If Not Russia, Who Is Hillary*s *Foreign Entity*?

[Joe Cooper]

I've long said Hillary Clinton is insufficiently stupid to have believed
she could operate an unsecured home server without compromising the
security of any data transmitted through it or stored on it.

For just as long, it has been my contention that the server was the
faucet through which she pumped information she was selling (yes,
selling) to foreign entities, both public and private.

I.T. security protocols would've easily flagged attempts at intrusion if
targeted toward the State Department's secure servers, through which
then-secretary of state Clinton ought to have conducted business.
Likewise, the transfer or copying of said information from a secure
server is a detectable act with access being tightly controlled and
records kept of who looked at what and when.

"Convenience," the excuse proffered by Clinton for not following even the
most basic of security procedures, is, in a way, a rare instance of
Clinton telling the truth, just not in the way she would have us believe.

She claims that it was more convenient to utilize a home server, using
linked devices to conduct business. More truthfully, it was more
convenient to offload state secrets absent the prying eyes of government
I.T. security staff.

In his now infamous "exoneration presser," fired FBI director James Comey
admitted that Clinton's server was "likely compromised" by foreign
actors, but he also claimed there was "no evidence" of such an intrusion.
During disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok's recent testimony, we discovered
that this assertion was just another in a long line of brazen falsehoods
tumbling out of Comey's mouth.

To drink a shot of liquor every time Comey says something that might be
true might prove an entertaining parlor game for teetotalers. Beyond
stating his name, there's precious little else he might say that is not
suspect.

Rep. Louie Gohmert, (R-Texas) gave Strzok a moral shellacking over
Strzok's extramarital affair with his co-worker and co-conspirator, Lisa
Page, wondering aloud whether Strzok bore the same smirk he exhibited in
that day's hearings when he looked his wife in the eye and lied to her
about his fidelity.

A legitimate point, as the character of the smirking doyen was at issue,
given that Strzok had spent the better part of that day swearing that his
personal biases did not bear on his public duties, an assertion belied by
both the evidence and common sense.

The resulting furor from Democrat members of the committee overshadowed
the point Gohmert was making – that from Strzok's own mouth came yet more
confirmation that Hillary Clinton's home server was compromised by a
"foreign entity"; that there was indeed evidence of the intrusion and the
theft of data; and that Comey had lied yet again, as he most certainly
knew of this prior to his tortured-logic exoneration spectacle.

Representative Gohmert emphasized that the "foreign entity" responsible
for placing the digital back door into Clinton's server was not Russia.
"And this is a foreign entity, not related to Russia in the least!"

Who is this unnamed foreign entity? Gohmert knows but isn't saying, as
that information is likely still classified. This revelation causes
numerous questions to spring to mind, not the least of which, the timing
of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's splashy unsealing of
indictments against Russian targets over "election meddling," coming
within hours of Strzok's damning admission.

The difficulty in unraveling the perfidy of the Clintons, the previous
administration, and their overseas entanglements has always been the
sheer scope of the corruption. When investigating one crime, ten more
are discovered, leading to ten more for each of those. The high levels
at which these crimes have been committed – President Obama's Cabinet and
the president himself – compound the problem as their ideological allies
within the permanent bureaucracy continue to obstruct, misdirect, and
cover up in the name of "resistance."

It strains credulity to believe that the vast investigative resources of
the federal government have been brought to bear against the Trump
administration simply to enable a twice failed presidential candidate to
avoid accountability for carelessly handling classified information.

While the Clintons have made their careers by enmeshing in criminality
nearly everyone with whom they come in contact, their lives, politically
and physically, are nearing the end. Even the risk of Clinton "bringing
everyone down with me" is likely insufficient motivation for such
herculean efforts to conceal and deceive both the public and the Trump
administration.

It is my assertion that the Democratic Party, under the shadow leadership
of President Obama, is mounting such a vigorous defense to hide its own
involvement in the criminality that characterizes all things Clinton –
most notably, the money-laundering operation known as the Clinton
Foundation.

President Obama knew of Hillary's illicit server. He communicated with
her on it. Both surely knew that any electronic device with even a
tangential connection to either of them would be targeted by every hacker
on the globe with nefarious purpose. Logic then would dictate that any
information passed through, or placed on that server, was placed there to
be picked up – a digital dead drop, if you will.

Politicians have made an art form out of evading accountability for
bribery and financial malfeasance in office. It simply isn't conceivable
that the unprecedented contortions of the Deep State displayed since the
arrival of Trump would be triggered by a desire to conceal garden variety
influence-peddling. However, as a reason sufficiently important to
warrant committing hundreds of additional crimes to prevent its
discovery, treason stands alone.

The same mindset that has no difficulty in short-circuiting the
Constitution by enacting through judicial and executive fiat those policy
aims they could never accomplish legislatively also has little problem
with bypassing national security restrictions, if they believe that their
purpose is sufficiently noble. We saw this in Julius and Ethel
Rosenberg, selling nuclear secrets to the Soviets to maintain a "balance
of power." Indeed, nearly every instance of domestic espionage in modern
times has been rooted in this misshapen sense of moral imperative so
fondly inculcated on the left.

Future investigations must answer these questions: who is the "foreign
entity" of which Rep. Gohmert spoke? What information did they receive?
Were they the end-user, or merely a conduit to another power? What
connection did they (and others in that time frame) have to the Clinton
Foundation? Where does the money trail lead? Who benefits from the
information and the policies stemming from it?

We learned that Russia was not the "foreign entity" that compromised
Clinton's server, a revelation quickly swept from the headlines by a
blanket indictment charging Russians with hacking everything from our
elections to the Colonel's secret recipe of herbs and spices.

How do we know that the timing of the indictment is more instructive than
the content within? There is nothing in the indictment that hadn't
already been alleged more than a year ago, and there is no new evidence
provided to bolster the claims. In other words, this indictment has been
sitting in Rosenstein's or Mueller's pocket, as cleanser for a damaging
news cycle – prosecutorial "BleachBit" for an investigation tainted from
its inception.

The author writes from Omaha, Neb. and welcomes visitors to
his website at www.dailyherring.com.

Source: http://bit.ly/Pay_To_Play_2L45PwK

--
"Conservative actor James Woods let America know exactly what “#DACA is
about” in one devastating tweet that included a meme depicting Senate
Minority Schoolmarm Chuck Schumer ‘saying,’ “It’s very simple to
understand actually – If Americans won’t vote for Democrats, then we’ll
import people who will."” (Scott Morefield)