was the subject of a national security crime investigation. This wasn’t a security review. It wasn’t an argument over classification levels. This was a violation of Title 18 of the US code of section 793F, mishandling national defense information. Contrary to what the American pubic has been told repeatedly, intent is not an element of the crime. There’s no requirement to prove any sort of intent at all. So when FBI Director James Comey talks about intent or he wasn’t able to prove it or there was no sort of specification that showed an intent; it’s a red herring, a false argument it isn’t a requirement of the crime. So we know, from the Inspector General’s intelligence community that 22 top secret SCI which is Sensitive Compartmentive Information, it’s a special category of the intelligence collection. Twenty Two (22) top secret SCI messages or emails went across Mrs. Clinton’s unsecured server. It’s a fact, it’s a finding of the Inspector General. That’s the root of the referral to the Department of Justice that caused them to begin this inquiry. The fact that that has occurred, puts the United States at grave risk. That’s the definition for compromising top secret material. That is the issue, that is really the focal point of what the FBI should have been looking at and it’s a YES or NO question. It’s not, what did you intend? It’s not, how did you feel about it? It’s not, what were you trying to accomplish? It’s a YES or NO question. Did this event occur? Yes or No. And if it did occur, who is responsible for it? What is the proximate cause of this event occurring and if you walk it back to find the person who made it happen, that’s who’s prosecuted. This whole intent thing, is nonsense. Mr. James Comey, FBI Director is lying to the American public when he goes down that path.
The reason I say this, lot’s of people sitting in jail for doing just that. It’s not speculative. It’s not an interpretation. Mr. Comey is calling the shots on prosecutions, which last time I checked it was an issue for the Attorney General or US Attorney not the FBI Director. But none the less, this information passed and we know it passed and anybody would be looking for this kind of information on a server. Not just the Russians and Chinese, but frankly any kind of first world intelligence service. Whether it’s the Germans, the Israelis, the Japanese, any first class intelligence operation would be looking for that kind of material on a unsecured server.
Not only would they look for classified information like that. They’d even look for unclassified information. So when she tries to talk it away and say, “Oh well, you know it’s no big deal, because these were my daughters wedding plans and yoga routines.” But if that’s what was on her server; unclassified. Look, a foreign intelligence service wants to know that information. They want to know what is occupying time and space in her head. What is she focused on? Who is she talking to. About what? When? It’s all part of the mosaic. It’s all pieces of the puzzle, that a foreign intelligence service is looking at. Trying to put together, what is the Secretary of State of the United States doing. What is important? What isn’t important? So that’s just another component of this larger question.
Look on this investigation itself, there’s a methodology that any counter intelligence professional goes through, when it comes to collecting evidence. Interviewing people who were either witnesses or subjects. Anybody who has access to Sensitive Compartmentive Information is subject to a polygraph. Have you ever heard anybody discuss Mrs. Clinton being polygraphed. Not a whisper, not a word and I can assure that there are hundreds of thousands of persons in this country with security clearances, whether it’s law enforcement, the intelligence services, the armed forces who are all routinely subject to polygraph exams. I myself have been polygraphed several times. Because I had access, not just to SCI material, but also to something Mrs. Clinton was familiar and that’s a SAP a special access program. That wasn’t even brought up as question or an issue. Why wasn’t she questioned about being polygraphed? It’s a requirement. I think the most telling thing with respect to Mrs. Clinton and this national security crime investigation, is that this sort of brokered voluntary interview, that seems to been orchestrated by David Kendall, was not a rights warning environment. It wasn’t a rights warning event. That was my first questioned when I learned she was being questioned that Saturday morning.
Because if I’m a Federal Law Enforcement Officer and I have reason to believe you’ve committed a crime and I’m questioning you concerning that. I am obligated to giving you a Miranda warning. I have to give you a rights warning. It’s not negotiable and so if I’m not Mirandizing you, if I’m not giving you a rights warning and I’m a law enforcement officer who’s capable of apprehending you for a violation of the law and I don’t do a rights warning, don’t take it too terribly serious, even if you do bring nine attorneys to the interview with you. That’s a very telling moment, that it wasn’t a rights warning.
The unintended consequence of all this, is the FBI Director Mr. Comey is personally compromised. He is complicit in this scandal. Besides that, very unfortunate, very sad circumstance. The larger thing is the institutional damage done to the FBI. This is not something the institution will get over, they’ve been shamed by this. It’s corrosive to the public’s trust in the justice system and to law enforcement generally. There are unintended consequences to this entire affair, beyond Mrs. Clinton’s reckless treatment of classified information and her absconding with federal records. There are long term impacts. I think the public really needs to appreciate the grave danger she’s placed the United States in.