WikiLeaks Just Released Over 2,000 More Emails That Will Threaten Hillary Clinton’s Campaign
Whistleblowing group Wikileaks is at it again, releasing more than 2,000 emails involving the Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, which is part of what the group claims is a total of 50,000 emails that it intends to share with the public. This initial exposure comes the very day the State Department published 350 emails that were previously deleted from Clinton’s private server.
The group, headed by hacker Julian Assange, notes that the emails contain 2,060 emails regarding Podesta’s communications relating to “nuclear energy, and media handling over donations to the Clinton Foundation from mining and nuclear interests.”
An initial review of the emails reveals they begin as far back as 2008 to 2016, and cover such material as Hillary Clinton’s Chipotle order to her position on the Iran deal sent from Nancy Rotering to John Podesta. Wikileaks calls Podesta a long-term associate of the Clintons, who served as Bill Clinton’s chief of staff from 1998 to 2001.
Assange had noted “significant” disclosures on the U.S. election Tuesday, and that the group would commence publishing new material this week. WikiLeaks wants to “to be publishing every week for the next 10 weeks,” according to Assange.
Back in August, the AP noted that during the time Donald Trump’s campaign chair Paul Manafort worked for Ukraine’s former government, he collected about $2.2 million in cash for two Washington lobbying firms, one of which was including the Clinton-connected Podesta Group. Ukraine’s current government says Manafort pocketed over $12 million as a lobbyist and consultant for the “pro-Russian regime.”
Furthermore, between 2012 and 2014, Manafort and his business associate Rick Gates funneled at least $1.13 million in lobbying fees to the Podesta Group Inc., while an additional $1.07 million went to Mercury LLC. The money was funded by the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, which is a nonprofit “governed by a board that initially included parliament members” from the ruling Party of Regions.
Tony Podesta serves as the founder and chairman of the Podesta Group, and Bill Clinton’s former chief of staff, as well as current campaign chairman for Hillary Clinton. Vin Weber heads Mercury, and is the former congressman and adviser to 2012 Republican candidate Mitt Romney.
The State Department was forced to release 250 pages of Clinton’s emails as a result of a court order to release 360 pages last month. Within the newly disclosed emails is the exposure of the Obama administration officials being in close contact with Clinton’s presidential campaign in 2015 regarding a possible fallout from the former secretary of state’s use of a private email server. Those email disclosures note that the White House told Secretary of State John Kerry not to entertain questions surrounding Clinton’s email arrangements.
The emails were acquired by the Republican National Committee under the Freedom of Information Act lawsuit that requested records of Clinton’s time in office.
There is also the 2001 discussion paper from Huma Abedin on thoughts on “post-Gaddafi Assistance & Governance.” The contents of this subject discussed ways to create a new Libya government, a new constitution, shore up oil contracts to revenue, decipher past issues with the Gaddafi administration along with its supposed failure to share hydrocarbon dollars, and even the robbery of private property from members of the monarchy.
Assange refused to admit who or what campaign would be targeted by the upcoming U.S. election leaks, even saying that speculation that he or WikiLeaks are out to get Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is “false.” And as for whether he has a personal relationship with Clinton’s Republican rival, Donald Trump, Assange said: “I feel personal affinity really, I think, with all human beings.” And that, “I certainly feel sorry for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. These are two people that are tormented by their ambitions in different ways.”
Why This Matters
Not long ago, Edward Snowden leaked the first ever public disclosure of secret black budget programs, essentially exposing the secrecy that dominates the United States government and its politics.
Whether the drone attack was proposed in jest or not is unclear, but her team did discuss legal and non-legal means of dealing with Wikileaks, meaning they were trying anything they could to silence the organization.
These are people we are electing as our leaders, people who hold some of the most powerful positions on the planet. Why are we continuing to follow along and praise these ‘leaders’ despite how many of their lies and terrible deeds have been exposed?
How is the establishment even taking these individuals seriously given their history? Perhaps something bigger is at play here? The sheer obviousness of corruption and the lack of integrity in our systems is helping to awaken the masses. It’s helping us to see what’s really going on so change can take place.
I think this is why elite people and organizations are trying to silence figures like Edward Snowden and Julian Assange — they threaten to open the eyes and minds of the masses, exposing Western politics and all that goes with it for what it is, a cesspool of corruption controlled by the big banks and corporations, Hillary’s main sponsors.
Wikileaks has been exposing the criminal, unethical, and immoral behaviour of Hillary Clinton (or those who puppet her) for a long time, and so have others that come from the field. For example,here is a list of 10 presidents and politicians (out of many) who told us that a “secret government” controls the world.
With so much exposed already, why do we continue to follow, allow, and accept these people to be our leaders? Think about it.
Finally, this isn’t about Trump vs Clinton, that is merely the illusion we are being invited into believing. This is about awakening to the fact that our system is absurd and it’s time to do something different. What is the answer? That is what we must discuss instead of playing this broken political game of dividing and choosing who to “vote” for.