• Did Sen. Warner And Comey 'Collude' On Russia-gate?

    From Virus Guy@1:396/4 to All on Sun Jul 1 23:43:57 2018
    From: Virus Guy <Virus@Guy.C0M>

    By the way, what ever happened to the "ShadowBrokers" and Anonymous
    hacking group?


    Did Sen. Warner And Comey 'Collude' On Russia-gate?

    Mon, 07/02/2018

    Authored by Ray McGovern vi ConsortiumNews.com

    The U.S. was in talks for a deal with Julian Assange but then FBI
    Director James Comey ordered an end to negotiations after Assange
    offered to prove Russia was not involved in the DNC leak...

    An explosive report by investigative journalist John Solomon on the
    opinion page of Monday's edition of The Hill sheds a bright light on how
    Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) and then-FBI Director James Comey collaborated
    to prevent WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange from discussing “technical
    evidence ruling out certain parties [read Russia]” in the controversial
    leak of Democratic Party emails to WikiLeaks during the 2016 election.

    A deal that was being discussed last year between Assange and U.S.
    government officials would have given Assange “limited immunity” to
    allow him to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he has been
    exiled for six years. In exchange, Assange would agree to limit through redactions “some classified CIA information he might release in the
    future,” according to Solomon, who cited “interviews and a trove of
    internal DOJ documents turned over to Senate investigators.” Solomon
    even provided a copy of the draft immunity deal with Assange.

    But Comey's intervention to stop the negotiations with Assange
    ultimately ruined the deal, Solomon says, quoting “multiple sources.”
    With the prospective agreement thrown into serious doubt, Assange
    “unleashed a series of leaks that U.S. officials say damaged their cyber warfare capabilities for a long time to come.” These were the Vault 7 releases, which led then CIA Director Mike Pompeo to call WikiLeaks “a
    hostile intelligence service.”

    Solomon's report provides reasons why Official Washington has now put so
    much pressure on Ecuador to keep Assange incommunicado in its embassy in London.

    The report does not say what led Comey to intervene to ruin the talks
    with Assange. But it came after Assange had offered to “provide
    technical evidence and discussion regarding who did not engage in the
    DNC releases,” Solomon quotes WikiLeaks' intermediary with the
    government as saying. It would be a safe assumption that Assange was
    offering to prove that Russia was not WikiLeaks' source of the DNC emails.

    If that was the reason Comey and Warner ruined the talks, as is likely,
    it would reveal a cynical decision to put U.S. intelligence agents and
    highly sophisticated cybertools at risk, rather than allow Assange to at
    least attempt to prove that Russia was not behind the DNC leak.

    The greater risk to Warner and Comey apparently would have been if
    Assange provided evidence that Russia played no role in the 2016 leaks
    of DNC documents.

    Missteps and Stand Down

    In mid-February 2017, in a remarkable display of naiveté, Adam Waldman, Assange's pro bono attorney who acted as the intermediary in the talks,
    asked Warner if the Senate Intelligence Committee staff would like any
    contact with Assange to ask about Russia or other issues. Waldman was apparently oblivious to Sen. Warner's stoking of Russia-gate.

    Warner contacted Comey and, invoking his name, instructed Waldman to
    “stand down and end the discussions with Assange,” Waldman told Solomon.
    The “stand down” instruction “did happen,” according to another of
    Solomon's sources with good access to Warner. However, Waldman's
    counterpart attorney David Laufman, an accomplished federal prosecutor
    picked by the Justice Departent to work the government side of the
    CIA-Assange fledgling deal, told Waldman, “That's B.S. You're not
    standing down, and neither am I.”

    But the damage had been done. When word of the original stand-down
    order reached WikiLeaks, trust evaporated, putting an end to two months
    of what Waldman called “constructive, principled discussions that
    included the Department of Justice.”

    The two sides had come within inches of sealing the deal. Writing to
    Laufman on March 28, 2017, Waldman gave him Assange's offer to discuss
    “risk mitigation approaches relating to CIA documents in WikiLeaks'
    possession or control, such as the redaction of Agency personnel in
    hostile jurisdictions,” in return for “an acceptable immunity and safe
    passage agreement.”

    On March 31, 2017, though, WikiLeaks released the most damaging
    disclosure up to that point from what it called “Vault 7” — a treasure
    trove of CIA cybertools leaked from CIA files. This disclosure featured
    the tool “Marble Framework,” which enabled the CIA to hack into
    computers, disguise who hacked in, and falsely attribute the hack to
    someone else by leaving so-called tell-tale signs — like Cyrillic, for example. The CIA documents also showed that the “Marble” tool had been employed in 2016.

    Misfeasance or Malfeasance

    Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which includes among our members two former Technical Directors of the National Security Agency,
    has repeatedly called attention to its conclusion that the DNC emails
    were leaked — not “hacked” by Russia or anyone else (and, later, our
    suspicion that someone may have been playing Marbles, so to speak).

    In fact, VIPS and independent forensic investigators, have performed
    what former FBI Director Comey — at first inexplicably, now not so inexplicably — failed to do when the so-called “Russian hack” of the DNC
    was first reported. In July 2017 VIPS published its key findings with supporting data.

    Two month later, VIPS published the results of follow-up experiments
    conducted to test the conclusions reached in July.

    Why did then FBI Director Comey fail to insist on getting direct access
    to the DNC computers in order to follow best-practice forensics to
    discover who intruded into the DNC computers? (Recall, at the time Sen.
    John McCain and others were calling the “Russian hack” no less than an
    “act of war.”) A 7th grader can now figure that out.

    Asked on January 10, 2017 by Senate Intelligence Committee chair Richard
    Burr (R-NC) whether direct access to the servers and devices would have
    helped the FBI in their investigation, Comey replied: “Our forensics
    folks would always prefer to get access to the original device or server that's involved, so it's the best evidence.”

    At that point, Burr and Warner let Comey down easy. Hence, it should
    come as no surprise that, according to one of John Solomon's sources,
    Sen. Warner (who is co-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee)
    kept Sen. Burr apprised of his intervention into the negotiation with
    Assange, leading to its collapse.

    --- NewsGate v1.0 gamma 2
    * Origin: News Gate @ Net396 -Huntsville, AL - USA (1:396/4)