Julian Assange: the secret world of the election

Julian Assange: "Hillary Made The FBI Look Weak, And Now They're Out For Payback"

Zero Hedge,

5 November, 2016

In an extended, 25 minute interview with Australia's John Pilger, posted now in its entirety on RT, Julian Assange said Hillary Clinton sparked an FBI backlash, which is now surfacing, when she stonewalled the Feds, who were trying to investigate her private server.

When asked by John Pilger about the significance of the FBI's intervention in this last week of the US election campaign in the case against Hillary Clinton, Assange responds that “If you go to the history of the FBI, it has become effectively America's political police. And the FBI demonstrated with taking down the former head of the CIA over classified information given to his mistress [that] almost no one was untouchable. The FBI is always trying to demonstrate that, "No one can resist us." But Hillary Clinton very conspicuously resisted the FBI's investigation. So, there is anger within the FBI because it made the FBI look weak.”

FBI director Comey threw the presidential race, which had threatened to become a Clinton procession last week, into chaos when he claimed that the agency had potentially obtained new information pertaining to Clinton’s use of a personal email server, set up shortly after she became Secretary of State in 2009, when they obtained the laptop of Anthony Weiner, the ex-husband of close Clinton aide Huma Abedin. Weiner was being investigated for an unrelated sexting offense.

Clinton has categorically denied mishandling classified information by using a vulnerable personal email address for State Department business. Fox News has alleged that the FBI has obtained new evidence from Weiner’s computer that shows that Clinton was “very likely hacked.”

When discussing the hacked Hillary emails, Assange, whose WikiLeaks website has over the last ten months released three sizable batches of emails, relating to Clinton herself, the Democratic National Committee, and her campaign manager John Podesta, said the FBI has cause to investigate Clinton. “There's a thread that runs through all of these emails. There is quite a lot of "pay-to-play," as they call it – taking… giving access in exchange for money for many individual states, individuals and corporations. Combined with the cover-up of Hillary Clinton's emails while she was Secretary of State this has led to an environment where the pressure on the FBI [to investigate] increases,” Assange said.

Regardless of whether Clinton ever faces charges, Assange asserted that Clinton was beholden to corporate and political entities that have been hidden from the electorate during the race to the White House.

“She's this centralizing cog, so that you've got a lot of different gears in operation from the big banks like Goldman Sachs, and major elements of Wall Street, and intelligence, and people in the State Department, and the Saudis, and so on. She's is the, if you like, the centralizer that interconnects all these different cogs. She's smooth central representation of all that, and all that is more or less what is in power now in the United States,” stated Assange, who said that the leaked emails presented a clear picture of this nexus of influences.

Assange also insisted that despite his image, projecting hope and change, President Barack Obama became “very close to banking interests” during his own initial White House campaign in 2008. “In fact, one of the most significant Podesta emails that we released was about how the Obama cabinet was formed – and half the [first] Obama cabinet was basically nominated by a representative from Citibank. It is quite amazing,” Assange said.

Assange also stated that as a result of too many vested "establishment interests", Trump won't be allowed to win.

Libya Is Hillary Clinton's War

According to Assange, Clinton’s emails reveal a plan, hatched months before the West’s intervention in Libya in March 2011, to make it the signature conflict of her tenure as secretary of state, and a podium from which to realize her presidential dreams.

"Libya more than anyone else's war was Hillary Clinton's war. Barack Obama initially opposed it. Who was the person who was championing it? Hillary Clinton. That's documented throughout her emails,” Assange said.

“There's more than 1,700 emails out of the 33,000 of Hillary Clinton's emails we published just about Libya. It's not about that Libya has cheap oil. She perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan state something that she would use to run in the general election for president. So late 2011, there's an internal document called the "Libya Tick Tock" that is produced for Hillary Clinton, and it's all the... it's a chronological description of how Hillary Clinton was the central figure in the destruction of the Libyan state.”

But the scheme not only failed on a personal level, after Clinton was largely blamed for allowing a jihadist ransacking of a US compound in Benghazi in 2012, but also continues to haunt the country, which remains in a state of civil war, and Europe.

“As a result, there [have been] around 40,000 deaths within Libya. Jihadists moved in, ISIS moved in. That led to the European refugee and migrant crisis, because not only did you have people fleeing Libya, people then fleeing Syria, destabilization of other African countries as a result of arms flows,” said Assange.

Should Hillary win on Tuesday, and should the neo-cons in Washington finally get their day in the sun with the "pacifist" Obama gone, as the WaPo recently reported, we - and many others - expect more "Hillary wars" in America's future.

"NATO and the United States should change their policy because the time when they dictate their conditions to the world has passed," Ahmadinejad said in a speech in Dushanbe, capital of the Central Asian republic of Tajikistan

Julian Assange says Libya “not about cheap oil.” Libya’s destruction part of a plan to help Hillary Clinton become president

the Duran,

5 November, 2016

Libya was not about that cheap oil, but about getting Hillary Clinton into the White House.

For Julian Assange, Hillary Clinton’s emails point to an obsession with power at all costs, even if it means destroying entire nations and killing tens of thousands of innocent civilians.

The Wikileaks “Libya Tick Tock” document bullet points Hillary Clinton’s illegal and destructive war in Libya. It was, according to Assange, part of a masterplan formulated months before the NATO bombings in March 2011..much like the Iraqi invasion was also planed months (and years) prior to the actual military invasion.

The goal was to make it the cornerstone conflict of Hillary Clinton’s tenure as US Secretary of State, for which she could parlay into a presidential victory.

‘Libya was Hillary’s war’ begins at the 10 minute mark…

Via Julian Assange…

“Libya more that anyone else’s war was Hillary Clinton’s war. Barack Obama initially opposed it.Who was the person who was championing it? Hillary Clinton. That’s documented throughout her emails.”

“There’s more than 1,700 emails out of the 33,000 of Hillary Clinton’s emails we published just about Libya. It’s not about that Libya has cheap oil. She perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan state something that she would use to run in the general election for president. So late 2011, there’s an internal document called the “Libya Tick Tock” that is produced for Hillary Clinton, and it’s all the…it’s a chronological description of how Hillary Clinton was the central figure in the destruction of the Libyan state.”

“As a result, there [have been] around 40,000 deaths within Libya. Jihadists moved in, ISIS moved in. That led to the European refugee and migrant crisis, because not only did you have people fleeing Libya, people then fleeing Syria, destabilization of other African countries as a result of arms flows.”

RT notes…

But the scheme not only failed on a personal level, after Clinton was largely blamed for allowing a jihadist ransacking of a US compound in Benghazi in 2012, but also continues to haunt the country, which remains in a state of civil war, and Europe.

When the “Libya Tick Tock” email was released, The Duran noted…

If Libya is the central showcase of Hillary’s superior ability to lead, and proof of her exceptional temperament and decision making prowess, than God help us all if she ends up in the Oval Office.

You can download the original “Libya Tick Tock” PDF file here, or go to Wikileaks to access the emails sent.

We have taken the time to place the entire “Libya Tick Tock” thread in plain text for your viewing below, and have bolded various parts which we found particularly interesting.

---

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05788648 Date: 10/30/2015

RELEASE IN PART
B5,B6

From: •H <hrod17@clintonemail.com >
Sent: Saturday, September 3, 2011 10:28 PM
To: Oscar Flores
Subject: Fw: tick tock on libya

PIs print for me.

From: Mills, Cheryl D [mailto:MiIIsCD@state.gov]
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 12:37 PM

To: H
Subject: FW: tick tock on libya

Here is Draft

From: Jake Sullivan [mailtc
Sent: Sunday, August 21, 2011 7:40 PM

To: Mills, Cheryl D; Nuland, Victoria
Subject: tick tock on libya

this is basically off the top of my head, with a few consultations of my notes. but it shows S’ leadership/ownership/stewardship of this country’s libya policy from start to finish. let me know what you think. toria, who else might be able to add to this?

Secretary Clinton’s leadership on Libya

HRC has been a critical voice on Libya in administration deliberations, at NATO, and in contact group meetings — as well as the public face of the U.S. effort in Libya. She was instrumental in securing the authorization, building the coalition, and tightening the noose around Qadhafi and his regime.

February 25 — HRC announces the suspension of operations of the Libyan embassy in Washington.

February 26 — HRC directs efforts to evacuate all U.S. embassy personnel from Tripoli and orders the closing of the embassy.

February 26 — HRC made a series of calls to her counterparts to help secure passage of UNSC 1970, which imposes sanctions on Gaddafi and his family and refers Qadhafi and his cronies to the ICC

February 28 — HRC travels to Geneva, Switzerland for consultations with European partners on Libya. She gives a major address in which she says: “Colonel Qadhafi and those around him must be held accountable for these acts, which violate international legal obligations and common decency. Through their actions, they have lost the legitimacy to govern. And the people of Libya have made themselves clear: It is time for Qadhafi to go — now, without further violence or delay.” She also works to secure the suspension of Libya from membership in the Human Rights Council.

Early March — HRC appoints Special Envoy Chris Stevens to be the U.S. representative to Benghazi

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05788648 Date: 10/30/2015

March 14 — HRC travels to Paris for the G8 foreign minister’s meeting. She meets with TNC representative Jibriland consults with her colleagues on further UN Security Council action. She notes that a no-fly zone will not be adequate.

March 14-16 — HRC participates in a series of high-level video- and teleconferences with She is a leading voice for strong UNSC action and a NATO civilian protection mission.

March 17 — HRC secures Russian abstention and Portuguese and African support for UNSC 1973, ensuring that it passes. 1973 authorizes a no-fly zone over Libya and “all necessary measures” – code for military action – to protect civilians against Gaddafi’s army.

March 24 — HRC engages with allies and secures the transition of command and control of the civilian protection mission to NATO. She announces the transition in a statement.

March 18-30— HRC engages with UAE, Qatar, and Jordan to seek their participation in coalition operations. Over the course of several days, all three devote aircraft to the mission.

March 19 — HRC travels to Paris to meet with European and Arab leaders to prepare for military action to protect civilians. That night, the first U.S. air strikes halt the advance of Gaddafi’s forces on Benghazi and target Libya’s air defenses:

March 29 — HRC travels to London for a conference on Libya, where she is a driving force behind the creation of a Contact Group comprising 20-plus countries to coordinate efforts to protect civilians and plan for a post- Qadhafi Libya. She is instrumental in setting up a rotating chair system to ensure regional buy-in.

April 14 — HRC travels to Berlin for NATO meetings. She is the driving force behind NATO adopting a communiqué that calls for Qadhafi’s departure as a political objective, and lays out three clear military objectives: end of attacks and threat of attacks on civilians; the removal of Qadhafi forces from cities they forcibly entered; and the unfettered provision of humanitarian access.

May 5 — HRC travels to Rome for a Contact Group meeting. The Contact Group establishes a coordination system and a temporary financial mechanism to funnel money to the TNC.

June 8 — HRC travels to Abu Dhabi for another Contact Group meeting and holds a series of intense discussions with rebel leaders.

June 12 — HRC travels to Addis for consultations and a speech before the African Union, pressing the case for a democratic transition in Libya.

July 15 — HRC travels to Istanbul and announces that the U.S. recognizes the TNC as the legitimate government of Libya. She also secures recognition from the other members of the Contact Group.

Late June — HRC meets with House Democrats and Senate Republicans to persuade them not to de-fund the Libya operation.

July 16 — HRC sends Feltman, Cretz, and Chollet to Tunis to meet with Qadhafi envoys “to deliver a clear and firm message that the only way to move forward, is for Qadhafi to step down”.

Early August — HRC works to construct a $1.5 billion assets package to be approved by the Security Council and sent to the TNC. That package is working through its last hurdles.

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05788648 Date: 10/30/2015

Early August — After military chief Abdel Fattah Younes is killed, S sends a personal message to TNC head Jalil to press for a responsible investigation and a careful and inclusive approach to creating a new executive council.

Early August — HRC secures written pledges from the TNC to an inclusive, pluralistic democratic transition. She continues to consult with European and Arab colleagues on the evolving situation.

Hillary Accepted Qatar Money Without Notifying Government, While She Was Head Of State Dept

Zero Hedge,

5 November, 2016

Three weeks ago, when we first reported that Qatar had offered to pay the Clinton Foundation $1 million after a hacked Podesta email disclosed that the ambassador of Qatar “Would like to see WJC [William Jefferson Clinton] ‘for five minutes’ in NYC, to present $1 million check that Qatar promised for WJC’s birthday in 2011”, we said that in this particular case, the Clinton Foundation may also be in violation of State Department ethics codes.

SecState Hillary Clinton, left, meets the Prime Minister of Qatar 
Sheik Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabor Al Thani in 2010.

As we said in early October, while this has been seen by critics of the Clinton Foundation as yet another instance of influence pandering and "pay-to-play", this time there may actually be consequences for the Clinton Foundation: according to the State Department, the previously undisclosed donation suggests there may be an ethics violation by the foundation, even though the State of Qatar is shown on the foundation's website as having given at least that amount. There is no date listed for the donation.

Underscoring the potential flagrant abuse of ethical guidelines if the Qatar payment is confirmed, Hillary Clinton promised the U.S. government that while she served as secretary of state the foundation would not accept new funding from foreign governments without seeking clearance from the State Department's ethics office. The agreement was designed to dispel concerns that U.S. foreign policy could be swayed by donations to the foundation.

Of course, US foreign policy could be very easily swayed if Hillary accepted money and simply did not report it the receipt of such money.

However, and where things got awkward for Clinton, is that the State Department has said it cannot cite any instances of its ethics officials reviewing or approving new donations from foreign governments to the foundation while Clinton served as the country's top diplomat from 2009 until 2013, confirming the foundation was in clear breach of its ethics agreement over the not immaterial donation of $1 million from a foreign state, which as Hillary herself also disclosed in another hacked Podesta email, is the primary supporter of the Islamic State.

"You would need to ask the Foundation whether there were additional matters that it should have submitted for State Department review," the department said in a statement.

* * *

Fast forward to today when overnight Reuters reported that the Clinton Foundation has confirmed it accepted a $1 million gift from Qatar while Hillary Clinton was U.S. secretary of state without informing the State Department, even though she had vouched to let the agency review new or significantly increased support from foreign governments.

Clinton signed an ethics agreement governing her family's foundation in order to become secretary of state in 2009. The agreement was designed to increase transparency to avoid appearances that U.S. foreign policy could be swayed by wealthy donors. According to the agreement, if a new foreign government wished to donate or if an existing foreign-government donor, such as Qatar, wanted to "increase materially" its support of ongoing programs, Clinton promised that the State Department's ethics official would be notified and given a chance to raise any concerns.

Alas, it now appears that the agreement was nothing more than a piece of paper to Hillary Clinton, who violated its terms on at least one occasion, and potentially on .

Clinton Foundation officials last month declined to confirm the Qatar donation. In response to additional questions, a foundation spokesman, Brian Cookstra, this week said that it accepted the $1 million gift from Qatar, but this did not amount to a "material increase" in the Gulf country's support for the charity. Of course, only in the world of the Clintons is $1 million not a "material" increase. It is also a flat out lie. As we calculated in October, according to the Foundation's own website, Qatar gave anywhere between $1 million and $5 million, so in the best case scenario the donation would be a rather material 20% increase to Qatar's total. In the worst case, it would be 100%.

Cookstra declined to say whether Qatari officials received their requested meeting with Bill Clinton. Officials at Qatar's embassy in Washington and in its Council of Ministers in the capital, Doha, declined to discuss the donation.

But while Qatar was obvious engaged in pay to play, what makes this instance even worse, is that Hillary and Bill were confident enough they could simply get away with it by never telling the State Department of the new influence money. According to Reuters, the State Department has said it has no record of the foundation submitting the Qatar gift for review, and that it was incumbent on the foundation to notify the department about donations that needed attention.

"Oversights"

Foundation officials told Reuters last year that they did not always comply with central provisions of the agreement with President Barack Obama's administration, blaming oversights in some cases. At least eight other countries besides Qatar gave new or increased funding to the foundation, in most cases to fund its health project, without the State Department being informed, according to foundation and agency records. They include Algeria, which gave for the first time in 2010, and the United Kingdom, which nearly tripled its support for the foundation's health project to $11.2 million between 2009 and 2012.

Foundation officials have said some of those donations, including Algeria, were oversights and should have been flagged, while others, such as the UK increase, did not qualify as material increases.

The foundation has declined to describe what sort of increase in funding by a foreign government would have triggered notification of the State Department for review. Cookstra said the agreement was designed to "allow foreign funding for critical Clinton Foundation programs" to continue without disruption.

And the punchline: The State Department said it has no record of being asked by the foundation to review any increases in support by a foreign government.

This means that not only was there an "oversight" by Hillary to report the Qatari $1 million, she did not report the receipt of any foreign money funneling into the Clinton Foundation at all!

Asked whether Qatar was funding a specific program at the foundation, Cookstra fell back to the Foundation's usual response when challenged about conflicts of interest, and said the country supported the organization's "overall humanitarian work."

"Qatar continued supporting Clinton Foundation at equal or lower levels" compared with the country's pre-2009 support, he said. He declined to say if Qatar gave any money during the first three years of Clinton's four-year term at the State Department, or what its support before 2009 amounted to. In another email released by WikiLeaks, a former Clinton Foundation fundraiser said he raised more than $21 million in connection with Bill Clinton's 65th birthday in 2011. It was not immediately clear how much of this was not reported to the State Department due to "oversights."

* * *

To summarize, due to an "oversight", Hillary Clinton violated an ethics agreement she signed during her tenure as State Department, and "forgot" to notify the Department (which she headed) that her family's foundation had received at least $1 million from Qatar, a state which alongside Saudi Arabia, she admitted provides "financial and logistic support to ISIL"; and also appears to have "forgotten" to notify the State Department on all other occasions when foreign countries were paying the Clinton Foundation to purchase political influence and clout.

* * *

The Clinton Foundation has said it would no longer accept money from foreign governments if Clinton is elected president and would spin off those programs that are dependent on foreign governments. Because if Clinton is elected president, she would much rather move the "oversights" to the Oval Office, where all the influence that donations - such as Qatar's - have purchased over the year, can finally be exercised