The FBI knew Julian Assange had the "Vault 7" information which contained illegal methods and technologies used by spy agencies against the American people.  They were negotiating with Assange, through U.S. Senator Mark Warner (D - VA), to keep the Vault 7 information from being publicly exposed. 

Everything changed, however, when Assange offered to provide proof that the DNC email leaks were provided by a DNC insider and not by the Russians.  This was the last thing Comey wanted, as it would blow the fake "Russian collusion" story to pieces.  So Comey ordered Senator Warner to "stand down" and cut off all negotiations with Wikileaks.  Assange released the Vault 7 material shortly after negotiations broke down.

JAMES COMEY ALLOWED THE RELEASE OF SEVERELY DAMAGING NATIONAL SECURITY INFORMATION RATHER THAN GIVE UP THE KNOWN LIE THAT THE RUSSIANS HACKED DNC EMAILS.

James Comey should be tried for treason.

---

Is there a link to this voice in your head?

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/3...unity-deal

https://original.antiwar.com/mcgovern/20...ssia-gate/

http://www.investmentwatchblog.com/break...residency/

We should also note that Comey was never interested in examining the server containing the massive trove of evidence against Hillary. He also ignored the efforts of ex-NSA forensic experts who proved that the leaks were done locally at the DNC and not by Russians.

https://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-...-dnc-hack/

---

I'm not as big into conspiracies as Byron LeftTown, but I think it should be obvious to anyone that Comey (and the FBI) wasn't interested in actually inspecting the servers. And for a credible source like Assange to say that he has information important to the investigation and they still not get that information tells me that they were more worried about finding information that would hurt the DNC / Hillary.

---

Especially when respected experts like ex-NSA head of technology William Binney offered technical evidence showing the files were copied at LAN speeds (inside the building) at a location in the US Eastern Time Zone.

Bottom line, we know Seth Rich was the leaker. Assange indicated as much and John Podesta wrote an email about making an example of the leaker, shortly before Seth Rich was murdered. It also matches the computer forensic evidence of a DNC insider being the "hacker".

---

When the FBI came to the realization that digging any deeper into the DNC email scandal might result in some embarrassing revelations for the democrats, they retreated. They needed to prop up that "Russian collusion" angle, and they couldn't dare expose the fact that the only collusion with Russia was associated with Hillary and her campaign.

There was so much happening behind the scenes at the DNC with Hillary's campaign basically running the party, and rigging the election to assure she was the nominee, that they couldn't afford to have the FBI exposing anything with a protracted investigation.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

There was an interesting exchange in the Peter Strzok testimony. Rep. Louis Gohmert, R-Texas, revealed that Strzok and other FBI agents were informed by Intelligence Community Inspector General investigator Frank Rucker, that all but 4 of the more than 30,000 emails on Clinton's server had been sent to an unauthorized foreign entity. No one from the FBI ever followed this line of investigation. They knew copies were illegally being sent to a foreign entity, but since it was not Russia, they had no interest.

Former Inspector General Charles McCullough III, an Obama appointee, received unprecedented pushback when he raised alarms about this with James Clapper. In response, 7 U.S. Senators, led by Dianne Feinstein, wrote a letter accusing McCullough of "politicizing" the matter.

https://thehayride.com/2018/07/peter-str...a-hearing/

---

Now Republicans are saying that Lisa Page never received notice from the DoJ that they wanted to speak with her until they had the US Marshall's office serve a subpoena in person. Then the FBI sends their lawyers to guide her in her answers. I'm not even sure how long Democrats can defend their actions at this point. Since when are we OK with people not to answer questions and hiding the truth?

---