« Burgers tonight | Main | 26 million lifetime page views for SST as of today. »

09 October 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

blue peacock


What's your take that the Trump administration never indicted any of the coup plotters? And there were many.


Unfortunately the formatting on this website cuts off the sides of the letter and makes it unreadable for me - anyone else having this problem? (MacAirBook- Safari)

Great find and wish I could read it. Thanks, LJ. Share your appreciation of the American Thinker website.

Balint Somkuti, PhD

This story reeks of divided identities and loyalties.

Sic transit gloria mundi!


Sad but I suspect that the shear number of those in Government that have a vested interest in this will ensure that nothing continues to be the outcome.

Wonder how the whistleblower fared after this.


Ah.....more about the FEEBS - Famous But Incompetent.
The Democrat-media is the voice of the swamp and the DOJ/FBI are the protectors of the swamp.

Antoinetta III

Deap, I'm having the same problem; I'm using a Toshiba Satellite with Windows 7 and running on Internet Explorer.

Antoinetta III


Deap: use “view image in a new tab”.



Who was the United States Ambassador to Honduras the whistlebolwer is writing about (2009), Hugo Llorens?

No one

Deap, right-click and view image.

Chuck Light

Deap: I had the same formatting problem. But you can find the letter by clicking on the link in the post which states "here starting at p. 121."

When you get to the FBI Vault, click on the PDF on the left side of the page, near the top, entitled "Hillary Rodham Clinton part 23 of 23.pdf."

When the PDF opens, scroll down to page 121. The letter will be found at pp. 121 to 131. Page 132 (HRC 10114) may be the postage receipt for the letter when it was originally sent, but it is illegible.

I haven't tried to find the American Thinker article which is referenced in this post, but it may provide context.


Chuck Light

I found the Ortel article at American Thinker. Google "Charles Ortel American Thinker" and you can find a page with Ortel's articles and blogs. The article is entitled "James Comey and Robert Mueller have Massive Clinton Foundation Problems." It appears that Mr. Ortel has a significant interest in the Clinton Foundation.


Carter Page is interviewed by Sharyl Atkinsson on C-Span 2/ Book TV this weekend. Chilling, interesting perspective. Page's book is out: Abuse and Power.

Apparently Atkinson, of Sinclair Broadcasting, has had her own troubles with illegal surveillance.

Often Book tv replays programs, sometimes late, when it can be recorded.

Roger G Spenser

Thank you for posting this.


All C Span programs are archived & can be viewed on your computer.
Accessed by typing (i.e.) "Carter Page" in the search box.

The Atkinson interview is here:

I intend to purchase a TV & subscribe to cable once I've exhausted all C Span Book TV programming.


Thanks all for the tips to access this link. Got it. All I can remember is Barry Soetoro stating ...but Hilary didn't mean any harm running her separate insecure server.

The beginning pages of this link re-capping the strings of false and highly hedged statements about Benghazi were bone chilling to read too. I guess we should be grateful Biden did not pick Susan Rice for VP, but then he did much worse, he picked Kamala Harris.

And oh yeah, lock her up!

PS: is there some comfort seeing my spell check still does not recognize the word "Kamala"? The gods of small favors strikes again.

Diana Croissant

am so very happy that you have been able to get the documents to prove what became so very obvious to so many who did not have access to documents but who just had working brains. They help us to understand what was going on with HRC's computer situation and with Jim Comey's FBI.

You mention Hillary's "cabal of sychophants." There was no one more eager to become a card-carrying member of that cabal than Comey himself. I do remember an interview on television--don't have the date nor can I remember the media outlet that broadcast it--in which Comey gushed about how wonderful it would be for Hillary to win since his wife and daughters and even he himself were excited about possibly having the first female POTUS.

It seemed to me at the time that it was not an appropriate statement for the head of the FBI to make on national television--especially with all the questions about Hillary's emails and her obliterated computer--not to mention also the tarmac meeting in AZ between Bill and Loretta Lynch (supposedly to discuss grandchildren). I thought then and still think that the old Peter Principal was really being played out in the FBI at the time.

I don't remember the timeline of all this. But all I remember is how rotten things seemed were the District of Columbia.

Diana Croissant

OOPs!! I worked to long in public schools and dealt with too many incompetent principals.

I meant The Peter Principle.


Pelosi & husband invest up to $1 million in CrowdStrike, tech firm that launched Russiagate – report



There have been few ruling classes in human history, stewards of their civilizations, who have inherited so incredibly much from their predecessors and then squandered it so astonishingly quickly. Their legitimacy is like an old pre-fiat currency. They can only spend what they have and they are spending it hand over fist.

robt willmann

The 2016 letter to James Comey from the person who used to work at the State Department, and is in the FBI "Vault" of records, has seven pages that are missing which have been deleted. If you use the citation link to the FBI website, and download the "Hillary R. Clinton part 23 of 41", it is 176 pages in the pdf computer format. The part about the letter goes from pdf pages 120-132.

If you look at the lower right hand corner of each page (except for the deleted page information sheet, pdf page 120), there is a sequential page number that is put on each page that is provided. The numbers in the right hand corner go from HRC-10096 to HRC-10114.

The pages in the posted article above have numbers HRC-10097 to 10104. Pages numbered HRC-10105 to 10109 have been removed in the released FBI file. Pages HRC-10110 to 10111 are the reproduction of an opinion editorial that is part of the letter. Pages HRC-10112 to 10113 have also been removed. The last page, HRC-10114, has part of the page covered by the U.S. Postal Service express mail form and part of a receipt for payment when it was mailed.

Along the right margin of each page in which there are blanked out redactions, there is a little notation, which they are supposed to include to show which exemption in the Freedom of Information Act they are using to black out and exclude information from being released to the public.

In this letter, the exemptions are 'b6' and 'b7c'. Those are also the reasons claimed as the justification to remove the seven pages of the letter that have been deleted from the file.

Exemption b6 excludes information about individuals in personnel and medical files and similar files, when the disclosre of the information "would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy".

Exemption b7c excludes law enforcement information, the disclosure of which "could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy".

Larry C Johnson

The missing pages are the walk-in's CV and fitness reports that he appended to the letter. If those had been kept in the file it would immediately reveal his identity.


Wow, after reading how the whistleblower described the proper procedures for handling and accessing classified documents, it makes the Anthony Wiener laptop incident seem like an even more egregious crime if ANY of those emails contained classified information. I seem to recall there were supposedly tens of thousands found, although I don't think a definitive amount was ever disclosed. In fact, looking back, the entire circumstance seems to have been quickly swept under the rug.

Presuming that at least some of those thousands of laptop emails contained classified info (OR evidence of criminal activity, e.g., the solicitation of donations to the Clinton Foundation while she was at the DOS, etc., etc.), that the FBI DID NOTHING about the Wiener incident, that neither Clinton nor anyone else - not a single person - suffered any legal consequence for this or the email scandal that preceded it is astounding good fortune for all involved.

Mathias Alexander

Yes Deap, I am having the same problem.



I am reminded of a lecture by a professor of Russian History that Patrick Armstrong linked to in one of his Russia Sitereps who explained how Tsar Alexander I's intellegence service had penetrated the French Imperial government as early as 1807 and knew precisely what information Napoleon was getting along with his force's structure and movements. It is no wonder the panic of all associated with this debacle of American national security have been doubling down and increasing in panic since Trump was elected in 2016 and looks to be re-elected unless the election is stolen or rigged in multiple states.


National Review - Jan 16, 2020: Did this "Russian document", that is now claimed not to exist, play a role in dismissing charges against Clinton?

....."Department of Justice prosecutors reportedly are investigating the possibility that former FBI director James Comey leaked a classified Russian intelligence document to the media during the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails, according to a Thursday report from the New York Times.

Per the Times, the investigation is centered around two 2017 articles from the Times and the Washington Post describing the Russian document, which played a key role in Comey’s unilateral decision to announce in July 2016 that the FBI would not pursue charges against Clinton for using a private email server to conduct official business during her time as secretary of state.

The document, which Dutch intelligence shared with the U.S., includes an analysis of an email exchange between Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D., Fla.), who was then chairing the Democratic National Committee, and Leonard Bernardo, an official with the Soros-backed non-profit Open Society Foundations. Wasserman Schultz assures Bernardo in the email that then–attorney general Loretta Lynch would make sure Clinton wasn’t charged in the email probe.

Both Bernardo and Wasserman Schultz have denied ever having the exchange, and the FBI’s assessment claimed that the document was a fake and part of a Russian disinformation campaign.........."

National Review: 1/16/2020 - right before all hell broke loose over "covid".

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad