Before there was WikiLeaks, there was The Smoking Gun, which was founded in 1997 to bring us “exclusive documents–cool, confidential, quirky–that can’t be found elsewhere on the Web…using material obtained from government and law enforcement sources, via Freedom of Information requests, and from court files nationwide.” It was natural that anyone seeking to leak emails stolen from the Democratic National Headquarters or other top Clinton aides would reach out to The Smoking Gun, and that’s exactly what happened. Yesterday, TSG wrote up an extensive article on their contacts with Guccifer 2.0, the “online persona that U.S. officials say was created by Russian government officials to distribute and publicize material stolen during hacks of the DNC, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and Gmail accounts used by Clinton staffers like John Podesta, the campaign’s chairman.”
The main focus of their article was Roger Stone, however, who had significant online contacts with the Guccifer 2.0 persona, called him a hero, and defended him extensively against accusations that he wasn’t who or what he claimed to be. It’s a fascinating article, and it just became much more urgently interesting this morning after BuzzFeed News reported that they essentially busted Nigel Farage coming out of a meeting with Julian Assange today in Ecuador’s London embassy.
Before I get to that, though, I need to provide you with some background. Julian Assange is the founder and leader of WikiLeaks, which was the conduit the Russians used to disseminate the Clinton emails. This is the assessment of our intelligence agencies. Guccifer 2.0 openly admitted to providing WikiLeaks with the material, so if Guccifer 2.0 is a Russian-created persona, that settles the matter. Assange has lived in the Ecuadorian embassy in London since 2012 because he is facing rape charges in Sweden and fears that he will either be imprisoned for that alleged crime or extradited to the United States.
The reason people are so interested in Roger Stone’s connections to Julian Assange is because he is a longtime close associate of Donald Trump and business partner with his campaign manager Paul Manafort, and he freely admitted on more than one occasion that he had a backchannel to Assange that provided him with advance notice on (at least the general outlines) of what they would be leaking before they actually leaked it.
But, before I get to that, let’s establish when Guccifer 2.0 contacted The Smoking Gun:
“Guccifer 2.0” surfaced on June 15, a day after The Washington Post reported that the DNC had been hacked and that security experts concluded that the Russian government was behind the intrusion.
In an e-mail to TSG, the hackers wrote, “Hi. This is Guccifer 2.0 and this is me who hacked Democratic National Committee.” After bragging that the DNC hack was “easy, very easy,” “Guccifer 2.0” noted that, “The main part of the papers, thousands of files and mails, I gave to Wikileaks.” Attached to the introductory e-mail were an assortment of documents stolen from the DNC’s servers.
While “Guccifer 2.0” subsequently shared additional documents with TSG and other reporters (and posted stolen material to the WordPress blog), the most damaging DNC material appeared on Wikileaks in late-July, days before the Democratic National Convention opened in Philadelphia.
The June 15th date is especially significant because security experts had fingered the Russians the day before, so the emergence of Guccifer 2.0 appears to have been an effort to confuse the issue. Less than a week later, Guccifer 2.0 gave an interview to Vice News in which he (they) denied working for the Russians and claimed to be Romanian. Unfortunately for the hackers, when the Vice reporters tried to talk with him [them] in Romanian, things did not go well.
Roger Stone comes into the story on August 8th (keep that date in mind):
During an August 8 speech, Stone said, “I actually have communicated with Assange” and then referred to a Wikileaks “October surprise.” Stone subsequently stated that while he had never met or spoken to the Wikileaks founder, the men had a “mutual friend” who served as an “intermediary.”
Ever since, people have been trying to discover if what Stone said was true and who his intermediary might have been. This interest only grew as it became clear that Stone definitely did have advance notice that John Podesta’s emails had been hacked.
On August 21, Stone tweeted that it would soon be Podesta’s “time in the barrel.” Stone’s Twitter predictions became more precise in the days before Wikileaks began publishing the contents of Podesta’s Gmail account on October 7. On October 1, Stone declared that “Wednesday @HillaryClinton is done.” Two days later, Stone tweeted that he was confident that “my hero Julian Assange” would soon “educate the American people.” In an October 5 tweet, Stone reported that, “Payload coming” and included the hashtag “Lockthemup.”
Stone also went on [Alex] Jones’s show on October 2 to declare that, “I’m assured the motherlode is coming Wednesday.” He added, “I have reason to believe that it is devastating.” Stone also claimed that Assange was fearful that “the globalists and the Clintonites are trying to figure out how to kill him.”
Though Stone missed the Wikileaks release date by two days, Podesta told reporters that it was a “reasonable conclusion” that “Mr. Stone had advanced warning and the Trump campaign had advanced warning about what Assange was going to do.”
Now, when I saw that Nigel Farage was visiting the Ecuadorian embassy today and couldn’t remember why seconds after he left the premises, I immediately looked to see if he had any obvious contacts with Roger Stone. It was a little easier to establish their contacts than I anticipated it would be:
When I had dinner with Nigel Farage who lead the Brexit campaign in the UK he told me the polls had been rigged in that fight. MSM trick.
— Roger Stone (@RogerJStoneJr) August 8, 2016
Notice the date of this tweet: August 8th.
That’s the exact same day that Roger Stone announced that he had been contact with Assange through an intermediary.
Case possibly solved, right?
But who is Nigel Farage and does he have any connection to Donald Trump?
First, here’s a piece from February 27th, 2017.
Nigel Farage enjoyed a dinner with Donald Trump and his daughter Ivanka on Saturday night after visiting the White House and discussing Brexit with the President’s advisers.
The former Ukip leader was yesterday pictured eating with the President, his family and close advisers at Trump International Hotel.
He earlier went to the White House where it is understood that he met Steve Bannon, Mr Trump’s chief strategist, and updated him on Brexit.
As that piece relates, Mr. Farage is the former head of the UK Independent Party, which is a far-right anti-immigrant Euroskeptic party that was a driving force behind pushing England to leave the European Union. Former British Prime Minister David Cameron has referred to them as “fruitcakes, loonies, and closet racists,” but they’re really not all that closeted. The UKIP movement is loosely equivalent to our own Tea Parties and perhaps even more closely analogous to Trump’s core supporters.
From Roger Stone’s tweet, we can place their dinner sometime between the Brexit vote on June 23rd, 2016 and August 8th.
Skipping ahead to the present, WikiLeaks dumped a bunch of CIA files on the internet yesterday, which also makes Farage’s visit today to Assange especially interesting.
When I read the news about the CIA leak yesterday, I half-jokingly remarked: “maybe Stone’s involved in this leak, too, and this is how Trump tries to get the Intelligence Community to back off their push to have him ousted for Russian collusion. It’s a bit of a problem that that possibility actually seems rational in this insane environment.”
I felt guilty even saying something like that aloud, but I also knew it wasn’t crazy to wonder about such possibilities. Call it a sign of the times.
We definitely know that Roger Stone had advanced warnings of the leaks and The Smoking Gun article suggests that there is evidence that Stone communicated with Guccifer 2.0 by direct message on Twitter. Stone has himself admitted getting his inside information from an intermediary with Julian Assange. He has admitted to dining with Nigel Farage in the relevant time period. Nigel Farage just met with Donald and Ivanka Trump and Steve Bannon less than two weeks ago. Nigel Farage just visited the Ecuadorian embassy in London where Assange lives and couldn’t remember why when questioned about it on the sidewalk outside.
Finally, while Stone says a lot of untrue things and even some seemingly deranged things, I wouldn’t automatically discount this:
Stone claimed recently on the pro-Kremlin RT network that a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court had approved a wiretap of his phone calls and monitoring of his email accounts.
He told the Russian network that he wasn’t sure if that was true, but he also claimed that a grand jury had been convened.
If a grand jury hasn’t been convened, one surely should be at this point.
Consider this:
Nigel Farage has named Vladimir Putin as the world leader he most admires, praising the Russian president’s handling of the crisis in Syria.
But the Ukip leader had less kind words for Angela Merkel, describing the German chancellor as “incredibly cold”.
In fact, his exact words when asked which leader he most admires were: “As an operator, but not as a human being, I would say Putin. The way he played the whole Syria thing. Brilliant.”
That’s almost an exact echo of how our new president talks about Vladimir Putin. And it should be noted that Putin supported Brexit and sees Angela Merkel as his most influential foe. His goal is to destroy the European Union, weaken NATO, and discredit the West. That is why he supports the UK Independence Party and undoubtedly why the newly-elected UKIP leader Paul Nuttall says he “believes Russian President Vladimir Putin and Syrian President Bashar Assad are ‘on our side’ in Britain’s fight against Islamic extremism.”
When Neera Tanden, who many expected to become Clinton’s White House chief of staff, accused Putin of funding the UKIP and Farage last September, it was Steve Bannon’s Breitbart News who raced to Farage’s defense.
Speaking to Breitbart London’s Editor-in-Chief Raheem Kassam on Breitbart News Daily, outgoing UKIP leader Mr. Farage said that the comments made by longtime Hillary Clinton confidante Neera Tanden were “slanderous” and that anyone using the epithet “far right” to describe people who believe in nation-state democracy “have lost the plot”.
So, did Nigel Farage serve as Roger Stone’s intermediary?
It looks like a strong possibility to me. Make sure Sen. Mark Warner gets wind of this because he’s the ranking member on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and he says that running down this story is the most important thing he’s ever done in his life.
Now he’s got a big lead.
What did the Trump campaign bring to the election meddling?
It’s almost certain that Russia meddled with our election, and it’s almost certain that nobody expected that the meddling would result in a Trump victory. So if I’m Russia, why bother wasting time coordinating with the Trump people?
Also, something I’ve been wondering, if this is absolutely proven–that the Russia meddled via hacking, and the Trump campaign knew at the time, what laws have been broken and who has the authority to investigate and prosecute?
It’s worth noting that all these Ukrainian connections of Trump’s are actually Eastern Ukrainian/ethno-Russian or pro-Russian connections. This is glaringly obvious in the case of Manafort, but also in the case of Michael Cohen, his lawyer, and so on throughout Trump’s business career.
Softening the GOP’s stance on arming Ukraine was enough of a motive itself, but Putin hit a goldmine instead.
What laws have been broken? Well, about a gazillion federal and state computer crime laws, for starters.
If I am told that a foreign country is violating state or federal computer laws, does that put me in legal jeopardy?
Ugh. Nigel Farage. I enjoyed watching him cry about the pending Brexit loss. Unfortunately, turns out it wasn’t pending after all, or not as a loss, so then we were subjected to his rubber-faced giddiness.
Heads or tails, the people of the U.S. lose either way.
I am quite serious.
What if Russia is right here?
What then?
“Unthinkable!!!” thunders the PermaGov media.
Night and day.
“We are right!!! Russia is bad!!! Bad, bad bad!!!”
Does this remind you of anything in the near past?
Say…the run-up to Bush II’s Iraq War.
Yup.
I am not so sure of this idea, myself.
i am not sure that there is any “right” side to this problem.
I am sure of the following, however:
The United States of America has…since the Korean war…been the worst international actor on the planet. There is absolutely no competition for that position.
The United States of America has said one thing…all men are created equal…while doing the exact opposite since its inception in 1776.
The mass media of the United States of America has been on the wrong side of every internationally dangerous question…on the “Kill ’em all and let God sort it out” side…since the Korean War.
Of course, the case can be made that Russia has been equally wrong. I agree with that idea. But consider the scale and results of that particular “wrongness!!!” Russia cannot hold a candle to the scope and sheer violence of the American efforts.
No contest.
None whatsoever.
How?
Why?
The U.S. is far richer.
Hooray for capitalism!!!
So here we have the real problem:
Two bad actors…one internationally dominant, one aspiring to the same position…are squaring off in the U.S. political sweepstakes.
Who will win?
Does it really matter if both are full of shit?
Booman is on the U.S. side. The entire article above is predicated on the idea that the U.S. irepresents the good guys and Russia represents the bad guys.
I call bullshit.
They are all bad guys.
Once we wake the fuck up to that one idea, then maybe we will have a chance to reform a system that has gone totally off the rails for 60+ years.
Until then?
Bupkis.
AG
Its all bad.
You are all dumb.
We get you AG.
Well…not all…
You?
Probably.
AG
This is the key assumption to everything you write: “The United States of America has…since the Korean war…been the worst international actor on the planet. There is absolutely no competition for that position.”
I wonder if it’s the dividing line between various disagreements on this blog. I wonder how many ponders agree.
I don’t agree, I believe the US and our allies have been on of the greatest sources of good on the planet. Are we perfect? Of course not, but better than the alternative? I believe so
But even if one does believe it, there are more alternatives than what we have now, and an agenda and order set by ethnonationalist politics and fascists. Just not right now. So pick your fucking side, says I.
I don’t think it’s ever a choice between ideals, not the be pedantic but it’s a choice between choices.
I’ll give a US political example.
Did Clinton live up to the perfect progressive/liberal example? Whatever your definition. Probably not.
Was Clinton miles better than Trump (the actual choice)? Definitely yes.
Yes, always a choice between choices. But I don’t think there are always times in the geopolitical context when it’s a definitive between “two choices, pick.” In the current context, it is most definitely between two.
Right on the global scale there may be another option but without some power behind it there’s really no option there. I agree
I feel like I’m in a middle ground. The US is definitely NOT a force for good, I think its done more bad than good easily, but it is also better than current alternatives such as Russia or China. After 4 years of Trump that may no longer be true and I support the #resistance to Trump working with the spies. But that doesn’t mean I am anything but delighted to see this fight. Trump and spies destroying each other would be a huge opportunity for positive reform and if that requires a diminishing of US geopolitical power and a growing of Russia’s and China’s… well I can support tgay to an extent.
Steggies, I really do not care how many people here…or in the general population of this gigantic prison we call “America”…agree with this. It is a fact. It is not a factoid; it is not false news; it is not propaganda. It is simply a solid fact.
Consider:
Korea
Vietnam
The many intelligence incursions into the governments of South/Central/Caribbean America, North and South Africa, Southeast Asia and the border states on the eastern side of Europe. The many U.S.-trained-and-supported right-wing militias that have toppled democratically elected governments. The many economic “sanctions”…really more like blockades…that have been levied upon sovereign countries that will not toe the U.S. line.
The Bush I and Bush II Iraq Wars.
And God only knows how many other atrocities committed in the name of “freedom” by our military and intelligence forces.
The shameful continuance of segregation by other means…by economic means, domestically applied economic sanctions in their own right…all over the United States.
Name another world power that has been this busy imposing its will by the use of military and/or economic means on the other countries of the world and on its own lower economic classes.
Name one!!!
You cannot.
And there we jolly well are, aren’t we.
A killer empire with deservedly bad karma now coming back at us at warp speed.
Including Herr Trumpf.
What goes around, comes around.
Street wisdom at its most trenchant.
What goes around, comes around.
Bet on it.
AG
You announce at the beginning of this post that you don’t care to persuade anyone. So you’re writing to read your writing, then.
I enjoy reading contributions from people who respectfully engage a discussion with the community. In announcing your intent so clearly, you saved me time. Thanks?
Article is really predicated on the idea that these far right ethnocentric nationalist groups are in enough foreign policy alignment with Putin to be useful to his cause.
And that Putin is helping them even as they help him.
Now, maybe you’d prefer to live somewhere other than the West or you’d like the West to go back to fighting themselves over religion and nationality. Maybe you’d prefer the Russian press and their position on the arts and the sexual preferences of many artists.
Perhaps you’d trade a mass ethnic-based deportations and statutory religious bigotry for a little less globalism.
But you’ve already revealed yourself in how you portray the West. You take it for granted at best, and you slander it at worst.
Interesting topic. What is “the west” now? Are we seeing a new alignment? Has the “atlantic divide” become so wide that west now really means western europe sans the UK and US?
that’s the threat.
Quite frankly, what I personally believe to be the situation with regard to what prior to globalism was called “The West” in capital letters is not going to matter one whit in the survival or decline of The West. It is a post-World War II idea that peace, human rights, and prosperity were necessary if The West was going to avoid another war like World War II. That idea was sold hard to those who were within a couple years later in the bulls-eye of Joe McCarthy’s hearing’s focus. The Marshall Plan was sold under that idea of integration and redemption until it came time to settle the Vietnam War and the Cold War and the Afghanistan War. What ended the post-World War II chaos within a decade or decade an a half in Europe was something that we could not afford in Vietnam or the former Soviet Union and certainly did not are to afford in Afghanistan, Iraq, even the Former Yugoslavia. By then we were shipping out our jobs, not using this foreign aid to create customers for our businesses.
By the time of George W. Bush, the idea of the West as a haven of international law, justice, human rights, and the end of spasmodic war and torture had disappeared. By the end of his and Cheney’s rule, so had any Western notions of privacy and freedom. And then by the middle of the Obama administration so had the notion that the European Union was a bulwark against economic crisis. Or the notion that Russia could eventually be integrated into Europe on Western terms.
For the past almost forty years, neither political party for all their supposed worship of the West sought to strengthen the arc of those institutions of the West that rose out of World War II.
All this veneration for the West of late is hollow and devoid of more than rhetoric and team-choosing.
The West post-Vietnam War was the region of the world that intentionally sought strength through multicultural respect, equality under the law, environmental restraint, and a free life. All of those have rapidly closed in the past 20 years.
What will preserve that nostalgic legacy of the West is not more clapping and cheering but actually creating a opposition to Trumpism that carries that legacy to the future. In fact, further litmus-testing of the “true faithful” will fail to get us anywhere. Especially when most of the arguments are way off the mark for where the situation has turned.
Immanuel Wallerstein has one glimpse of what resistance (or call it an opposition party to the Republicans) involves:
Sanctuary, shelter, food, water, counsel, relief for those coming under the focus of TrumpWorld are more important than a Dinesh d’Sousza-style pep rally for Western culture. Show it in action; don’t claim it rhetorically.
“Slander?”
A definition:
Read my most recent post on this thread.
The truth of the matter is not “slander.” It is simply an observable truth. What I wrote in that comment cannot be argued. It is simply what has happened since the end of WWII. I wish it were otherwise, but it quite clearly is not.
You write:
You mean “AG hates America,” don’t you, Booman? How McCarthy of you!!!
No. I do not “hate America. I hate what it has become in my lifetime. I am part of a nearly 400-year old American family. I am staying…not running…and I am fighting in my own way to change things. What I would “prefer” is to live in a country that does not try to impose its militarily-supported economic will upon the weaker countries of the world. What I would “prefer” is to see the end of economically-forced segregation in the United States. What I would “prefer” would be to live in a country that treats its citizens that same way that it should be treating the environment…human ecology, in a simple couple of words.
What I would prefer would be to see this country take its troops back from their far-flung positions, establish an impermeable set of legal borders…no forced deportations, just a halt to “forced,” totally illegal immigrations…forced upon the country by greedy, soulless corporations looking for guaranteed cheap labor…and begin to rebuild itself from within. Let the other countries of the world take care of their own goddamned business. And most clearly…do not fuck with us!!!
The Russian press? It doesn’t hold a propaganda candle to the game the U.S./NATO media play. Not even close. Hell…I’ve been in Russia several times over the past decade, in real contact with Russian musicians…real, up close and personal, daily contact. The entire country knows what’s up with its media. It’s a laughingstock. Here in the U.S. the media have been…at least until the recent, unexpected triumph of Herr Trumpf…the Word of God to a majority if the American people. Trump’s win threw the Deep State into a true panic because their magnificent consensus machine belched up nothing but rancid gas for the very first time. Up until now it has been one long, trance-producing advertisement for whatever the Deep State wanted a majority of the public to believe, from poison soup to genetically altered nuts.
No more.
Watch.
AG
P.S. And…get real while you’re at it.
WAMO ain’t shit.
Bet on it.
Start looking for new work.
The Deep State is getting mighty shallow these days.
This is shallow, naive both-siderism on a global scale.
Neither shallow nor “naive,” jsrtheta. Just calling out the cards the way that they lay.
Spy vs. spy.
Nothing more and nothing less.
They hang spies, don’t they?
Unless of course they ascend to the presidency of the United States, like Bush I.
Ot control Russia, like Putin.
Spy vs. spy, and lie vs. lie.
That’s what spies do.
Lie.
That’s their job!!!
AG
It seems that Nigel Farage served as Stone’s intermediary to the larger white nationalist movement during the campaign. At least the US-UK media were noting his travels, unprecedented to some extent in a US election campaign. To the extent that Stone directed him on Trump’s behalf (even without Trump’s knowledge and explicit consent) I still note that Stone and Farage were very tight.
What did international white nationalist solidarity get Trump? I don’t think those pursuing this angle have driven that to ground yet.
What Putin is likely to have gotten were relaxation of the longer sanctions from 2014 and the last minute sanctions around the time of the election. Not sure about the earlier ones, but the last were specific to prominent Russian persons. I’m not sure that they explicitly named Putin, but they did catch up a number of Putin business allies.
But the hanging question in this whole narrative is the fact that Trump did not need Putin to deliver the skills needed to fish for (or phish for) the DNC and Podesta hacks nor to deliver the electoral college.
What the Wikileaks Vault 7 leak makes clear is the use of the US intelligence community of private contractors. And the vulnerabilities in doing that.
Yes, bring evidence before a grand jury about Roger Stone. My guess it will lead deeper into US persons before it leads to Russia and Putin. And that Trump’s partnership with Putin was very much a matter of Walter Mitty. My guess is that after Trump’s victory, Russian national security is scrambling to figure out how much of an asset or liability Trump is to them.
If Mark Warner finally has developed enough brass to do something, be sure forge ahead and make sure the information gets to the American people on the eve of an election, a campaign tactic growing in use; even the FBI Director used it. But don’t live in the illusion that it’s some two-for-one combination of domestic political win and a foreign relations advance. It will barely rein in the pace of the Trump juggernaut of normalizing white nationalism in the US. And Warner only succeeds if he succeeds in fracturing the Congressional Republican Caucus over what he finds. In Watergate, Sam Ervin depended on Howard Baker to be a straight-shooter. Who is that counterpart for Warner? If the answer is McCain or Graham we will not see more than the gentlemen taking yet another dive for Mitch McConnell.