Yesterday, the Washington Post published a story citing unnamed former and current White House employees who claimed that President Trump had shared classified information with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Unfortunately, the Post neglected to consult any of the individuals actually present at the meeting – President Trump, National Security Advisor H.R. McMaster, Deputy National Security Advisor Dina Powell, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. Since these four were the only Americans in the room at the time, and since they have all strongly and categorically denied that any classified information was shared, one wonders how accurate the alleged information could be. Though we find them less credible, perhaps, the Russians also have dismissed these charges as “fake.” If in fact the president is not wise enough in the world of international relations to know what material needs to be kept private, H.R. McMaster and Dina Powell are certainly not neophytes and would have steered the president away from releasing information that would be better not shared. Let us be clear, however. The President of the United States is the final arbiter of what is classified and what is not and is well within his legal rights to reveal any information that he chooses to whomever he chooses. In the end, however, this report seems to be, in fact, just another attempt to paint the president as either incompetent or somehow conspiring with the Kremlin to undermine the sovereignty of the United States.
Perhaps we should take another look at the continuing Democratic narrative that President Trump and Putin are somehow best buds. Remember that the investigation of the supposed Russian hacking of the Democratic National Party’s server was begun under President Obama and that the report was the product of a group of hand-picked analysts from the FBI, NSA, and the CIA, not all 17 intelligence agencies as is the normal procedure. Neither was there a dissenting opinion attached to the report as is usually done. Neither did any of these three groups examine the DNC server themselves. In an email to BuzzFeed News, the DNC’s deputy communications director admitted that “the FBI never requested access to the DNCs computer servers.” Instead, it was a private firm hired by the DNC who concluded that the hacking had been done by the Russians. What investigating body does not examine the evidence themselves? In an FBI investigation in Terre Haute, Indiana, last year, all the computers of the entity under investigation were confiscated and searched by the FBI. Why wasn’t the FBI interested in examining the DNC server themselves?
Julian Assange of Wikileaks long ago claimed, “we can say that the Russian government is not the source [of the leaked DNC emails].” He went on to claim that they had come instead from a disgruntled DNC member who felt that Bernie Sanders was being unfairly treated in the primary. And there is evidence to suggest that may have been the case.
In a story published yesterday on FoxNew.com, Malia Zimmerman reveals that Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who was murdered on a Washington D.C. street on July 10, had leaked thousands of internal emails to WikiLeaks according to multiple investigative sources. A federal investigator reports that 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders were provided to WikiLeaks and are currently in the possession of the FBI. These emails, dating from January 2015 through May 2016 were given to Gavin MacFadyen, an American reporter and director of WikiLeaks who was then living in London. A private investigator, Rod Wheeler, hired by Rich’s family as the D.C. Police investigation stalled, feels that the case is being obstructed. “My investigation shows someone within the D.C. government, Democratic National Committee or Clinton team is blocking the murder investigation from going forward,” he told Fox News. (as reported by Zimmerman). The Washington police currently have no suspects in the case and have refused to release the grainy video of two men following Rich moments before his murder to the public.
A spokesman for the Rich family, however, claims that even if such emails exist, it doesn’t prove that Rich helped WikiLeaks. Their main concern, he contends, is to find “Seth’s murderers.” And while Assange refuses to reveal whether or not Rich was the source of the DNC emails, claiming that it is WikiLeaks’ policy to protect their sources, whether alive or dead, WikiLeaks has posted a $20,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of Seth Rich’s murderers.
Was it Seth Rich who provided WikiLeaks with the DNC emails that have been attributed to Russian hackers? Seth Rich’s death was obviously not the result of a botched robbery. His watch, money, cell phone, and a necklace valued at about $2000 were still on his person when police discovered him, conscious but dying on the street. What then was the motive for his murder? We may never know, but investigator Wheeler contends, “I do believe that the answers to who murdered Seth Rich sits on his computer on a shelf at the DC police or FBI headquarters.”
Perhaps that is also where the answer to the conspiracy behind the Russian-Trump conspiracy theory also sits.