Tag Archives: Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton’s Dirty Plot Against Julian Assange Uncovered By Redditors

A Reddit user managed to get to the bottom of the false accusations of pedophilia against Julian Assange and it’s straight from Hillary Clinton’s desk

A few days ago, the Ecuadoran embassy in London decided to cut off Julian Assange’s internet access for unknown reasons, but rumors quickly spread regarding an allegation that he had been sending naked photos of himself to an 8-year-old girl through a dating site and that he had an open investigation against him by the Royal Bahama Police Force (RBPF) regarding the matter. The claim is absolutely false and, as it turns out, looks to have been fabricated by a contracted company named Premise Data Corporation in San Francisco, according to a very curious reddit user.

The allegation that Assange was being investigated, and the story that went along with it, broke through Daily Kos, a website where anyone can sign up and post articles related to politics. The article has since been deleted and replaced with a message saying “I’ve deleted the post because the evidence was fabricated.” And, as it turns out, Buzzfeed helped to prove that the allegation was not true when they contacted the RBPF and were told that no investigation exists by its assistant commissioner, Stephen Dean, who also said the RBPF was given information about the case, but that no complainant had ever followed up on it.

So then, where did this story come from?

The origin of the story can be traced to Premise Data Corporation, the CEO of which who is a close friend of Hillary Clinton, as redditors discovered. Premise is a global intelligence operation (aka spies) harvesting and harnessing big data, a private corporation based in San Francisco, and whose street address happens to be the same address that dating website Todd and Clare uses.

Todd and Clare had put out a press release on October 11th claiming Assange had approached them about being the ambassador to their anti-rape campaign promoting their KATIA software in June 2016, but had since used the website to lure an 8-year-old girl into performing sex acts. Following this release, the United Nations Global Compact group, which T&C had recently joined in an effort to promote gender equality internationally, dropped T&C citing misuse of both the UNGC logo and reporting procedure, along with violating UNGC’s Integrity Measures, according to UNGC’s Communications Chief Carrie A. Hall in an article from Buzzfeed today.  T&C had aligned themselves with the United Nations in order to “bluewash” their brand, or use the UN affiliation to boost sales around the world. But now it looks like they had done it to smear Assange’s name.

Basically, Todd and Clare tried to make it look like the lies they were spreading about Assange came from an official United Nations desk.  But it gets worse.

In another press release from February 2016, T&C explains how their KATIA system works, and it sounds just like something a government intelligence organization like the NSA would use to find terrorists, complete with facial recognition software and background checks. T&C says they use this technology to weed out sex offenders and get their female customers the best matches possible.

T&C Network Solutions, the official name of Todd and Clare Hammond’s dating website, may actually be a front organization for Premise. The site claims to have over 40,000 female users, according to their blog, but if you ask anyone you know, nobody has ever even heard of T&C. Since they share the same address and are in the same industry, it wasn’t too far of a stretch to assume there may be something fishy going on, so reddit user sf-78lXQwy_7 decided to look a little deeper. Low and behold, the CEO and founder of Premise, David Soloff, had posted an image of himself with Hillary Clinton back in July this year. Soloff’s linkedin profile is astonishing. A graduate of Columbia University and UC Berkley, Soloff holds a PhD in Economic and Social History and a Bachelors in linguistics, two areas which are perfect for anyone looking to make an impact on the world through intelligence operations.

On the board of directors page, another name linked to Hillary Clinton shows up, Larry Summers. Summers is a Harvard professor, and former president of the university, who now is next in line to be Treasury Secretary under Clinton’s inevitable presidency, a position he held under her husband’s presidency in the 1990s.

Another board member for Premise is Antonio Gracias, who also happens to be Hillary’s campaign bundler.  But what’s most obvious to the link between Hillary and the false accusation from T&C is that Larry Summers is Center for American Progress was founded by John Podesta, whose emails had been hacked and are currently being leaked by Wikileaks. (And George Soros funds the Center).

Further investigation by Assange’s defense team yielded a thorough report of their findings on T&C as a business, saying, “It is our conclusion that T&C Network Solutions exhibits the characteristics of a highly suspicious and likely fabricated business entity.”  They go on to note that no official records exist for T&C Network Solutions, none of the phone numbers associated with the organization were operational, the social media profiles for the company are all followed by zombie accounts (aka fake profiles) to inflate its presence, the first capture on Archive.org for the site is in October 2015, user profile pics on the site were clearly scraped from the web and altered slightly to avoid reverse image searches, the woman listed as the domain’s registrar doesn’t seem to exist in relation to Todd and Clare, and probably the most damning piece of evidence of it all: Todd and Clare themselves don’t seem to exist either.

Today, Wikileaks has claimed it was Secretary of State John Kerry who pressured Ecuador into cutting off Assange’s internet, to which Kerry hasn’t commented on and other members of the White House have denied.

A full list of relative sources for uncovering this smear against Assange is below:
a00006 – Julian Assange Fake Paedophilia Case Archives – Last Updated 10/19/16 4:49am CST

ARCHIVE and Read the archive instead – [Info from 4chan so take with a grain of salt]

> Wikileaks Report – INVESTIGATION: T&C Network Solutions and ToddAndClare.com
Summary: Shows steps taken to make it seem like ToddAndClare.com to seem like a legitimate company. Acutally a shell for an entity.
http://archive.is/1fgVJ – Last Updated 10/19/16 12:31am CST

> 4chan.org /pol/ Proof of collusion connection with PAC or HRC
Summary: 4chan.org /pol/ report linking T&C to HRC to frame Julian Assange for Paedophilia
http://archive.is/sVsNF – Last Updated 10/19/16 1:16am CST (thread #1)
https://archive.is/tJ1Np – Last Updated 10/19/16 4:33am CST (thread #3?)

> Reddit Research Team posts
Summary: Research of collusion, with explaination of methodology
>https://archive.is/YQbcq – Last Updated 10/19/16 1:42am CST
https://archive.is/MIZnh – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:44am CST
https://archive.is/TfzuQ – Last Updated 10/19/16 3:23am CST

> Wikileaks Report – Todd and Clare emails to Julian Assange
Summary: T&C offered Julian Assange $1,000,000 for a “Commercial” for T&C and other implications
https://archive.is/UEOj7 – Last Updated 10/19/16 12:31am CST

> Wikileaks Report – Background and Documents on Attempts to Frame Assange as a Pedophile and Russias spy
Summary: Summary and timeline of steps taken by 3rd parties, in detail, to frame Julian Assange under false allegations to get him out of hiding.
https://archive.is/cRlE1 – Last Updated 10/19/16 12:31am CST

> Physical Location of T&C
Summary: Physical location T&C is connected as an entity of the Premise Data Corporation. Shows address and map of location.
http://archive.is/AVxwe – Last Updated 10/19/16 12:34am CST

> David Soloff’s Twitter page (various connections)
Summary: Founder of Premise Data Corporation, personal friend of HRC
http://archive.is/HbvAo – Last Updated 10/19/16 12:38am CST
https://archive.is/491KD (date of connection) – Last Updated 10/19/16 12:38am CST
https://archive.is/dEwtl (package from feed) – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:25am CST
https://archive.is/2MHuq (connection) – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:25am CST

Post – #1 of 4

New Post Break

> Premise Data Corporation team page
Summary: Shows founder “David” and his team in connection to PDC
http://archive.is/3Zz11 – Last Updated 10/19/16 12:38am CST

> Americanprogress.org profile on Lawrence H. Summers
Summary: Lawrence is connected to David Soloff and Super PACs linking them to DNC and HRC. Podesta founded the Center for American Progress.
http://archive.is/a7XP9 – Last Updated 10/19/16 12:40am CST

> Yamiechess.com, trafficsail.com, and findingmeg.com
Summary: All connected to T&C servers
https://archive.is/lHUge – Last Updated 10/19/16 1:14am CST
https://archive.is/tq9Wd – Last Updated 10/19/16 1:14am CST
https://archive.is/OfcRt – Last Updated 10/19/16 1:14am CST

> Wikileaks connection to physical location and plot
Summary: Tweet and Picture of Building from location of headquarters of the front or PAC behind the allegations or plot
http://archive.is/Z3q1H – Last Updated 10/19/16 1:29am CST

> LoopNet plot listing address and location for “10685 Hazelhurst Houston, TX 77043”
Summary: LoopNet plot listing for Industrial location of headquarters of the front or PAC behind the allegations or plot
http://archive.is/bwH9k – Last Updated 10/19/16 1:29am CST

> White House Visitation Records
Summary: Visitation records of civilians meeting those in the White House. Archival made to preserve incase of tampering.

Post – #2 of 4

New Post Break

> Equador statement
Summary: This is the “Official” statement by Equador and the reason for cutting Julian’s connection
https://archive.is/wrQA4 – Last Updated 10/19/16 3:35am CST

> Datagovus.com – Premise Data Corportation
Summary: Buisness listing of PDC and its D.B.A. with mailing details and such. Connections include CA and TX address.
https://archive.is/qJNJq – Last Updated 10/19/16 3:35am CST

> Noam Chomsky on Date Rape – KATIA PROJECT
Summary: Connection of Noan Chomsky and T&C with the KATIA Project. Tool connection with T&C.
https://archive.is/NlRre – Last Updated 10/19/16 3:35am CST

> LinkedIn – Alexandra Graboski
Summary: Profile of face for T&C. Connection now to Assistant at McGowan / Rodriguez Management. Location in LA, Ca.
https://archive.is/fEcxA – Last Updated 10/19/16 3:35am CST

> Twitter Mobile – David Soloff
Summary: David threatening control and use drone on civilians. Connections possibly to US GOVT.
https://archive.fo/7UkQV – Last Updated 10/19/16 3:35am CST

> United Nations Report on T&C (Right click > View Image)
Summary: On June 8, 2016, ToddandClare.com was contacted by a representative of Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, stating that due to MIT Professor Noam Chomsky’s support in the KATIA Project, Mr Assange was interested in becoming a #HeForShe Ambassador for KATIA
https://archive.is/1gm2W – Last Updated 10/19/16 3:35am CST
https://archive.is/1gm2W/c557e189a83124805824e2bb4a9f05aea8005877.png (direct link to pic) – Last Updated 10/19/16 3:35am CST

Post – #3 of 4
New Post Break

> Bipartisanreport.com – Smear piece on Julian Assange
Summary: BR collusion with T&C shadow company with connection to DNC and HRC to Detain Julian Assange on false pretenses.
https://archive.is/kjeQG – Last Updated 10/19/16 4:49am CST

> Buzzfeed.com – Smear piece on Julian Assange
Summary: Buzzfeed collusion with T&C shadow company with connection to DNC and HRC to Detain Julian Assange on false pretenses.
https://archive.is/bY08w – Last Updated 10/19/16 4:49am CST

> Lexi Graboski – About Page
Summary: Background and details in acting/modeling for Lexi (T&C Actress)
https://archive.is/OGTYq – Last Updated 10/19/16 4:49am CST

> Various Unsorted Connections, Pictures, And Shared IPs w/ T&C
Summary: Various archived pictures showing connections and shared IP’s
https://archive.is/Z39Re – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:29am CST
https://archive.is/VsiWt – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:29am CST
https://archive.is/0eo7X – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:29am CST
http://archive.is/NHJ96 – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:29am CST
https://archive.is/SgMYc – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:38am CST
https://archive.is/FhSuN – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:41am CST
https://archive.is/KcstU – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:43am CST
https://archive.is/MhMvi – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:43am CST
https://archive.is/e25WJ – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:43am CST
https://archive.is/keDw6 – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:48am CST
https://archive.is/ntkTI – Last Updated 10/19/16 2:57am CST


Post – #4 of 4

Ecuadorian Embassy Cuts Off Julian Assange’s Internet Access

The Ecuadorian Embassy in London has finally been pressured to silence one of the biggest whistleblower and media activists of our time.

In a tweet that got over 36k retweets early this morning, Wikileaks announced that CEO Julian Assange had his internet access revoked by a ‘state party’. Wikileaks later tweeted it was in fact Ecuador who had cut off his internet after the release of Hillary Clinton’s Goldman Sachs transcripts on Saturday.

Assange, who has been in refuge at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for over four years now after Sweden issued a warrant for his arrest alleging sexual assault, has not spoken publicly regarding this recent development and it’s likely we won’t hear from him anytime soon. However, his Wikileaks operatives are carrying out what they call “appropriate contingency plans” and should not be faltered or deterred from Wikileaks’ planned weekly releases, said to continue until well past the election on November 8th.

Rumors quickly spread over the internet that Assange might have died, due to a series of tweets from the Wikileaks account late Sunday evening which included coded messages using sha256sum encryption, but a twitter account claiming to be the infamous hacker collective Anonymous explained to the public that these messages were not “dead man’s keys”.

Wikileaks later confirmed that Assange’s internet had been cut by the Ecuadorian Embassy shortly after the release of the Goldman Sachs speeches.

If this is the case, then what is the link between Goldman Sachs, Hillary Clinton and Ecuador? As it turns out, two years ago Ecuador decided to liquidate a substantial amount of gold bars worth $600 million through Goldman Sachs. The deal reportedly included a buy back within three years (2017) at the current cost of gold. The Ecuadorian central bank said they did this because keeping gold bars around in vaults required money for maintenance, saying

“These interventions in the gold market represent the beginning of a new and permanent strategy of active participation by the bank, through purchases, sales and financial operations, that will contribute to the creation of new financial investment opportunities.”

On the popular social media website Reddit.com, users of the subreddit r/Wikileaks have started a thread regarding the situation with a whole host of theories about the whereabouts and constitution of the infamous whistleblower, but nothing too substantial as of yet aside from reports that Assange “is fine” from those close to the embassy in London. A user from another subreddit supporting Donald Trump posted photos of the embassy and said there was higher than usual mail delivery on Monday, claiming to have spoken to neighbors about the activity and even snapping a few photos of government vehicles outside the embassy.

Meanwhile, the Ecuadorian government released a statement claiming that they are still protecting Assange and giving him asylum, “Ecuador will continue to protect Julian Assange and uphold the political asylum granted to him in 2012.”

The small country of Ecuador rests on quite the lucrative oil reserve at a whopping 846 million barrels of heavy crude oil right under their feet. Unfortunately, in order to dig up the oil, Ecuador would have to go through its extremely biodiverse and vibrant rain forest, one which is protected by various environmental advocacy groups. Ecuador’s oil reserves are basically untouchable for the time being and make the country have a hard time using it as collateral for their economy these days. This could be a good case for United States interventionists like Hillary Clinton to want to control Ecuador, considering it’s one of the few sovereign countries in the world who uses the U.S. dollar as its main currency.

IRS Officially Investigating Clinton Foundation

While everyone was distracted by the Democratic Convention last week, 64 Republican congressmen’s request that the IRS investigate the Clinton Foundation was granted.

The IRS, a non-partisan government organization tasked with collecting taxes from U.S. citizens, has a special office for exempt operations like the Clinton Foundation, a non-governmental organization (NGO) who touts itself as the premier charity to the world. IRS Commissioner John Koskinen had referred congressional charges of corruption by 64 House Republicans on Tuesday, July 26th during the Democratic National Convention, which was too busy dealing with Bernie-or-Bust protesters and the Wikileaks dump of DNC emails the weekend prior to the convention. Clinton Foundation “pay-to-play” activities, a form of indirect bribery, seem to be the ultimate charge.

The request to investigate the Clinton Foundation on charges of “public corruption” was originally made in a letter to the FBI, FTC and IRS on July 15th this year, but only the IRS picked up the investigation. This could prove particularly difficult for the Clinton campaign for presidency after already dealing with an FBI investigation regarding Hillary’s email server for which she illegitimately used to handle classified information. The initiative is being driven by Tennessee Representative Marsha Blackburn (R) who serves as vice chairwoman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, which happens to oversee the Federal Trade Commission. The FTC also happens to regulate public charities with the help of the IRS. The IRS investigation could be the first step in getting to the truth about whether or not the Clinton Foundation is as corrupt as Hillary’s opponents have been asserting for years.

In the letter to the IRS, the congressmen charged that,

“The [Clinton] Foundation’s filings with the IRS for 501(c)(3) status appear to prohibit much of its current activity. The Foundation submitted its application to the IRS on December 23 1997. The description of its ‘activities and operational information’ notes that it would construct a library, maintain a historical site with records, and engage in study and research. No mention is made of conducting activities outside of the United States, which is one of the codes included in the IRS ‘Application for Recognition of Exemption’ in effect at the time (See activity code 910). As a result the Foundation’s global initiatives appear to be unlawful persuant to IRS guidance.”

Blackburn recently told Fox News, “There sure is a lot of money going through there and it seems the contributions would touch on Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. It is a hub of some kind of activity and let’s leave it to the IRS, the FBI and the FTC to discern exactly what that is.”

However, as Western Journalism has pointed out, the letter gives a solid starting point for investigation, beginning with Laureate International Universities, who paid former President Bill Clinton an estimated $16.5 million dollars over a five-year term to be Laureate’s “honorary chancellor” while USAID gave over $55 million in grants to the International Youth Foundation, a separate entity run by Laureate’s chairman, Douglas Becker, during the years od 2010 – 2012, while Hillary was Secretary of State (2008 – 2012). Bill Clinton recently resigned from his position at Laureate International Universities.

What may be even more damning of the Clinton’s crony capitalism at work is the Clinton Foundation’s connection to a Russian uranium company named Uranium One, the letter says. Uranium One donated several amounts of money adding up to around $23 million, according to an article by the New York Times’ Jo Becker and Mike McIntire, yet the Clinton Foundation never reported the donations.

But it doesn’t stop there..

Most recently, the Justice Department had indicted congresswoman Corrine Brown (D) of Florida for using over $800,000 in donations as a “personal slush fund”. Brown is also a super delegate who supports Hillary Clinton in Clinton’s bid for presidency and has been a member of the Hillary Clinton Leadership Council of Florida for some time now, and the House Republicans involved in this letter are using Brown as an example of someone who was rightfully indicted for misuse of charitable funds (it also doesn’t help that she had close ties to Hillary Clinton). In a parallel, but perhaps more largely scaled comparison, the Clinton Foundation received a reported $337 million in 2014 alone, most of which was received by foreign donors while weapons deals from the State department took place under Hillary Clinton.

100-Page Report Shows Staggering Evidence of Election Fraud in Democratic Primary

A recent report from Election Justice USA shows as many as 184 delegates were stolen from Bernie Sanders due to election fraud in the Democratic Primary

While it’s unclear whether the super delegates would have voted for Sanders, the EJUSA report does make one thing clear: Bernie Sanders won the majority of pledged delegates in the Democratic Primary at 2030 to Hillary Clinton’s 2021.

These numbers were arrived at by EJUSA’s intensive research and verification into claims of voter suppression, unintended party affiliation changes, heavy voter purging, and registrations never being honored by the Board of Elections in various counties throughout the U.S. during the Democratic Primary. In some cases, signatures were even forged on party affiliation documents and evidence of computer hacking being involved has come to light.

In the following excerpt from the executive summary of the report, EJUSA explains how as many as 184 delegates should have gone to Sanders:

Election Justice USA has established an upper estimate of 184 pledged delegates lost by Senator Bernie Sanders as a consequence of specific irregularities and instances of fraud. Adding these delegates to Senator Sanders’ pledged delegate total and subtracting the same number from Hillary Clinton’s total would more than erase the 359 pledged delegate gap between the two candidates. EJUSA established the upper estimate through exit polling data, statistical analysis by precinct size, and attention to the details of Democratic proportional awarding of national delegates. Even small changes in vote shares in critical states like Massachusetts and New York could have substantially changed the media narrative surrounding the primaries in ways that would likely have had far reaching consequences for Senator Sanders’ campaign.

For the executive summary and the full report, please visit Election Justice USA’s Facebook page regarding the issue. For posterity, we made a backup of the report as well. The original location of the report is on google drive.

Sanders Campaign Calls for DNC Accountability Over Hillary Favoritism

“We have an electoral process. The DNC, by its charter, is required to be neutral among the candidates. Clearly it was not,” Jeff Weaver said.

Jeff Weaver, Bernie Sanders campaign manager, expressed to ABC News the campaign’s disappointment at the Democratic National Committee for favoring Hillary Clinton throughout the Democratic primary as seen in the recent Wikileaks email leak on Friday.

Weaver also disclosed his surprise that nobody within the DNC had made any effort to reach out to him regarding the email leak and what was enclosed in the documents. Already, however, a top staffer DNC CFO Brad Marshall, apologized for conspiring to use Bernie Sanders’ religious beliefs against him in the states of West Virginia and Kentucky during Clinton campaigning in those states. This, among many other emails between top DNC staffers, proves collusion to undermine the Sanders campaign for presidency while party leader Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and other top staffers told the public they were entirely neutral and that no favoritism had taken place.

He went on to explain that it’s most likely Wasserman-Schultz who was ultimately responsible for this sort of behavior:

“We are trying to build unity for the fall to beat Donald Trump and Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a figure of disunity in the party, not a figure of unity,” Weaver added. Weaver and the DNC chairwoman have tangled often during this campaign cycle. Asked specifically whether she should resign, Weaver responded, “She should consider what her options are.”

Weaver said that he was surprised that no one with the party had reached out to him, “given the conduct that was disclosed” in the emails. Several of the emails showed that DNC staff called Weaver names including “a liar.”

Several members of Sanders staff have expressed specific outrage over the emails, which seemed to suggest attacking the senator’s religion. Sanders’ former Iowa State Director Robert Becker told ABC News that it showed “a total lack of decency.”

Hillary Clinton had raised support from hundreds of super delegates over a year ago, long before the primaries had started and before she even started campaigning, which has been a topic of contention from the Sanders camp since super delegates don’t actually vote until July 25th, the first day of the Democratic Convention. On Monday, the convention will start and is a contested convention, meaning neither candidate received enough pledged delegates to win the nomination and will rely on superdelegates to make the final decision.

WATCH: Lee Camp, Wikileaks Prove Democratic Primary Was Rigged By DNC

Over 20,000 newly leaked Clinton emails from Wikileaks and Lee Camp’s Redacted Tonight round up of important evidence of election fraud prove the DNC sabotaged Bernie Sanders

Amidst multiple lawsuits against the DNC mounting up, Wikileaks latest Clinton email leak and Lee Camp’s election fraud evidence round-up prove that the Democratic National Convention has rigged the Democratic Primary in Hillary Clinton’s favor. To anyone that values democracy, the worst part about this is the fact that the mainstream media refuses to give the story any real coverage.

Wikileaks’ recent release has already been analyzed by a few media outlets. From the Observer,

“In its recent leak of 20,000 DNC emails from January 2015 to May 2016, DNC staff discuss how to deal with Bernie Sanders’ popularity as a challenge to Clinton’s candidacy. Instead of treating Sanders as a viable candidate for the Democratic ticket, the DNC worked against him and his campaign to ensure Clinton received the nomination.”

That means the party was intentionally working against its own candidate Bernie Sanders and your vote really didn’t matter if you were a Democrat voter this season.

The Hill goes on to explain how the emails prove that top officials worked hard to undermine Sander’s campaign for presidency:

One of Camp’s most important points is that all of the discrepancy in voter tallies between exit polls and machine data happened ONLY in the Democratic primary and not the Republican primary. An apt question comes to mind: How is this not evidence of election fraud?

To see a list of all of Camp’s points from the following video, see: Lee Camp’s Requiem for a Stolen Primary Election

Watch Lee Camp’s overview of 2016 Democratic Primary election fraud video below:

Lee Camp’s Requiem for a Stolen Primary Election

Lee Camp’s Requiem for a Stolen Primary Election

RT’s Redacted Tonight released a quick list of all the ways the election was stolen. Lee Camp

1. A Standford paper showed that exit polls didn’t match up with voter machine tallies

2. The voter machine/exit poll discrepency happened ONLY on the democratic side and not the republican primaries

3. Voter machine/exit poll discrepency ONLY happened in states where there was no paper trail

3. The mainstream media refuses to cover election fraud evidence, even after Camp’s hastag #exitpollgate goes viral

4. A second Stanford paper shows discrepency between pre-election polls vs. voter machine tallies

5. Pre-election poll/voter machine discrepencies only happened in states where there was no paper trail and only in the Democratic primary, not the Republican

6. Counterpunch proves Hillary Clinton did best in states where voting machines flunked hacking tests (Counterpunch)

7. In Arizona, polling locations were cut down by from 200 to 60 causing people to wait in line for hours just to vote. This only happened in districts that were more likely to vote for Bernie Sanders.

8. Puerto Rico had the same problem as Arizona.

9. In Brooklyn, NY more than 120,000 voters were purged for no apparent reason. The Board of Elections said it was an error, and the source of the error Diane Haslett-Rudiano was suspended without pay for skipping required steps when cleaning voter records

10. In Chicago, multiple witnesses at the voting machine audit said the machines were overcounting for hillary, but the auditors were lying to make the numbers fit. When they brought this to the Chicago BOE, they got nowhere. (Inquisitor)

11. In California, poll workers were instructed to give out provisional ballots to anyone registered as NPP (No Party Preference) on election day. Isn’t that odd? According to investigative journalist Greg Palast, provisional ballots are like “placebo ballots” since they rarely actually count — they’re either never counted or counted way after election day. That means even if Bernie actually won the California primary, it wouldn’t matter because July 25th has already come and gone and the election is over.

12. Fractional voting, in voting machines, treats votes like fractions and adds non-existent votes to whoever gets more votes and isn’t true voting to begin with

13. Guccifer 2.0 leaks showing collusion between Hillary Clinton and the DNC

14. Google manipulating search results to help the Hillary campaign

FBI Signed Illegal Non-Disclosure Agreement To Interview Hillary Clinton

FBI sources confirm with the press that they were ordered to signed an NDA in order to interview Hillary Clinton as part of their email investigation

In what the NYPost calls an “unusual move”, the FBI agents involved in investigating Hillary Clinton’s email server were ordered to signed what is called a “Case Briefing Acknowledgment” form which acted as a separate non-disclosure agreement on top of the usual NDA agents must sign before obtaining security clearance for a case.

The Post says their sources from the FBI are very disappointed with director James Comey’s recommendation that Hillary Clinton not be prosecuted for negligence:

Sources said they had never heard of the “Case Briefing Acknowledgment” form being used before, although all agents must initially sign nondisclosure agreements to obtain security clearance.

“This is very, very unusual. I’ve never signed one, never circulated one to others,” said one retired FBI chief.

An FBI agent currently on the job admitted, “I have never heard of such a form. Sounds strange.”

Meanwhile, FBI agents expressed their “disappointment” over FBI Director James Comey’s decision not to recommend charges against Clinton, sources close to the matter told The Post.

“FBI agents believe there was an inside deal put in place after the Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton tarmac meeting,” said one source.

Another source from the Justice Department was “furious” with Comey, saying he’s “managed to piss off right and left.”

The document was first picked up by the press when it was referred to by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, on his government website in an open letter to FBI director James Comey regarding the NDA as violating whistleblower protections. Stephen D. Kelly, senior deputy to Director Comey, wrote a letter back to Grassley which Fox News reported on after obtaining. The Whistleblower Protections Act, which Grassley authored, requires a whistleblower exemption clause in nondisclosure agreements given to employees working on the case and was not included in the Case Briefing Acknowledgment form until after the investigation was officially concluded by the FBI.

An excerpt from Grassley’s letter shows a clear concern for how the FBI has handled the case, listing 17 matters which he feels have not been resolved regarding the case:

1. When will you reply to my letter asking about the apparent conflicts in this case? Since I sent my letter, Former President Clinton had a private meeting with Attorney General Lynch and the New York Times reported that Former Secretary Clinton was considering retaining her as Attorney General if she is elected President. In light of the other apparent conflicts outlined in my letter and this new information, do you believe there is no appearance of a conflict warranting the appointment of a special counsel, and if not, why not?

2. How many emails contained classification markings, what were those markings, and why is that not considered evidence of intentional mishandling of classified information? Did the FBI investigation determine how each of those documents marked as classified was transferred from classified systems onto an unclassified system and then emailed?

3. Publicly-released email indicates Secretary Clinton instructed a subordinate to “remove headers” from a classified document and “send nonsecure.” The document was a set of talking points related to a principals meeting of the National Security Council. Please explain how that is not evidence of intent to mishandle classified information. Was Secretary Clinton asked about that email in her interview with the FBI? Was her subordinate asked about it? What were their responses?

4. Given your statement that Secretary Clinton and her aides were “extremely careless” in handling classified information, why do you believe it would be unreasonable for any prosecutor to bring a charge based on “grossly negligent” handling of classified information? Is there a distinction between those two standards? Or do you believe that there should be an Executive Branch policy of refusing to prosecute anyone for gross negligence without evidence of intentional conduct, even though the statute does not require it? If so, would you recommend repealing the statute criminalizing gross negligence? If not, why not?

5. As part of the investigation, did the FBI review the classified cybersecurity briefing Diplomatic Security arranged for Secretary Clinton and her staff in 2011, the Boswell Memorandum regarding cybersecurity threats relating to the use of Blackberries, and the other relevant security warnings given to Secretary Clinton and her staff on these issues? If not, why not? Did you evaluate whether such repeated warnings to Secretary Clinton about specific cyber threats and the use of non-government email, along with her subsequent and continuing refusal to comply with those multiple warnings and instructions, constituted gross negligence? If not, why not?

6. Were any of Secretary Clinton’s non-government servers, or their backups, located outside of the United States? Did the FBI recover all of the servers involved?

7. In your statement you said: “To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.” Has the FBI recommended that Secretary Clinton or any of her senior aides have their security clearances suspended or revoked as a result of its findings? If not, why not?

8. One of the people who ran Secretary Clinton’s private server, Bryan Pagliano, invoked the Fifth Amendment when called to testify before the Benghazi Committee, when approached by my Committee, and in related Freedom of Information Act litigation. He reportedly received a limited immunity agreement from the Department of Justice. Did any other people the FBI contacted as part of the investigation invoke the Fifth Amendment? Did Secretary Clinton invoke the Fifth Amendment when interviewed by the FBI?

9. The head of SES/IRM during Secretary Clinton’s tenure, John Bentel, testified under oath to the Benghazi Committee that he only learned of Secretary Clinton non-government email and server when the story broke in the press in 2015. He made the same assertion to my Committee through his lawyer. Yet, as part of the State OIG’s investigation, two of his subordinates independently told State OIG that they had raised concerns to Mr. Bentel in 2010 about Secretary Clinton’s non-government email and server not complying with federal records requirements, that he falsely told them the State Department’s legal team had approved her email system, and then told them “not to discuss the matter any further” and “never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.” Did the FBI interview Mr. Bentel as part of the investigation? If not, why not? Did Mr. Bentel repeat his claim that he only learned of the non-government email and server from the media in 2015? Did the FBI attempt to resolve the conflict between Mr. Bentel’s claims and the claims of his two subordinates? If not, why not?

10. Did the FBI or Department of Justice raise any concerns about several of Secretary Clinton’s associates using the same attorneys to represent them in the investigation? Did the FBI determine whether Secretary Clinton paid for the attorneys for her associates, especially Mr. Pagliano and Mr. Bentel, and whether such third-party fee arrangements raised conflicts of interest given that those associates were being asked questions whose answers could incriminate Secretary Clinton? In the FBI’s view, would a third-party fee arrangement in which Secretary Clinton paid for Mr. Pagliano’s attorney constitute a conflict of interest when he was given immunity to speak about his involvement in her server? If not, why not?

11. According to press reports, the Department of Justice made an agreement with Cheryl Mills that certain topics would be off-limits during her interview with the FBI, including questions about her role in sorting and deleting Secretary Clinton’s email. This was purportedly because Ms. Mills claimed to be acting as Secretary Clinton’s private attorney in doing so, and thus sought to shield those actions behind attorney-client privilege. Did the FBI and/or Department of Justice make any agreements, formally or informally, with Secretary Clinton, her associates, or their attorneys, to preclude the FBI or Department of Justice from certain areas of inquiry? If so, please describe these arrangements and provide copies of all relevant records of them.

12. Did Secretary Clinton invoke attorney-client privilege, or any other privilege, to refuse to answer any questions posed by the FBI or the Department of Justice during her interview?

13. Rule 1.11 of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, which covers “Special Conflicts of Interest for Former and Current Government Officers and Employees,” specifically states that “a lawyer who has formerly served as a public officer or employee of the government . . . shall not otherwise represent a client in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a public officer or employee, unless the appropriate government agency gives its informed consent, confirmed in writing, to the representation.” While working for Secretary Clinton at the State Department, Ms. Mills was personally and substantially involved in Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email and server for official business. Under the rule, it appears that she should have been precluded from serving as Secretary Clinton’s private attorney in the same matter after leaving the State Department. Did the FBI determine whether the State Department had given written consent for Ms. Mills’ private representation of Secretary Clinton in this matter? Did the FBI otherwise raise concerns about the conflicts the representation posed?

14. When did the FBI first contact Secretary Clinton as part of the investigation? When did it request an interview? When was the date of the interview determined?

15. Did the FBI investigate Secretary Clinton’s and her associatess possible violations of laws concerning the treatment of federal records, such as 18 U.S.C. § 2071, which prohibits concealing or destroying such federal records? Did the FBI investigate whether any of the thousands of federal records Secretary Clinton and her attorneys deleted were responsive to Congressional inquiries or agency inquiries, such as ones from the State Department OIG, which would have violated 18 U.S.C. §§ 1505 and 1519, respectively? Did the FBI evaluate the numerous emails released suggesting that Secretary Clinton and her associates may have attempted to evade the Freedom of Information Act?

16. Did the FBI investigate, or is the FBI currently investigating, allegations of public corruption relating to the Clinton Foundation and former President Clinton’s speaking fees from foreign governments? If not, why not?

17. Under the law, it is a “well-settled principle that false exculpatory statements are evidence – often strong evidence – of guilt.” See, e.g., Al-Adahi v. Obama, 613 F.3d 1102, 1107 (D.C. Cir. 2010); United States v. Penn, 974 F.2d 1026, 1029 (8th Cir. 1992); United States v. Meyer, 733 F.2d 362, 363 (5th Cir. 1984). As your statement and the State OIG report both demonstrated, Secretary Clinton and her representatives made numerous exculpatory statements later shown to be false: that she never sent or received any classified information; that she never sent or received any information that was classified at the time; that she never sent or received any information marked as classified; that she established the server setup in order to only have to use one device; that the State Department approved her server arrangement; that her attorneys reviewed each of her emails in sorting them for deletion or production; that she turned over all her federal records; that she would cooperate with any inquiries into the issue; that she would encourage her associates to cooperate as well. Did the FBI weigh the probative value of this cavalcade of false statements in determining her guilt and intent, as it should have under the law?

As of July 20th, 2016, Attorney General Loretta Lynch has kept her word of not prosecuting Clinton at the advice of Director Comey, despite the controversy surrounding her decision after a brief lunch meeting with former president Bill Clinton which critics claimed was a conflict of interest and influenced Lynch’s decision, to which she denied.

WATCH: Abby Martin Explains How Bernie Endorsing Hillary Would Be Disasterous

Investigative journalist Abby Martin got heated during an interview with Paul Jay of The Real News when he said he felt that Trump had a worse foreign policy than Hillary. And she was right.

In a heated debate between herself and Paul Jay of The Real News yesterday, Abby Martin gave her reasoning for not supporting Bernie Sanders if he decided to endorse Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton has a disastrous foreign policy when it comes to carrying out human rights abuses, toppling governments and anything imperialistic that gives wet dreams to neo-conservatives in Washington at night. For Bernie Sanders to endorse her would go directly against everything he’s spoken against throughout his entire presidential campaign for the Democratic Party.

FBI Director Says No Criminal Charges Against Hillary Clinton

Just hours before Hillary Clinton’s first joint campaign appearance with President Obama, FBI director James B. Comey stated that he does not recommend criminal charges against the former Secretary of State.

Despite calling Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for classified emails “extremely careless”, Comey said today that he does not recommend filing criminal charges against the presumptive Democratic nominee. Comey said that an ordinary government official could have faced at least an administrative sanction. He also said there was no evidence that she or her lawyers had intentionally deleted or withheld any emails.

The FBI questioned Clinton on Saturday, only a couple days after it was reported that former president Bill Clinton had held a meeting with Attorney General Loretta Lynch who is responsible for the government’s investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails. Lynch later said she would take the FBI’s lead on whether or not to prosecute Hillary.

Hillary had denied that her husband’s meeting with Lynch had anything to do with the email investigation, but critics are extremely skeptical. Not only has Hillary withheld transcripts from speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs, but she even withheld roughly 50,000 pages of emails that she claimed were personal and had nothing to do with work, according to the New York Times.