http://politichicks.com/2017/07/disturbing-details-death-gop-operative-sought-hillarys-email/

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-peter-smith-death-met-0713-20170713-story.html

A major story that has some readers scratching their heads recently surfaced regarding the death of a GOP operative and Hillary Clinton’s emails.  According to The Blaze, “The Chicago Tribune has reported that Peter W. Smith, who was attempting to obtain 33,000 deleted Hillary Clinton emails from hackers who claimed to have them, committed suicide ten days after contacting the Wall Street Journal.”


Smith told the Wall Street Journal that he had made contact with several hackers on the “dark net,” who claimed they could produce the storied 33,000 deleted emails from Hillary Clinton’s servers. The police are calling it a suicide, but the timing of the death opens up questions and many conspiracy theories.  With a suicide note that read “No foul play whatsoever” and “recent bad turn in health since January 2017” many believe that it sounds like a staged death.  The method of death was also bizarre, described as “asphyxiation due to displacement of oxygen in confined space with helium.”

It is unfortunate that we live in an atmosphere where we immediately question the death of someone when the story involves the Clintons, the DNC or her emails, but it is becoming more and more suspicious when each time something happens it turns deadly.  If it was indeed foul play, what could be on those emails that were so perfectly deleted and “bleach-bit” from her server?  What could be in them that was so dangerous no one should ever see them?  It makes one wonder and no doubt question the motive behind this mans death.

Haitian official was to testify next week on misappropriation charge

WASHINGTON — Klaus Eberwein, a former Haitian government official who was expected to testify against alleged Clinton Foundation corruption and malpractice next week, has been found dead in Miami via gunshot wound to the head.

The death was ruled a suicide. Eberwein was 50 and reportedly told acquaintances he feared for his life for his fierce criticism of the Clinton Foundation.

How many people do YOU know who have died mysteriously? Not as many as the Clintons! Check out WND’s explosive report, “‘Clinton death list’: 33 spine-tingling cases.”

Eberwein was due to appear next Tuesday before the Haitian Senate Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission where he was widely expected to testify that the Clinton Foundation misappropriated Haiti earthquake donations from international donors.

He had served as director general of the Haitian government’s economic development agency, Fonds d’assistance économique et social, for three years.


According to Eberwein, a paltry 0.6 percent of donations granted by international donors to the Clinton Foundation with the express purpose of directly assisting Haitians actually ended up in the hands of Haitian organizations. A further 9.6 percent ended up with the Haitian government. The remaining 89.8 percent – or $5.4 billion – was funneled to non-Haitian organizations.

“The Clinton Foundation, they are criminals, they are thieves, they are liars, they are a disgrace,” Eberwein said at a protest outside the Clinton Foundation headquarters in Manhattan last year.

Now more than ever, Bill and Hill are “Partners in Crime.” Jerome Corsi reveals “The Clintons’ scheme to monetize the White House for personal profit.”

According to the Haiti Libre newspaper, Eberwein was said to be in “good spirits,” with plans for the future. His close friends and business partners are shocked by the idea he may have committed suicide.

“It’s really shocking,” said friend Gilbert Bailly. “We grew up together; he was like family.”

The Haitian government issued an official notice thanking Eberwein for his service and mourning his untimely death.

http://www.wnd.com/2017/07/clinton-foundation-witness-found-dead/

Images of court documents and other stuff at link:https://medium.com/@zachhaller/plaintiffs-file-motion-for-protection-in-dnc-fraud-lawsuit-9f1845ab0593

On Tuesday, June 13, 2017, lawyers for the plaintiffs in the DNC fraud lawsuit filed a Motion for Order of Protection to the U.S. District Court in Florida following three disturbing incidents that recently occurred in orbit of the lawyers and plaintiffs involved in the ongoing, high-stakes litigation.

The lawsuit, a class action filed by Jared Beck and Elizabeth Lee Beck last summer, seeks damages for Democratic Party donors and voters duped by the party’s fraudulent 2016 primary. Counsel for the Democrats argued on April 25, 2017 in favor of their Motion to Dismiss, insisting that Federal Judge William J. Zloch throw out the case because the Party has the right to choose its nominee behind closed doors, in smoke-filled rooms, regardless of the results of primary contests.

In addition to the Party, the lawsuit names disgraced former DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz as a Defendant. Following her resignation as DNC chair, Schultz has been the subject of intensifying scrutiny related to this lawsuit and another blasting the DNC’s grotesque compensation practices under her leadership. D.C. Capitol Police are also investigating a massive data breach committed by her former IT staffers, who have since fled the country. Meanwhile, uncertainty lingers as the homicides of DNC data director and potential witness Seth Rich, and Miami Federal Prosecutor Bheranton J. Whisenant Jr. remain unsolved.

The Events of June 1

On Thursday, June 1, approximately six weeks following the release of transcripts from the oral arguments, a staff member at Plaintiffs’ firm Beck & Lee received a mysterious call that was programmed to falsely identify on caller-ID as the contact number of Wasserman Schultz’s local office. The caller sought information related to the case using a voice-altering application, and would refuse to disclose his or her identity.
Notice of Filing E-Mail

Though the nature of the conversation seemed casual, the call was subsequently reported to the Court by Plaintiff’s attorney Elizabeth Lee Beck that day, in order to document potentially unsolicited contact from the Defendant. At that time, it would remain to be seen if Wasserman Schultz’ office would confirm or deny the call originated from their office as the number appearing on caller ID appeared to indicate.

The Events of June 2

Wasserman Schultz’s office responded to the report promptly to advise the Court that the office number identified on the call was from a former office location no longer in use by the Congresswoman, and advised that the call “[did] not appear” to have originated with “that office”. The Democrats and Wasserman Schultz’s counsel would advise that “no one on Congresswoman Wasserman-Schultz’s staff, including the Congresswoman herself, has any knowledge of any such call being made, nor was any such call authorized”, (emphasis added).

While the particular wording of the statement did not unequivocally deny the call may have originated from within Wasserman Schultz’s network, counsel for the incumbent Florida lawmaker added that they were “very concerned” to hear of what must have been a spoofed call, and alerted D.C. Capitol Police as a precaution given the Congresswoman continues to serve in the House representing Florida’s 23th congressional district.
Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs’ June 1, 2017 Notice

Over the course of June 2, attorney Cullin O’Brien, who represents the Plaintiffs along with the Becks, would himself receive three mysterious calls, each from an unidentified number. In the first, the caller introduced himself as “Chris”, before asking for O’Brien by name, and if O’Brien was working on the “DNC Fraud Lawsuit”. O’Brien requested the caller put all communication in writing, and the caller hung up.

20 minutes later, O’Brien received another call, and identified the caller as “Chris” again by voice. This time, a series of threatening rants ensued in which the anonymous caller made reference to the recent murder of Miami U.S. Attorney and Federal Prosecutor Bheranton J. Whisenant Jr., and threatened that “this is bigger than you and your family and your law partners,” and he would “play the law firms off each other.”

A third call would come in that night from another unknown number that Mr. O’Brien would not answer. The caller, presumed the same as the two previous calls, left a 4-minute voice message. The message was sealed and submitted to the Court as evidence in connection with the Motion for Order of Protection.

Beyond Mr. O’Brien’s calls Friday, that very evening the same Beck & Lee employee who answered the June 1 call received a visit to her home by an unidentified, unknown visitor, asking for the employee by name. Her mother would answer the door to inform the visitor that the employee, who wishes to remain anonymous, was not at home. The visitor then left a Florida Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee Vote-By-Mail Application to be given to the employee, soliciting her name and contact information, despite the employee not having or seeking any affiliation to the Democratic Party. According to the employee’s mother, the visitor carried a stack of these flyers, but drove away without visiting any other residents on the street.


The Events of June 3

While the events of June 1 and 2 occurred near Miami, Florida where the lawsuit was filed, a third concerning event took place overnight in the town of Dassel, Minnesota, about 50 miles west of Minneapolis in central Minnesota.

On Saturday morning June 3, Angela Monson, one of the various Plaintiffs named in the lawsuit and an active member in her local Democratic party, awoke around 5:45am and sought to use her personal laptop computer. After noticing her device was not in the entryway where she last left it, Monson found her laptop in the living room, eerily placed on an end table in comfortable reach for only a right-handed person. Monson, who lives with mild cerebral palsy, has limited use of her right hand, and is exclusively left-handed.

Upon recovering her laptop, Monson noticed the device had been tampered with: according to the affidavit submitted to the court, when she tried to boot up the computer, it made a snapping noise, and did not turn on.

In examining the defective and misplaced device, Monson turned it over, and the back plate snapped off. Noticing the 10 screws holding the hardware together were missing, Monson checked with her sons to be sure neither tampered with the device. Upon hearing neither had, an alarmed Monson realized an intruder must have entered, presumably overnight.

Monson would inspect her home to find a patio door left ajar approximately 3 inches, and another door mysteriously unlocked. Law enforcement who arrived on the scene discovered a third connecting door unlocked as well, unveiling the entry path of an intruder who appeared to have broken into the house, tampered with the laptop til it no longer functioned, and retreated without looting or damaging the home or property in any other way.
Exhibit 5 to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Order of Protection and Request for Hearing



The O’Brien calls, the employee’s visit and literature drop, and the Plaintiff’s home invasion are each alarming in and of themselves, but the fact that each of these events took place less than 48 hours after the original mysterious June 1 call creates an even darker cloud over the ongoing litigation. While the threatening phone calls answered by Mr. O’Brien could have been coincidental harassment inflicted by any one of the millions of onlookers, the solicitation of the employee’s contact information via a Florida Democratic Party registration form and the breaking and entering of a Plaintiff’s home and ruination of her personal computer appear calculated and highly suspicious.

Since the galling and irreversibly damning oral arguments thrust the utter depravity of the Democratic Party and its contempt of its members into the public consciousness, attorneys Jared Beck, Elizabeth Lee Beck, Cullin O’Brien, and others defending the merits of the lawsuit have already been subjected to constant badgering across social media platforms in defense of the corrupt establishment. The disturbing sequence of events detailed above, and in addition to the increased pressure on a Democratic Party incapacitated by massive ongoing scandals worsening by the day, all the more justify the Plaintiff’s attorneys Motion for Order of Protection to ensure safety and privacy for their staff, the plaintiffs, and key witnesses as the case inches toward its next step.

Following Plaintiffs’ Motion for Protection on Tuesday, June 13, counsel from the Democrats filed a Defendants’ Response to the Plaintiff’s Motion two days later on Thursday, June 15, seen below.


In their response, attorneys for the Democrats take no position to support or oppose the Plaintiff’s Motion for Order of Protection. Their icy retort not only notably lacks any measure of respect for the Democratic Party voters involved or concern for how the integrity of the legal process could be compromised by such harassment, but instead volunteers the below:

   “To the extent that Plaintiffs seek to imply that the Defendants had some role in any of the incidents listed in their motion or had any other inappropriate contact with or harassment of anyone in any way in involved with this case, Defendants wish to make it clear that such an implication is patently false.”

Oddly, Plaintiff’s Motion did not make any implication or suggestion that the Defendants had any role in the disturbing occurrences that took place; the Motion for Protection simply provided the Court with documentation of the events that took place related to the parties involved in the suit. It is unclear why the Defendants’ response would include a preemptive denial, and noteworthy that this preemptive denial is worded in such absolute terms.
https://twitter.com/zachhaller/status/875420146621231104

Awaiting an Order of Protection

Following the formal acknowledgement from the defendants related to the suspicious events described above and docketed with the Court, an anxious public will await the Court’s ruling on the Motion for Order of Protection that could come at any time. Judge William J. Zloch could approve, deny, or further inquire regarding the Motion; this Motion now takes precedence over the Judge’s current analysis of the merits of the Motion to Dismiss the lawsuit filed previously by the Democrats and argued in the court hearings taking place in late April, 2017.

While the mainstream media continues to downplay and dismiss the massive implications of a lawsuit that will have profound consequences on the voting behavior of over 300 million Americans of all party affiliations, a silent but unfathomably vast majority around the country and world will watch with bated breath as the all-powerful American Democratic Party and media fight tooth-and-nail in Court to delay its inevitable, impending, and tragic demise.

In their valiant and undaunted efforts to bring this suit to high Court where it stands, Elizabeth Lee Beck, Jared Beck, and Cullin O’Brien have already enshrined themselves in American and world history as new-age revolutionaries who have exposed the American Democratic Party for the wicked and unrelenting oligarchy it has become.

In spite of the best efforts of a war-hungry former President who seemed to do everything in his power to ensure the continuation of his odious legacy, Americans last November successfully blocked the Clinton Restoration.

With the heavy lifting behind them, this magisterial few who brought the suit to pass have not only vindicated 13 million disenfranchised progressives, but have already ensured that the rotting carcass of the Democratic Party will soon be turned to dust.

IT Is my Opinion that Guccifer 2 is part of a counter intel operation directed by  FusionGPS or some other Post 9/11 private intel agency to get the FISA  Warrant that allowed Barrack Obama's National security Counsel to spy on The Trump Campaign for the benefit of Hillary Clinton's Campaign. This was probably orchestrated by John Podesta  and ex CIA.  James Comey would have known the sources for the information making him suspect as well.

The DNC Got the FusionGPS piss dossier in mid June.  Guccifer2  is blamed for the theft of that dossier within days of the DNC getting it,  The Don Jr. FusionGPS connected Russian meeting in mid june, The Tea leaves spoofed Pings between a russian bank and Trump tower in mid june. These things collectively got the Warrant.

Here is an old pre election diagram that needs to be updated with the FusionGPS information and the time of the FISC Warrant in July... at the time this was made it was assumed mcCain supplied the Piss dossier to the FBI in October.

It does show the Tea leaves DNS  spoof of Trump/Alpha Bank connections accurately..



My point is all of the stuff used to get the FISA warrant, seems to happen  in the two week period in mid June when it becomes clear Trump will be the Republican Nominee, and it all seems to be tied to FusionGPS, Crowdstrike, and CIA people.

My opinion is Guccifer2 is a cut out for FusionGPS in June of 2016. FusionGPS is the go between for the Obama Admin and the Intel agencies. At this point Guccifer is being used to get the FISA Warrant.

Note by waterglass: Click the links because information is conveyed in them in the picture attachments.


   Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and associate of Julian Assange, told the Dailymail.com  he flew to Washington, D.C. for emails
   He claims he had a clandestine hand-off in a wooded area near American University with one of the email sources
   The leakers' motivation was 'disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the  'tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders'
   Murray says: 'The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks'
   'Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the documents Wikileaks published did not come from that,' Murray insists
   Murray is a controversial figure who was relieved of his post as British ambassador amid allegations of misconduct but is close to Wikileaks

By Alana Goodman In Washington, Dc For Dailymail.com

Published: 15:33 EDT, 14 December 2016 | Updated: 18:01 EDT, 14 December 2016


A Wikileaks envoy today claims he personally received Clinton campaign emails in Washington D.C. after they were leaked by 'disgusted' whisteblowers - and not hacked by Russia.

Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a close associate of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, told Dailymail.com that he flew to Washington, D.C. for a clandestine hand-off with one of the email sources in September.

'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,' said Murray in an interview with Dailymail.com on Tuesday. 'The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.'

His account contradicts directly the version of how thousands of Democratic emails were published before the election being advanced by U.S. intelligence.


Craig Murray (left), former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a close associate of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange (right), told the Dailymail.com that he flew to Washington, D.C. for a clandestine hand-off with one of the email sources in September

Murray is a controversial figure who was removed from his post as a British ambassador amid allegations of misconduct. He was cleared of those but left the diplomatic service in acrimony.

His links to Wikileaks are well known and while his account is likely to be seen as both unprovable and possibly biased, it is also the first intervention by Wikileaks since reports surfaced last week that the CIA believed Russia hacked the Clinton emails to help hand the election to Donald Trump.

Murray's claims about the origins of the Clinton campaign emails comes as U.S. intelligence officials are increasingly confident that Russian hackers infiltrated both the Democratic National Committee and the email account of top Clinton aide John Podesta.

In Podesta's case, his account appeared to have been compromised through a basic 'phishing' scheme, the New York Times reported on Wednesday.

U.S. intelligence officials have reportedly told members of Congress during classified briefings that they believe Russians passed the documents on to Wikileaks as part of an influence operation to swing the election in favor of Donald Trump.

But Murray insisted that the DNC and Podesta emails published by Wikileaks did not come from the Russians, and were given to the whistleblowing group by Americans who had authorized access to the information.

'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,'  Murray said. 'The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.'

He said the leakers were motivated by 'disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.'

Murray said he retrieved the package from a source during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in northwest D.C. He said the individual he met with was not the original person who obtained the information, but an intermediary.

Murray claims he met with the person who passed the emails over in a Washington, D.C. part near American University

His account cannot be independently verified but is in line with previous statements by Wikileaks - which was the organization that published the Podesta and DNC emails.

Wikileaks published the DNC messages in July and the Podesta messages in October. The messages revealed efforts by some DNC officials to undermine the presidential campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders, who was running against Hillary Clinton.

Others revealed that Clinton aides were concerned about potential conflicts and mismanagement at the Clinton Foundation.

Murray declined to say where the sources worked and how they had access to the information, to shield their identities.

He suggested that Podesta's emails might be 'of legitimate interest to the security services' in the U.S., due to his communications with Saudi Arabia lobbyists and foreign officials.

Murray said he was speaking out due to claims from intelligence officials that Wikileaks was given the documents by Russian hackers as part of an effort to help Donald Trump win the U.S. presidential election.

'I don't understand why the CIA would say the information came from Russian hackers when they must know that isn't true,' he said. 'Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the documents Wikileaks published did not come from that.'

Murray was a vocal critic of human rights abuses in Uzbekistan while serving as ambassador between 2002 and 2004, a stance that pitted him against the UK Foreign Office.

He describes himself as a 'close associate' of Julian Assange and has spoken out in support of the Wikileaks founder who has faced rape allegations and is currently confined to the Ecuadorian embassy in London.

Assange has similarly disputed that charges that Wikileaks received the leaked emails from Russian sources.

'The Clinton camp has been able to project a neo-McCarthyist hysteria that Russia is responsible for everything,' Assange told John Pilger during an interview in November.

'Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely, that 17 US intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That's false – we can say that the Russian government is not the source.'


The Washington Post reported last Friday that U.S. intelligence agencies had 'identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails.'

The paper said U.S. senators were presented with information tying Russia to the leaks during a recent briefing by intelligence officials.

'It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia's goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,' a senior U.S. official familiar with the briefing told the Post. 'That's the consensus view.'

The paper said U.S. senators were presented with information tying Russia to the leaks during a recent briefing by intelligence officials.

'It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia's goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,' a senior U.S. official familiar with the briefing told the Post. 'That's the consensus view.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html#ixzz4nlihBq4J
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Over 8,000 emails released by WikiLeaks exposes the collusion between CNN and Washington Post with the DNC in hopes of influencing the election in Democratic favor.
? Don Trump Jr. emails show Hillary may have colluded with Russian Government
? Bernie Sanders criticizes Democratic party, says he'll work with Donald Trump

A new batch of over 8,000 emails exposed by WikiLeaks revealed that staffers from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) wrote questions for CNN news anchor Wolf Blitzer for when he interviewed then Presidential candidate Donald Trump. Emails dating as far back to 2015 show the mainstream media colluding with the DNC and Democratic candidates.

Among the 8,263 emails released by WikiLeaks, one shows staff working for the CNN network asking DNC staffers what questions they should quiz Republican candidates on, including Trump and Ted Cruz.

The emails make it clear the DNC was working in cahoots with CNN during the 2016 Presidential election. In a colluding effort to help Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton win over Trump, or possibly Cruz, CNN worked effortlessly with the Democratic party, the DNC, and staffers from the party to develop interviews with calculated questioning to make Republican candidates look poor in hopes of influencing the election.

An email dated April 28th entitled 'Cruz on CNN' reads: "CNN is looking for questions. Please sent some topical/interesting ones."

Another email asks if DNC staffers 'want to offer Jake Tapper questions to ask us' during another interview on the network. Tapper, who is a journalist for CNN, relentlessly pounded Trump with hard-hitting question throughout the election. It's now clear where he obtained his information from, who he was working for, and why he was doing it.

When a news outlet works hand-in-hand with a political party in hopes of influencing election results, that is the sign of democracy being replace with fascism. However, despite this overwhelming amount of evidence packed against CNN and the DNC, they both continue to mercilessly attack President Trump on what they call colluding with Russia during the campaign, of course, without a single iota of evidence. What there is evidence of is collusion between an American news outlet and a political party, and that's fascism. Yet will CNN spend 90 percent of it's air time reporting on an actual collusion? So far, they haven't spent a single second.

A Separate DNC email chain found appears to show Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank asking the DNC for help with research for a column The column he wrote was about Trump and featured a list of things the presidential candidate said that he deemed as 'outrageous'.

'Wolf Blitzer is interviewing Trump on Tues (sic) ahead of his foreign policy address on Wed,' DNC research director Lauren Dillon wrote in the email that was entitled 'CNN questions for Trump.' Numerous questions were submitted by a group of DNC staffers and officials for Blitzer to ask Trump.


In a separate conversation dated on April 28, Jason Seher, a writer for Jake Tapper's show on CNN, emailed Pablo Manriquez, a former DNC media booker thanking him for 'facilitating Luis coming on today, and bearing with us through a meelee (sic) of GOP nonsense and cancellations and all that. Any particular points he'll want to make? We're gonna stay Dem focused...'

The release also shows CNN asked for and received emails from DNC interim chairwoman Donna Brazile, who worked at the network as an on-air contributor, and leaked questions to the Clinton campaign for a debate and a town hall event.



But it wasn't just CNN and the Washington Post who colluded and worked with the DNC and Democratic Party. NBC News also dipped their hand in the honey pot, as an email from John Harwood, a chief journalist for CNBC, sent to John Podesta, head of staff for the Hillary Clinton campaign, asking for questions to ask Republican candidate Jeb Bush in an upcoming interview.

An email from NBC journalist John Harwood to John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign head of staff.

The emails reveal obvious collusion between CNN, NBC, and the Washington Post, and the DNC in an attempt to influence election results in a Democratic way. Through compiling information for articles, drafting interview questions, and carrying out a false narrative against Republican candidates, CNN and the Washington Post should be held accountable for their treason against the American people and democracy.

CNN said the emails being hacked should be "a lesson to journalists" about being more careful and preventing future hacks.

Washington Post's new slogan "Democracy dies in the darkness" seems to only apply to them and their fellow conspirators NBC and CNN in working against American democracy and it's sacred election.

At some point during this timeline, Fusion GPS paid an ex-British spy to spread money around Moscow in exchange for tall tales. Keep in mind that he couldn't actually go there himself, as it would be too dangerous. So, he probably had to work through Russian sub-contractors. Both the "informants" and the sub-contractors had a financial incentive to tell him whatever he wanted to hear. And, it would have been trivial to buttress each other's stories to make it believable.

Think about it: if Russian intelligence actually had compromising information on Trump, it would have been a state secret and they would have never given it to someone else before they could use it themselves. But, given the opportunity to sow confusion and discord around even a "long shot" US Presidential candidate, they wouldn't have been able to resist. Since they had probably already tried to set up Trump during the pageant (for whatever reason), they already had the narrative ready.

Hopefully, this will help people connect the dots and offer the necessary evidence to prove the point.

My working theory right now is Podesta Knew that Wikileaks had his emails since June of 2016.

Guccifer, TeaLeaves, The Piss dossier, The Russian Lawyers Meeting with Trump, and the April theft of DNC opo research were creations of FusionGPS with collaboration from Crowdstrike.

I think the April Hack was a FusionGPS creation from the start with collaboration from Crowdstrike.

I think it was a way to get Steeles dossier in the pipeline as evidence for the second FISA attempt by Obama.

Seth Rich Stole the emails July 5th after Comey dropped the server investigation. Rich  gave some or all of them to someone who could get them to Assange between the 6th and the 9th, and was then shot late at night, early the next morning walking home after a hard night drinking.

Assange, realizing his source was murdered, Releases the DNC stuff from Rich starting on the 22nd of July 2016. They did a lot of damage.

To cover up the Murder of Rich, the Guccifer2 cut out is used to release  a set of spoof files with the time stamp of 7/5 and everything else that would match up with the embed on the disk of the serve in early September, well after the Wikileaks dumps..

The September leaks by  guccifer2 were not meant to hurt Clinton. And the didn't. Same goes for all earlier guccifer2 releases.

The Podesta Emails released by wikileaks On October 10th a full month later, and our Spy agencies would have known real time when Assange planned to release the emails, because his communications are tapped constantly. A good idea would be to see the difference from when the Billy Bush tape was leaked until wikileaks published.

The video was probably released within minutes of the time when Wikileaks committed to a publishing time for Podesta's emails.