Slashdot Mirror
Assange: Wikileaks Will Publish 'Enough Evidence' To Indict Hillary Clinton (rt.com)
An anonymous reader writes from a report via RT: Julian Assange says Wikileaks will have "a very big year" as it will publish enough new information about Hillary Clinton to indict her. In an ITV interview about the Democratic presidential candidate, Assange said, "We have emails relating to Hillary Clinton which are pending publication." As it stands, about 32,000 emails from Clinton's private server have been leaked by Wikileaks. Assange has yet to comment on how many new emails will be released or when they will be published. While he thinks there will be enough to indict Clinton, he doesn't think it will happen under Attorney General Loretta Lynch. He does think "the FBI can push for concessions from the new Clinton government in exchange for its lack of indictment." Specifically, Assange revealed the leaked emails show that she overrode the Pentagon's reluctance to overthrow sovereign Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, and that "they predicted the post-war outcome would be what it is, which is ISIS taking over the country." Clinton's email controversy came to light in 2013 after a hacker named Guccifer breached her personal server.
Link to location for Publication
Might want to use TOR or your favorite hiding software.
What does evidence have to do with it? Whether she is indicted or not will be decided by the backroom deals she makes and what favors she'll give to people once she becomes president.
Evidence and justice have nothing to do with it.
It's a little disconcerting about how eager both Trump and Sanders followers are to have a combative foreign power interfere with US politics at the highest levels though literal KGP espionage, as long as it might make Hillary look bad. This is worse than the GOP sending letters trying to stop the Iran nuclear deal. I think we have to go back to the Tory Loyalists to find this scale of anti-American glee.
There is nothing described here that would be grounds for an indictment.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
So Assange wants us to end up with Trump?
a first post to believe in.
Ooops, its no first post!
Seems we'll get biden.
but she won't be indicted.
Clinton authorized drone strikes (i.e. assassinations) via email from her phone, which went through her personal server. Peoples were literally being marked for death through her insecure email server. That alone should be enough to put her in a federal prison, but now Assange is telling us that there's more to be learned? Let all mortal flesh keep silence.
The proof is in the pudding, princess. and my spoon is clean.
Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld overrode the Pentagon's concerns about the overthrow of Saddam Hussein. We were repeatedly told the war would be over very quickly, a matter of weeks, and that the Iraqis would pay for the reconstruction of their country through oil revenues. We were also told we would be welcomed with open arms by the entire Iraqi community.
Cheney continues to say he knows where the wmds are yet refuses to reveal their locations. Perhaps he should be waterboarded, since it's not torture, to reveal that information.
Still waiting on their indictments.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Even if 100% true making a choice to override military commanders is not an indictable offense (even if wrong in the end). Hell that's actually the exact reason why we have civilians in charge (to override commanders for non military reasons). If that statement is correctly attributed to him that's a shame on him. It is just a stupid statement.
#FEELTHEBERN!
So...he's holding onto them so that she gets into office, and the expects that the congress (which will not change hands) will not impeach (house) and convict (senate) with the actual emails/facts on the table? But he's announcing them now rather than a surprise reveal on January 2x? And why does he not think that Trump will win the White House, and what will his course of action be if he does? I don't get his motives here, except as some play for himself in some twisted logic game?
On the subject of the actual indictment...
the leaked emails show that she overrode the Pentagon's reluctance to overthrow sovereign Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, and that "they predicted the post-war outcome would be what it is, which is ISIS taking over the country."
Wait...so it's now illegal for the SoS to influence international policy (not illegal, afaik)? Or is it just that she was (presumably) wrong in pushing to remove Gaddafi because of the power vacuum it created (stupid, perhaps, but not illegal)? Or is it that emails on her server reveal the discussions about past operations within the government (again, unless classified, not illegal)?
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
We are all left-wing here - it's vitally important for the continued existence of all our jobs that a Democrat is elected President. Otherwise the expansion of bureaucracy and regulation might cease, and we would all have to start generating wealth, instead of living off other people's tax dollars.
So don't knock Hillary. Knock Trump instead.
If he has the information then FUCKING RELEASE IT NOW so they can swap to a viable alternative. otherwise if he waits the US end up with Trump as president and that will be worse than anything that cow could possibly come up. Mind you nothing stated in the summary here appears to be a reason for indictment, overriding the miltary is something they are supposed to do when they think it appropriate, being wrong or stupid is not a crime (otherwise trump would have been locked up decades ago).
"the FBI can push for concessions from the new Clinton government in exchange for its lack of indictment."....?
We need him trump is to extreme.
He thinks her criminality will actually matter. That's so charming.
The narrative's already written, folks. (And the script has been WELL paid for.)
I heard an interview on NPR the other day about the triviality of the 'secret' emails found to have gone through her server. It seems to have been entirely forgotten that this is WHAT HER PEOPLE RELEASED - ie long after they'd scrubbed it clean of meaningful communications.
That some were left of 'somewhat' secret nature is due to incompetence or more likely a deliberate effort to leave "something to be found".
Nixon would have been impeached over 18.5 minutes of missing tape. Hilary with roll to the presidency despite deliberately criminal behavior.
-Styopa
"[Assange] doesn't think it will happen under Attorney General Loretta Lynch. "
Obama will not do anything to damage Hillary's chances of winning the election but there will be a limit to how much of a corrupt jackass Obama is willing to make himself look like to help here out. We already know, based on evidence released publicly, that Hillary is guilty and a crazy liar, so if Obama's justice department does not indict he goes down in history as the U.S. President more corrupt than Nixon.
A prediction: Obama has Lynch slow-walk the decision to indict until after Hillary is elected in November 2016, they they indict her. After Hillary takes office in January 2017, she pardons herself.
Ceci n'est pas une signature.
US Politics is a complete and total disaster, the US Govt is a mob of evil clowns, and Washington DC is their circus
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Specifically, Assange revealed the leaked emails show that she overrode the Pentagon's reluctance to overthrow sovereign Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi in 2011, and that "they predicted the post-war outcome would be what it is, which is ISIS taking over the country."
Points here:
Peoples were literally being marked
Peoples, fishes, deers, sheeps, and bisons -- what do they all have in common? They're all considered specieses.
"enough new information about Hillary Clinton to indict her."
The US "justice" system is notorious for the ability to indict -- ie: initiate prosecution -- based on virtually no evidence at all. It is a common expression that "you can indict a ham sandwich". Enough information to indict is a very low bar indeed, and may in fact involve no information whatsoever.
Nice of Assange to wait until Clinton has the nomination sewn up. Bernie might have been able to use this. Guess Julian must be a Trump supporter...
This is not news.
Besides, evidence that is the product of a criminal act is inadmissible anyway. Anything Wikileaks releases will be inadmissible, and it will taint any evidence the FBI has already collected.
This is an effort to get her off on admissibility, not get her in prison.
Isn't RT just a Russian propaganda rag, like Pravda? The equivalent of the UK's Daily Mail.
This should not be on the front page, at least not the RT link. As for the content, well, it should be main-page when and if such documents are leaked – not before.
Slashdot is for discussion of news, not speculation of what might be released, and what it might mean. Just wait for the wikileaks release, and then main-page it.
And hearing the Pentagon advising against a war... That does not happen very often.
Americans are too busy watching the Kardashians to be bothered about the direction the country is headed.
If he released this dump of "evidence" in time it would lead to Sanders winning the democratic endorsement. All the polling data we've ever seen has shown Sanders very easily defeating Drumpf in a general election.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
How do you square saying "...about 32,000 emails from Clinton's private server have been leaked by Wikileaks." when those emails were obtained from consented-to releases as the result of a FOIA request? That's not "leaking". That's "publishing publicly available information".
E-mails are just text files, and can be easily forged. Anyone who's ever gotten a spam message from themselves should realize this.
Collecting forensics evidence from a hard drive so that it's admissible in courts is not the same as just dumping files. Last I knew, you have to preserve the data in the original format, and provide access to the defense.
Unless these E-mails are signed by a private key known to be Clinton's, I don't really see how they're going to be admissible.
Speaking as a Brit I find it a total disgrace that someone like Hillary Clinton is even in the running to be the president of the USA.
Sums up the total and utter corruption of US politics to me (and the rest of the world)
I guess he resents being stuck in the embassy over sex crimes.
The Real culprit is the USAian Lying Mainstream media thought control service. They are the ones who are pushing these candidates that any sane rational (not brain washed person) would reject out of hand. But the thing is we are brain washed. We have a choice of a totally corrupt incompetent candidate fighting against a person of no discernible values who will make promises no sane person believes. I will leave it to you to decide which is which. But we are going to be voting for them because the media says these are our presidential choices.
Stop attacking the symptoms and not the causes. Rather than saying trump | Hillary is evil. Say the CNN and Fox are evil. Turn off you TV and social media and move to a farm in Arizona or Vermont.
It's well passed time to shit or get off the pot on Clinton's emails.
It was Europe that wanted the invasion. Hillary backed the wrong pony. And massage thinks that is indictable? He needs to show that she did that for personal gain. Or that she lied to make for personal gains. While I opposed Libya's invasion, the fact that she backed it is not a criminal act.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
First Woman President? Big deal. First pre-indicted President.
Not like she hasn't already built a throne of children's skulls, and a platform of war crimes, on from which to rule.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
No, the Daily Mail has more journalistic integrity than RT.
Dumped munitions or expired munitions that would have been more dangerous to the crews loading them than their intended targets?
Ass or Angel?
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
I'll believe it when I see it.
Hillary and Billary: President and Former president and now First Lady of the white house. Because we just got through whitewashing both it and the candidates to get the brown out.
Snopes says not true, to at least most of those: FALSE: Clinton Body Count.
He thinks her criminality will actually matter. That's so charming.
It matters as much as Petraeus' (compared with Snowden's).
That seemed like an embarassment to me, especially with MI5/6 doing the coverup until they were all dead in exchange for political favors.
But maybe that is less bad than our forms of political corruption.
If this is a true story, can't we have a link to a better source than RT, which is known to push conspiracy theories? In any event, if this story is true, I get the distinct impression that Assange doesn't have a clear idea of what U.S. laws actually prohibit.
I don't really care how much illegal stuff Hillary has done
Trump is infinitely worse. Julian, please be a gentleman and at least wait until Hillary has been sworn in so Castro or Booker or whomever the running mate is can slide into office.
The state department has said that her mail server was never authorized and would not have been permitted had she asked:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/...
She disregarded the Freedom of Information Act by keeping her official State Department communications on her server and therefore unavailable for retrieval and archiving as per FOIA.
That's illegal - she broke the law simply by operating her own server.
Security and the hacking of her server is irrelevant. Clinton stripping classified headers off of documents is irrelevant. Those charges, if proven, will simply add to her punishment (if there is any at all).
In a just world, she would have already been convicted in a court of law. What we know she did, by her own admission, should be enough for criminal prosecution and should disqualify her from the presidency.
"The emails were made available in the form of thousands of PDFs by the US State Department as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request.
Welp, she'll just have to lock all those "hacker" k1dz up when she's president, won't she?
Why is it that non-lawyers insist on pretending to know the law.
I strongly suspect the server broke several laws about regulation and handling of classified information. I think this based on what I know about handling of classified information from my military service. I don't KNOW anything because I don't have access to anything beyond published reports.
Neither does anyone else commenting here so why fight about it.
I can't say I agree with that assertion. When working for the State I was told that if I link my phone / tablet / whatever to my state given email address, which is part of the public record, then they have the right to access the device as well.
none of it was per se illegal
Copy-pasted from here:
Title 18 of the U.S. Code of the Espionage Act in sections 793, 798 and 1001
Section 793 applies to anyone who has been “entrusted” with information relating to the national defense. The law applies to a federal official who “through gross negligence permits” information “to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, to be lost, stolen, abstracted or destroyed.”
Section 798 applies to any government official who “knowingly and willfully communicates” information “to an unauthorized person.” Section 1001 addresses giving “false statements.”
Clinton and her aides also could be charged under section 1924, which is a misdemeanor. This was the April, 2015, charge former CIA Director David Petraeus negotiated with prosecutors for sharing classified information with a mistress who also served as his biographer.
The web site Truth or Fiction says not true.
Clinton's email controversy came to light in 2013 after a hacker named Guccifer breached her personal server.
a) Guccifer exposed a handful of Clinton's emails by breaking into the email account of one of her friends and leaking the ones she sent him.
b) The email controversy came to light because the Republicans trying to lynch her for Benghazi realized she sent all her emails through the private server.
c) Guccifer's "hacking" involves guessing password reset questions and bragging about everything he finds. To think he not only "breached her personal server" but then kept his mouth shut about it and never dumped a thing is absurd.
This is a damn tech site, certainly people can show some basic critical thinking skills and not just repeat the wild-ass claims of every wannabe hacker looking for notoriety.
I stole this Sig
What you are seeing is a body double.
Similar to Saddam Hussein abroad and Ari Fleischer in America. It's a huge lie.
Notice the facial expressions on Bill and their daughter lately around Hillary-double? They can't act.
Not just that, but RT is a mouthpiece for the Kremlin, and Putin and Trump seem relatively friendly.
I would be far from shocked if RT didn't have a directive to try and help Trump's campaign.
I stole this Sig
You act like those "rags" are unique, most news sources these days are pawns of their parent government. Its pretty comical sometimes (or tragic depending your mood), you see a story on one news site and in roughly the same time frame you see it again and again with only cosmetic changes. A lot of "news" these days, especially at the national level is a government/law enforcement press release slightly tweaked from paper to paper with only a few changes/commentary.
So Julian Assange, a citizen of - well who cares - not the US, is such an expert on US law and high-level politics and intrigue that he knows he has information capable of indicting an ex high-level diplomat? Wow, not even many US citizens would know if the information was capable of doing that. Assange is apparently very well informed on the laws, legal proceedings, precedent, etc. from the US. What a guy. Apparently one potential criminal (Assange - who won't answer charges) knows another potential criminal?
One of the biggest facts that right-wingers AVOID is that the State Department server was NO MORE SECURE than a commercial/private server, and in fact the State Dept. server was (eventually) hacked.
One could argue that such messages should have been sent over the separate secure system (not email), but that's a DIFFERENT ISSUE than whether the "regular" office email system was more secure or not than her personal server.
They were BOTH Chevy's, not Lexuses.
Table-ized A.I.
... just as soon as I fabricate it.
Let's all rush to Google® and look up the definitions of "provenance," and the concept of, "chain of custody."
In court, defendants have a right to face their accusers.
Wikileaks promises that it will not reveal its sources.
We're all nerds here and some of you, like me, have hand-crafted emails that look perfectly real, including the header information.
Great prank material, but certainly not admissible in court.
NOTE: My interest is matters of digital law; not politics.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
I'm a Democrat, and I think there's been "enough evidence" available to indict her for quite some time.
Seriously, what do they need, HD video of her snickering, "They'll never find these classified emails now, ha ha ha!" while she presses the Delete key again and again?
If you or I had done this we'd already be serving time in a Federal prison.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
The Guccifer email breach was reported by Fox News and never verified to be true. I'm sure this convicted hacker is telling the truth though. Couldn't possibly just be stirring the pot and trying make his name known.
If ever there was an election to vote for a third party, it is this one. Keep an eye on Gary Johnson from the Libertarian party. While I don't agree with his stance on every issue, he seems really solid. Which I can't even fathom saying for anyone else in the running. Want to upset the current system? Don't let either side win. Maybe they will finally wake up.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
Slashdot now posts Kremlin "news"? The wikileaks article is nowhere nearly as specific as RT, mainly known for having English language newscasters quit on air live over being ordered to report false stories. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Gently reply
The only reasonable scenario would be to find a third alternative, but good luck getting enough people to agree on one.
Governor Gary Johnson is the only candidate in this election with experience in the executive branch.
People knew that Adolf Hitler was a violent demagogue (from his Hitler-Ludendorff-Putsch in 1923), but they absolutely refused to vote for the alternatives because they thought they had done something worse.
Godwin's Law strike 1
There are plenty more strikes against Trump where that came from. See Adam Tod Brown's article "5 Ways Donald Trump Perfectly Mirrors Hitler's Rise To Power".
It's only an 'Imperial Presidency' when the party I hate does it.
I can bitch about R (and I bitched about W plenty) and D (so much to bitch about with Obama) all I want.
Well, I for one welcome our new over-combing overlords.
Never was that meme more apt... :-)
https://i.imgflip.com/nsmwr.jpg
Politics and war are both built on a very firm foundation of pure deception.
Assange is a serious self-publicist. He may well have this information, but him saying so isn't going to convince me.
Just release the sodding data.
Why does he care about Hilary so much all of a sudden.
Of course, that's why we have a civilian government. The Pentagon doesn't have the final say, the POTUS has the final say, as Commander-In-Chief, and relies on advice from his/her advisers one of which would be the SoS. Nothing here to prosecute, just some has-been news item trolling for another 15 minutes of fame because he's tired of Ecuadorean food.
Guccifer claimed he breached her server, there's no actual evidence of it. The Clinton server came to light after he breached the AOL and Yahoo accounts of people who she had been corresponding with by guessing weak security questions. He has no competence in attacking servers otherwise.
Tastycrats, Fingerlicans... NO DAMN DIFFERENCE. Both corporate whores, lock stock and barrelhead. Look behind the red meat and dog whistle curtains and see the same fake wizard blowing CEOs.
Could have sworn they were in Syria...
That's how it seems to me. On the other hand, people involved in politics have FAR more social contacts than others.
So if... ...is giving the FBI more power vis-a-vis the President a good idea? Given what they obviously want, that could be bad news for TOR and encryption law generally.
He does think "the FBI can push for concessions from the new Clinton government in exchange for its lack of indictment."
Leaking material evidence that would indict someone is honorable, sure, but this seems like it's throwing more chaos into the situation, with very unclear outcomes. And in a year where a megalomaniac barking yam is doing donuts all over the GOPs lawn and driving his racist bus tantalizingly close to actual power, is more chaos really a good idea? Asking for a friend. :>(
You might ask which ideal of America while you're at it.
The ideal of an America governed by a constitution that actually means what it meant when it was written, to be amended as needed? The ideal of an America where the constitution means only what it is convenient for it to mean today (the "living document" approach) where amendment is unworthy of the energy it would take and instead, the Supreme Court graciously redefines it on a moment-to-moment basis? The ideal of an America where everyone is (somehow, don't ask me how... genetics isn't that far along yet) is "created equal"? The ideal of a Christian America? The ideal of an America where personal liberty and informed, consensual choice form the basis for civilized behavior and law? The ideal of an America where "law and order" do, and should, reign supreme in a cascade from legislator to enforcement to retribution? The ideal of an America where immigrants are unwanted interlopers? The ideal of an America where immigrants are the foundation of highly desired diversity in thinking, action and resources? The ideal of an America where only its position in a global context mean anything good? The idea of an America where everyone is either rich, or a "temporarily disenfranchised millionaire"? Etc., etc., etc. I really could go on for a while. :)
This is part (and only part) of our problem. Depending on just whose Kool-aid one decides to consume, pretty much everyone thinks they believe in "the" ideal of America, with very few even giving lip service to the fact that there are many such ideals. It makes for chaotic and spectacularly obtuse public discourse, and the only surprise I experience in that is that anyone with two wet brain cells to run together might be surprised by this end result.
As for patriotism... a large number of people who I have discussed the matter with seem to be coming from a definite jingoist point of view, as opposed to a patriotic point of view. Most of them clearly think jingoism is patriotism. I find it appalling, personally, but it's just another "ideal of America" that has sunk it's roots in like an aggressive fungal infection.
Then there is the fact that the rich and powerful almost entirely control our government. Without getting into an argument about when that became actual fact, I can confidently assert that as of now, it is well entrenched and no way to undo it has made itself obvious to the segment of the population that has actually noticed what has happened.
I not only suspect chaos, I expect it. And what do you know, everywhere I look -- there it is. :/
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Still waiting... Since 2012 the Republican House of Representatives have held 5 Select Committees on Benghazzi to investigate Hillary and her emails. They don't need the DoJ to indict someone for lying to Congress or contempt of Congress. They can fine people, put people in jail, etc.[^1] They could also appoint a Special Prosecutor[^2] at the DoJ, going around Loretta Lynch entirely. It's been done -- plenty of historical precedent. But they haven't. They would have if there were any substance to the allegations. But the emails are total $#!7 and the whole drama just an attempt to derail her campaign, because she beat Cruz, Kasich and Trump in all the polling they did.
Don't get me wrong -- I don't like the 6!7# any more than I like Trump. Hope they both go to jail...along with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell, Paulson, Wolfowitz, Kissinger, etc., etc. But I'm not holding my breath. I'm planning on moving to East Asia and living as a digital nomad, no matter who successfully rigs this election. But the email controversy is just another fake scandal that shows the kind of systematic dysfunction that's tearing the US apart and driving me out.
[^1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress#Partial_list_of_those_held_in_contempt_since_1975
[^2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_prosecutor
Hillary Clinton won't be indicted, no matter what the law says and no matter what she's done. Several lawyers in the DoJ have said they simply don't see any criminal behavior in the evidence. They won't ever, either. The investigation will be "expanded in scope" and "extended" to drag it out past November elections. If Hillary loses, Obama will grant her a blanket pardon, as Ford granted one to Nixon. If she wins, the investigation will continue to expand and extend until she's sworn in, then she'll get to do whatever she wants with the evidence. In either case, I'm sure the DoJ (not necessarily the FBI, but lawyers) will ensure that the evidence will be destroyed.
Bill never said anything in an hour's speech worth a quarter much less a quarter of a million dollars. That money was paid for access to key State Department information they gave out through that server. Everybody in the world has seen those emails except American citizens.
Please, if you're going to do it, just do it already, while we still have another candidate in the race. Sandbagging just means the (D) ticket is dead in the water.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Implying that a prominent Democrat could ever be charged with a crime in the first place....
Ecuador - soon to find its common footing with US interests and mutual extradition treaties.
Maybe, but it's Assange claiming to have this data, and a Russian propaganda rag covering it. At the very least this a story about a claim Julian Assange is making that will turn out to be true or false.
That Guccifer guy was just blowing smoke - he got some emails from a recipient's outside account, not from Clinton's server. If Assange thinks these are so incriminating, they should be released ASAP.
Have you read my blog lately?
Keep 'em coming, Julian.
Does Trump have a uniformed private army patrolling the streets and violently suppressing Democrat aligned organizations?
Replace "a uniformed" with "an uninformed" and the answer becomes yes. See "Donald Trump Encourages Violence At His Rallies. His Fans Are Listening." by Sam Stein and Dana Liebelson.
Julie A was crying about how Google is all-in for Hillary and now this? And nothing about Trump, who surely has a light year long trail of illicit activities that still haven't been reported? Methinks he's on the Donald's payroll.
Sure they will.
I suppose Assange conveniently has nothing on Trump at all.
There's plenty of indictable info in the public eye already in terms of illegal handling of classified materials.
Supposedly, this new batch of wikileaks emails is from Russian hackers.
So, here's hoping that it focuses on the pay-to-play government for profit that the Clintons have been running w/ their foundation.
well as far as that does not stop her from winning the Presidential election.
Serena Williams Hot!! as she steps out In a White Crop Top and black Tight Leather Jeans|CREEBHILLS'
It's perfectly acceptable to send unclassified messages over SIPRNet or JWICS. There is a maximum level of classification authorized for every network; you can go lower, but you can't go higher.
Things do get overclassified sometimes, but not for the bogus reason you gave.
Regarding the notorious private server, even messages marked C (Confidential) were not authorized to be there.
That that is is that that that that is not is not.
I like what Wikileaks did, but Asange is a petulant jerk. One would want him to be a more visionary person, but he's just a small-minded revenge doll.
Do yourself, and the world, a favor: publish the Hillary-damning data ASAP - BEFORE the Democratic National Convention, with hopes that Hillary will not get selected as a candidate for president, so that we can get a far better leader into office (perhaps Bernie?!).
Self-importance and self-indulgence is the root of ALL evil.
No one wants to talk about the real problem. 6+ billion stolen through an NYSE listed company to Israel and to Hillary, to her campaign.
The evil in this world knows about it. They see it. And they match it with their own special brand of yin yang evil.
Now its clear to everyone, OBAMA and HILLARY created the power path for ISIS. ISIS knows about the stealing, and very likely has pathways of their own to "get the money" Hillary style.....
America needs to wake up. And grow up. Enough of this.