PHILADELPHIA – The National Security Agency (NSA) has “all” of Hillary Clinton’s deleted emails and the FBI could gain access to them if they so desired, William Binney, a former highly placed NSA official, declared in a radio interview broadcast on Sunday.
Speaking as an analyst, Binney raised the possibility that the hack of the Democratic National Committee’s server was done not by Russia but by a disgruntled U.S. intelligence worker concerned about Clinton’s compromise of national security secrets via her personal email use.Binney was an architect of the NSA’s surveillance program. He became a famed whistleblower when he resigned on October 31, 2001, after spending more than 30 years with the agency.
He was speaking on this reporter’s Sunday radio program, “Aaron Klein Investigative Radio,” broadcast on New York’s AM 970 The Answer and Philadelphia’s NewsTalk 990 AM.
Binney referenced testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in March 2011 by then-FBI Director Robert S. Mueller in which Meuller spoke of the FBI’s ability to access various secretive databases “to track down known and suspected terrorists.”
Stated Binney: “Now what he (Mueller) is talking about is going into the NSA database, which is shown of course in the (Edward) Snowden material released, which shows a direct access into the NSA database by the FBI and the CIA. Which there is no oversight of by the way. So that means that NSA and a number of agencies in the U.S. government also have those emails.”
More at the Daily Caller
But the DNC is very unlikely to allow them to be released to the public becuase this is a election year
Interesting take on who hacked the DNC server. It kind of fits with Assange saying that if the source were to be known, it would cause embarrassment to the parties involved. Even Clapper cautioned against blaming the Russians. The odds are probably 50/50 as to the Russians or an inside job/employee of another government agency. Now that Clinton has officially blamed the Russians turning this into an international incident, the country’s credibility is on the line. If the Russians did it, it most certainly means they have all of her classified emails as well meaning grave damage has been done our national security thanks to her. If the Russians didn’t do it, she will have embarrassed the country on the international stage.
@another vet: Rest assured the Russians (and others) have them. And they didn’t need Trump to “suggest” it for them to have the idea, either.
@another vet: This statement could cause considerable turmoil among the Clinton Crime Network. The fear of a Trump presidency would likely be a death blow to the DNC. Attorney General Christe will likely prosecute the whole Obama administration who were involved in sending and deleting classified emails. If Obama requires the emails to be deleted, he will also be subject to prosecution.
@Randy: The stakes are definitely higher for Hillary than Trump. He loses it’ll be a blow to his ego (assuming he’s serious about the job in the first place) and he goes back to being a businessman and showman. She loses a blow to her ego,, no more political career, no more power, no more using the U.S. Government as a cash cow, and prosecution.
@another vet: Do you think Christe will send the Clinton gang to one of our federal prisons in Colorado. Maybe they can be housed with the terrorists housed here.
Wednesday, September 7, 2016: Only one new Benghazi email in 15,000 docs recovered from Clinton server, State Department says
@Greg: And, of course, the State Department, under this administration, has never been caught lying and the editing the tape of lying, has it? Always fully honest and transparent.
No, I think this requires independent verification.
Perhaps Vladimir Putin will have Russian intelligence operatives provide “missing” emails to Wikileaks a week or so before Election Day. He’s a real leader, Donald tells us. No doubt he’s far more trustworthy than our own State Department.
@Greg: Sadly, our State Department lies just like a communist dictator does. What does that tell you?
Are you trying to fertilize the “the election is rigged” scenario for Hillary? Desperate much?
I don’t know how anyone can talk about lies in connection with Hillary Clinton while ignoring the fact that Donald Trump’s entire campaign consists of nothing but lies. As someone has recently pointed out, the fault is largely that of the media, which allowed a false equivalency to go unchallenged. Trump is a reality television phenomenon. He bumped up audience ratings, so the media gave him the spotlight. They didn’t point out the obvious—that the guy is a totally unqualified bag of wind—imagining their audiences would figure that out for themselves.
So now Clinton and Trump are being held to entirely different standards of truthfulness, which the media allowed to become firmly established. Clinton is held to the traditional American standard that political leaders have most often been judged by. A single misstatement on her part is the occasion for a pile-on, and it remains in perpetuity.
The standard applied to Trump, on the other hand, is essentially that which would be applied to a late-night television product pitchman. Nobody expects or requires the truth of him. He can lie constantly, and change his lies on a daily basis, until his entire campaign becomes one enormous contradiction. They’ll still buy his miracle non-stick frying pan, because they saw someone run over it with a tractor or attack it with a jackhammer. It just looks so damn good, and they like the way he talks about it.
So, we’ve come to the point where republicans are ready to vote for a guy who openly expresses his admiration for Vladimir Putin. Vladimir Putin, an ally and arms supplier to Iran, and to Bashar al-Assad; Putin, who has invaded Ukrainian territory and annexed Crimea; who has launched cyber-attacks against the U.S. government, and who is almost certainly attempting to covertly change the course of a U.S. presidential election to put Trump in the White House. You know, PUTIN. The guy whose military aircraft are routinely engaging in irresponsible provocations that endanger the lives and safety of U.S. sailors and pilots, not to mention risking a potentially disastrous miscalculation that could quickly run out of control.
This isn’t some fantasy scenario. It’s the current state of affairs. A dishonest huckster spouting totally inconsistent and patently dangerous nonsense is being weighed against a well informed and experienced statesman whose positions are long standing, well known, and highly consistent. The only reason Trump is getting away with it is because the media isn’t dealing with the two candidates equally. They’re afraid to spotlight the obvious problems with Donald Trump.
There’s your media bias: They won’t show Donald Trump for what he is, because they’re more responsive to audience ratings than they’re responsible to the truth.
@Greg:
Got your latest round of deflective talking points, eh, Greg?
Your blathering about Trump’s admiration for Putin rings hollow when Hillary crony Podesta made tens of millions in shady business dealing’s with a Russian company, and the cornering of the uranium market Hillary’s state department gave another Russian company. Not to mention the thinly veiled bribe Slick Willie was paid to give a speech in Russia.
Hillary’s actions speak far louder than her lying words, particularly when she accepts tens of millions from the shariah-pushing Saudis, while bloviating about her alleged support for womens’ rights.
Tell us, why is it sexist to ask questions about Hillary’s questionable health – described as consistent with stage 2 Parkinson’s disease- when it was perfectly legitimate to cast repeated disparaging concerns about McCain’s health and age when he was running in 2008?
@Pete, #12:
Russia only “cornered the uranium market” inside the right-wing propaganda bubble. This particular scandal is a perfect example of a from-the-ground-up fabrication.
The entire annual U.S. uranium production only amounts to around 2 percent of the annual global total, and the U.S. company Russian investors bought interest in only accounts for around 10 percent of that 2 percent. So, the deal—which could be neither approved or disapproved by Hillary Clinton to begin with—got them control of only two one-thousandths of total annual global production. They “cornered” nothing.
Add to that the fact that the sale of the company didn’t include license to export uranium outside of the United States. They could only sell it here. The only apparent motive was the thought of making some profit, and the wisdom of that investment has turned out to be very questionable. The uranium market has pretty much taken a nose-dive. Supply exceeds demand. The Russian investors may have lost their shirts.