Thursday, August 11, 2016

Never mind that

Austin Bay looks at the matter of Shahram Amiri, an Iranian nuclear scientist who was executed by the mullahs:
Here’s a sketch of Amiri’s murky trek. In 2009, while on pilgrimage to Mecca, Amiri disappeared. In 2010 he reappeared on Youtube, indicating he was in the U.S. Then he appeared in person, in Washington, D.C., walking into the Pakistani Embassy’s Iranian-interests office. He said he’d been kidnapped by Saudi and American intelligence agents. They tortured him. Then he came to America, and they offered him money to reveal Iranian nuclear secrets. But he didn’t. Now he wanted to go home, to Iran.

This summary from U.S. News & World Report has additional details and speculates that the Iranian government threatened his family. Amiri did return to Iran to be welcomed as a hero. Then, in May 2011, the regime arrested him and accused him of treason. Amiri, according to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary government, had spied for The Great Satan (the U.S.).

Amiri’s execution intersects with the 2016 U.S. political elections. As the linked article notes, two emails transmitted in 2010 through Hillary Clinton’s off-the-books and unauthorized server appear to refer to Amiri. Clinton senior adviser Jake Sullivan was involved in both emails: one he forwarded on July 5, 2010 (10 days before Amiri returned to Iran) and another (one he sent) dated July 12. The July 5 email said, “Our friend must be given a way out.”

For many good reasons senior official-level traffic is “born classified.” Access to a SecState’s unprotected email traffic provides enemy intelligence services with clues and indications regarding U.S. foreign and defense policy. In some cases, it may provide confirmation of suspected U.S. operations or, perhaps, U.S. intelligence assets and sources. Assets include human spies.
Those emails were out there on an unsecured server. While you can't necessarily prove the Iranians got confirmation that Amiri was working with our government from unsecured emails, it certainly is possible they did. And that should not have been possible.

Meanwhile, we know some more things Hillary Clinton didn't want known:
A new batch of State Department emails released Tuesday showed the close and sometimes overlapping interests between the Clinton Foundation and the State Department when Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state.

The documents raised new questions about whether the charitable foundation worked to reward its donors with access and influence at the State Department, a charge that Mrs. Clinton has faced in the past and has always denied.

In one email exchange, for instance, an executive at the Clinton Foundation in 2009 sought to put a billionaire donor in touch with the United States ambassador to Lebanon because of the donor’s interests there.

In another email, the foundation appeared to push aides to Mrs. Clinton to help find a job for a foundation associate. Her aides indicated that the department was working on the request.
I don't suppose any of this matters to Hillary's supporters. But it should. I also suspect Julian Assange has a lot more of this sort of thing in the queue. It doesn't appear to matter, though, because if your friends control the justice system, you won't be brought to justice:
The FBI went to Justice Department earlier this year asking for it to open a case into the foundation, but the public integrity unit declined. The Justice Department had looked into whether it should open a case on the foundation a year prior and found it didn’t have sufficient evidence to do so.
Well, yeah. If you don't let investigators find evidence, you won't have any. It's how we handle voter fraud allegations, too. But never mind that. I'm sure Donald Trump will say something stupid today so we won't have to think about our next president's behavior.


W.B. Picklesworth said...

"I'm sure Donald Trump will say something stupid today so we won't have to think about our next president's behavior."

It doesn't matter. If he was wise and judicious there would be appalling stories aplenty. And the wise and judicious candidate would likely stand there weakly and play the game by their rules. I'm not suggesting Trump is doing it well, but I think it's worth bearing in mind that this isn't a level playing field. Ted Cruz would be a kitten molester by this point; Marco Rubio would be a meth addicted, teenaged girl.

Anonymous said...

The MSM continues to ignore the fallout of Hillary's feckless disregard for our national security, but the facts are out there and are being rubbed into the Democrat electorate’s noses; they simply do not care.

I hate to hang my hopes on Julian Assange, but unless he is telling the truth about the stuff he has up his electronic sleeve, Hillary will probably win.

Gino said...

you cant shame the shameless... and this pretty much applies to the entire DNC (and much of their voter base) at this point.

Mr. D said...

I hate to hang my hopes on Julian Assange, but unless he is telling the truth about the stuff he has up his electronic sleeve, Hillary will probably win.

He's not necessarily a reliable fellow.

Mr. D said...

Ted Cruz would be a kitten molester

Some of our social media pals make Zodiac Killer jokes about ol' Ted, so I would say kitten molester is a step up.

You're right, of course. And as Gino rightly adds, you can't shame the shameless.