Hello James

Here’s one on snit-wit Marcy Wheeler’s blog… with illustrations and live links at:

Ron West

"The history of the great events of this world are scarcely more than a history of crime"

-Voltaire

The wheel is indeed empty, or certainly devoid of truth. Marcy Wheeler at 'emptywheel' blog believes "the Russians did it", but there are so many holes in the 'DNC hack' story, a government embraced CIA generated conspiracy theory (one that's going to backfire), Niagara Falls couldn't keep that sieve filled; no matter intelligence agencies across the spectrum [2] [3] [4] of the liberal democracies are trying to pull the American intelligence agency's chestnuts out of the fire, Russian hackers here, Russian Hackers there, evil Russian hackers everywhere!

To begin, we only need dissect one short article where Wheeler asserts 'the Russians did it' in her:

December 12, 2017 by emptywheel

In recent days there have been a number of stories in Russia implicating the FSB (note, not GRU) in issues related to the DNC hack. First, there was this article from The Bell, claiming that the four Russian treason defendants (two of whom were FSB officers) are being prosecuted because they provided inside information to the US about GRU’s involvement in the DNC hack.

“But it is impossible to identify which specific cyber group or groups were responsible for last year’s Democratic National Committee hack based on technical traces alone, four cyber experts polled by The Bell confirmed. To prove specifically that the GRU was involved, U.S. investigators would have needed inside sources — preferably with access to confidential state matters, one source explained. Mikhailov had that access.

“Relations between intelligence agencies working on the cyber front were strained, one of Mikhailov’s acquaintances said. The FSB and GRU compete for funding and Mikhailov felt the FSB carried out cyber tasks more professionally than the GRU, according to one of his acquaintances.

“He used to say that “the GRU breaks into servers in a brazen, clumsy, and brutish manner and it interfered with his own work”, the acquaintance said. Moreover “the GRU’s hackers didn’t even try to cover their tracks””

The report said that Sergei Mikhailov — who was named (but not charged) the Yahoo hack case — shared information on Russian hackers who wouldn’t work with the FSB with western law enforcement agencies though a cut-out named Kimberly Zenz.

“Mikhailov had been working closely with Western intelligence agencies since 2010. Report written for Vrublevsky said that Mikhailov had leaked sensitive information “on Russian cyber-criminals, who had refused to cooperate with him, to a U.S. citizen”. More specifically, Mikhailov reportedly handed the U.S. citizen — a woman — information on Russian state-sponsored hacker attacks against Estonia and Georgia in 2007 and 2008.

“Burykh says he found that Mikhailov gave the information to Stoyanov, who then passed it on to Kimberly Zenz of the U.S. company iDefense Intelligence. From there, it went to the U.S. Department of Defense"

This 1st (immediate preceding) portion of Wheeler's article is ok to set up her premise but is mostly notable for one omitted fact; her source, The Bell, is politically aligned with Russia's most fringe anti-Putin liberal elements, led by the former nationalist turned liberal (western media darling & color revolution hopeful) Alexi Navalny.

Then there’s this story, reporting that a hacker tied to the Lurk group, Konstantin Kozlovsky, hacked the DNC on behalf of the FSB.

Following on this (immediate, preceding) linked story, which is mostly notable for its brevity and rehashing The Bell reporting but referencing another Russian liberal fringe (Navalny aligned) anti-Putin media outlet, Dozhd TV, introduces the name Konstantin Kozlovsky and it's then we come to the real cheat in Wheeler's reporting and where in her article things get really interesting:

This immediate, preceding linked article is, again, the Russian liberal fringe or, Navalny aligned anti-Putin media but perhaps the most credible of the fringe liberal media. The article is in Russian language. It is long, complex, and it certainly does NOT lay out any news, despite Wheeler's word play on the expression 'lay out the facts.' It is most notable for numerous points Wheeler omits to mention. The article's author, Irek Murtazin, is very careful to emphasize, throughout, nearly everything he is writing is speculation. He mentions there is more than one version of his story. He begins his article with a disclaimer, pointing out almost nothing is known with any certainty, concerning the evidence or any facts surrounding the charges concerning those arrested. He proposes the American version of events is possible but doesn't give this much credence. He uses many self-referring terms concerning his article's content that can be translated variously as 'my impression', 'a possibility', 'my opinion' and more. This is a context most westerners will have no ability to discover for themselves and Wheeler construes this for her readers to be "laying out the news"

Notably, Murtazin admits the (keep reading) Konstantin Kozlovsky Facebook profile and posting could be a creation of "foreign security service" (implying CIA or other western intelligence) but he prefers to believe it is a Russian security service creation intended for manipulation and/or damage control. Murtazin's article clearly indicates this is his opinion only and he has no hard facts to back these presumptions up. He even has his unnamed security services sources specifying 'possibly' or 'it could be.'

NG [Novaya Gazeta, but actually Irek Murtazin's opinion piece, Wheeler fails to make this distinction] questions — as I do — why this is all coming out now. Of particular interest, it notes that Kozlovsky’s claims were posted in August, but for some reason the hashtags that would have alerted people to the posted claim were not triggering, meaning the information only got noticed (at least in Russia) now.

This (immediate, preceding) omits Murtazin having pointed out Konstantin Kozlovsky had been held in a facility so secure 'a mouse' could not leave or arrive unregistered. This is important to note for the fact these may in fact not be (almost certainly are not) Kozlovsky's claims at all. The impression Wheeler would leave with the inattentive is, the idea there is actual substance to Kozlovsky's 'Facebook claims' when in fact there likely is no substantive element. Wheeler then quotes Murtazin:

“Interestingly, the first materials on this page were posted back in August of this year. And despite the fact that sensational publications were accompanied by tags # CIB, # FSB, # Dokoutchaev, # Mikhailov # Stoyanov, # hackers, # Kaspersky, the existence of a personal page Kozlovsky in Facebook for some reason became known only in early December”

Reinforcing her misleading the reader, Wheeler doesn't openly or clearly state, or accurately interpret material posited in Murtazin's article, pointing to the most likely possible of facts; the sound idea Kozlovsky, the imprisoned person, never had anything to do with setting up his own Facebook page. Then:

"April 28, 2015: FSB accesses Lurk servers with Kaspersky’s help.

"May 18, 2016: Kozlovsky arrest.

"May 19-25, 2016: DNC emails shared with WikiLeaks likely exfiltrated.

"November 1, 2016: Date of Kozlovsky confession.

"December 5, 2016: Arrest, for treason, of FSB officers.

"August 14, 2017: Kozlovsky posts November 1 confession of hacking DNC on Facebook.

"November 28, 2017: Karim Baratov (co-defendant of FSB handlers) plea agreement.

"December 2, 2017: Kozlovsky’s claims posted on his Facebook page.

Note Wheeler does not specify which "additions" are hers, in the preceding, although (at her site) Wheeler attributes the timeline to Murtazin with a blockquote. She previously only uses blockquotes for portions of articles she cites (I've added quotation marks where Wheeler is quoting with blockquote at her article, as her entire article is reproduced here in blockquote for purpose of this discussion.) Nowhere in Murtazin's article does a timeline appear in form Wheeler presents as a quote:

fake block quote - 1

Of particular note, the emails exfiltrated from the DNC and shared with WikiLeaks were probably not exfiltrated until the days immediately after Kozlovsky’s arrest.

Where on earth did Wheeler come up with this? Now, she would have us believe the DNC mails hack was accomplished following Kozlovsky's arrest, in which case the 'confession' posted at Facebook cannot possibly be passed off as accurate, the context and language of the proposed confession precludes this. Is Wheeler insinuating Kozlovsky hacked the DNC from maximum security prison, with a gun to his head, and attempting to attribute this to Murtazin? Finally, Wheeler concludes...

As NG [Murtazin's opinion piece, actually] notes, this all may well be true (though I wonder why Russia is now letting claims it was involved in the DNC hack go public, after claiming it was uninvolved for so long). But the reason it is coming out now is at least as interesting that it is coming out.

...and her "may well be true" consistently ignores Murtazin has emphasized, not only throughout his article, but particularly in its conclusion, this is entirely speculation absent hard facts (noting none of the prosecution files are public), and his admission of this cannot take into account Wheeler's twisting of his theory (Murtazin presents his piece as nothing more than a theory), her additions and most notably, omissions. Then, Wheeler can wonder for all of eternity (for her readers' suggestion susceptible minds) "I wonder why Russia is now letting claims it was involved in the DNC hack go public" when in fact it has not been demonstrated Russia has done any such thing. This is Murtazin speculating, nothing more, coming from a disgruntled former mainstream Russian journalist with the integrity of 10,000 Marcy Wheelers with his admission amounting to 'I made this all up, maybe it will prove true' (but it certainly won't, see section two of this post.) In fact, there is greater chance (even if very slim) the arrests of the Kapersky lab figure and the Russian secret services officers are coincidental and unrelated to the arrest of Kozlovsky, than there is chance (practically none) Kozlovsky hacked the DNC servers. For all we know, the FSB officers arrests & treason charges could relate to corruption concerning the billions of rubles the LURK hacking group had stolen from Russia. Anyone can speculate anything at a point where no one really knows what the evidence is concerning those charged. In the end, the most notable omission of Wheeler is, Murtazin's theory does not implicate Putin, but proposes a possibility that would point to far down the chain of command, to a mid-level, American spy service directed, traitor embedded in Russia's FSB; ordering the DNC hack to [apparently] frame the Russians. How'd Wheeler miss that? She couldn't have. The damning piece of Wheeler's article is as simple as its' title; "Why Is Russia Finally Letting (Dubious) Details of Its Involvement in DNC Hack Out?" The plain answer is, Russia hasn't. Novaya Gazeta, publishing this far-fetched speculation, is certainly not acting on behalf of the Russian state.

Marcy Wheeler is one of the slickest, most underhanded so-called 'journalists' this investigator has ever encountered. She comes off as a master propagandist, fully engaged in running a professional 'limited hangout' or information operation promoting the USA's intelligence services line. Her target audience is what I'd call the 'marginally mainstream alienated' seeking to know what is actually happening. Those people are both; too often convinced and horribly misinformed.

Note on my methodology: I did not rely on google translate (never a good idea, although I do use this tool to become familiar with the overall gist of a story in foreign language.) In order to actually understand the Russian article by Murtazin, I arranged on three occasions to sit with one of my (several) Russian literate associates, to get at accuracy and the nuance of what Murtazin was trying to say. Once before this composition and twice again following this composition.

Incidental to this, I'm informed the Kozlovsky 'confession' (reproduced in the Novaya Gazeta opinion piece by Murtazin) reads in the original Russian like a hybrid geek spy novel/Russian suspense thriller movie trailer, with all of the elements of a criminal-turned-unlucky-super-hero plot; where the protagonist turned world savior Kozlovsky had been served with a task list of accomplishing all the west's liberal democracies most extreme paranoid cyber-fantasies. The remark was made "they should give this to Spielberg" and this Russian literate friend is not a Putin fan. It follows, Central Intelligence Agency can never provide proper screen credit to its writers, for reason of plausible deniability as it were.

Also, it is noticed Murtazin's bias is palpable; when Murtazin refers to Russia's Federal Security Bureau (FSB) as 'The Lubyanka' (a historic Moscow jail and museum where FSB has an office) to associate today's FSB with Stalin's political crimes (the comparison is not close.) This is not how you win friends and influence people (or change the system.)

Wrapping up this section on the emptywheel (which reads like an intelligence agency contracted) hit job, we come to question of Marcy Wheeler's motive, in her ability to take advantage of her readers vulnerability where examples given...

cz

outside comfort zone- V -outside comfort zone

WaPo = CIA media ^ ^ DNC mails leaked

...'cz' is the 'comfort zone' and the V in the center represents 'psychological sight.' As a metaphor, we can say, the eyes are at the point (bottom) of the V and people who depend on certain media and consequent shaped, narrow perception, have their field of vision contained or restricted within the V or comfort zone. The point of working through media to shape perception is to keep the large majority of people inside the 'comfort zone', insuring trust in (no matter if undeserved), and support for, geopolitical policy (no matter how insane.) In the event Wheeler, with her habit of sourcing Operation Mockingbird 2.0's WaPo & NYT, were herself manipulated (narcissists are brilliant material for this), I'll be following up on that with a forthcoming satire. Meanwhile, anyone desiring an unbiased take on what's actually happening, politically, inside Russia by an author who is not socially engineering his material, is not in love with Putin but understands Putin's method's better than most, I recommend a read of analyst Gordon Hahn's assessment HERE:

This section has not been changed since it had been posted as "Incompetent Espionage & Wikileaks (III)." It still holds up:

16 September 2017 update: Antiwar.com reports:

"Under this deal, which was reported by the Wall Street Journal, Assange would provide conclusive proof that Russia was not the source of hacked emails WikiLeaks published. In return, he would be offered a pardon, or some other assurance that he wouldn’t be prosecuted by the US for involvement in WikiLeaks.

"Rohrabacher brought this deal to the White House Wednesday [13 September 2017], but Chief of Staff John Kelly not only apparently didn’t like the offer, but didn’t tell President Trump that the offer had been made, instead telling Rohrabacher to take the proposal to the intelligence community.

"The intelligence community almost certainly wouldn’t be in a position to offer any sort of amnesty for Assange, which likely means the end of the proposal. Rohrabacher offered to set up a meeting between Assange and a Trump representative, but that too appears to have been dismissed by Kelly"

So, the generals keep Trump sequestered like the Vatican keeps a rampant pedophile priest under wraps; away from any real work and responsibilities (in this case, kept from knowledge of what's actually going on in the world.) But now, with the Wall Street Journal blowing the whistle, Ivanka should soon be whispering in her daddy's ear; and what will tell you everything is, what happens next. Suppose Trump keeps his mouth shut and says nothing? This will indicate the absolute completion of the Pence aligned generals capture of the Oval Office.

But the real news here is, Assange provides evidence of his belief that he is personally more important than any unconditional release of information which should stop the Pentagon and NATO's pursuit of a war footing directed at Russia in its tracks.

Narcissism? Is there a stronger word? Julian Assange, who fancies himself 'Jesus of the Digital Age' would appear to be tired of bearing his cross. The Roman's puppet, King Herod, hasn't been authorized to provide the pardon and Pontius Pilate's (read Mike Pompeo's) people will deliver Jesus of the Digital Age to crucifixtion on behalf of the 'duopoly' mob, to satisfy their blood lust. Good luck with the world's biggest 'deal-maker' (read loser) Wikileaks, because you blew it by waiting too long.

The entire sand-castle (a product of Obama CIA Director John Brennan's imagination) the "Russians hacked the election" is finally washing away with an incoming tide. How this plays out is anyone's guess.

The open question is, how the new information will be leveraged, if it were to actually break into the open widely, with the bad boy Trump essentially captured by the surreal evil that surrounds him. Other than pure evil (e.g. Pence), only a narcissist or a fool would ever desire to be president of this particular republic. In 'The Donald', we have both.

1 August 2017 an audio tape is leaked in which Seymour Hersh states the FBI knows it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails:

"What the [FBI] report says is that some time in late Spring… he makes contact with WikiLeaks, that’s in his computer. Anyway, they found what he had done is that he had submitted a series of documents — of emails, of juicy emails, from the DNC" -Seymour Hersh

On 9 August 2017 The Nation magazine publishes a column on a group of independent experts...

"Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year"

...demonstrating the DNC mails were leaked, not hacked.

On 18 August 2017 Antiwar.com reports Congressman Dana Rohrabacher has met with Assange concerning the DNC mails and [the article] further credibly suggests Assange is holding the DNC leak evidence hostage as a bargaining chip to possibly acquire a pardon for himself and leverage wikileaks into legitimacy with a President of the United States who at this point is owned by the USA's intelligence agencies, a hare-brained scheme destined to fail. Assange & company waited too long.

But this would fit Julian Assange's self-centered, persecuted-savior complex which never ceases to amaze, this guy (as well, Craig Murray) has allowed the idiots surrounding Trump to push us towards the brink with Russia, for months. All because Assange is tired of his embassy confinement in London, a circumstance that is entirely his own fault for the fact he didn't have the self-discipline to keep his dick in his pants (whether Assange's admitted intercourse was a case of rape or not.)

What's more is, this blog pointed to strong circumstantial evidence it was Seth Rich leaked the DNC mails this past January, and recalling this, it still stretches the imagination a former UK ambassador would make an amateur espionage move worthy of a cub scout playing spy. But that's what Craig Murray had done in the case of the DNC emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

Seymour Hersh states Seth Rich is the source of the DNC mails. Craig Murray states he had met with the source of the DNC mails. A + B = C:

Craig Murray met with Seth Rich

That Murray would be a high value target for American counter-intelligence to monitor for the reason of his high profile association with WikiLeaks is beyond obvious. For Murray then to state...

murray_wikileaks-1

"I know who leaked them. I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things"

...goes to the practically bizarre when coming from a former United Kingdom ambassador to Uzbekistan. The UK is little different to the USA in the case of embassies providing cover for spies; in which case Murray should at least have some rudimentary espionage understanding such as YOU DO NOT MEET YOUR SOURCE DIRECTLY WHEN YOU ARE A HIGH PROFILE TARGET OF YOUR ADVERSARY'S COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE HUNTING YOUR (in this case, WikiLeaks) SOURCE(S)

Then, we had WikiLeak's Assange giving what amounts to a 'Glomar' 'I will neither confirm or deny' response concerning the murder (assassination) of Seth Rich after appearing to suggest Rich was the source of the DNC emails leak:

Beyond this, WikiLeaks offering a $20,000 reward for the solving of the Seth Rich murder is laughable, that's what an American west coast upscale community would offer for the arrest of a serial killer of the neighborhood's cats. Two million dollars might get two seconds' attention of a corruptible counter-intelligence agent with knowledge of a professional hit on Seth Rich, twenty million might even net an inside the agency sucker willing to take the exceedingly high risk to one's life (almost certain death) that would attend selling out an agency hit man for substantial lucre. In truth, the WikiLeaks reward offer amounted to little more than a tabloid publicity stunt.

Narcissism is a blinding thing; and a self-righteous narcissism is no exception. Ambassador Murray could have every good intention but on the face of it, he had seriously screwed up. Murray and WikiLeaks should have immediately come clean, there was little to lose. Seth Rich was the source, Murray had met with him, and much could have been gained by stating so; there would be nothing given up any intelligence agency involved did not already know. It have been the right thing to do.

Craig Murray stating 'I had a serious lapse of professional judgement and this resulted in the death of Seth Rich' would be the most responsible and newsworthy move WikiLeaks could have taken; to counter the CIA's 'the Russians hacked the DNC' propaganda lie, in which there is much invested by the agency; and the consequent damage to relations with Russia, and growing threat to what little world peace yet exists, is immense. WikiLeaks should have done the right thing a long time ago and they have not. Why not? Because Assange and WikiLeaks believes Assange's comfort is more important than world peace. What fucks. This is beyond inexcusable, it's criminal. But for Murray, there’s more at stake here than just a hit to ego & image.

Murray's likely role in the DNC leaks case? A personal meeting with Rich to confirm for WikiLeaks Seth Rich was a bona fide insider with authentic material prior to a WikiLeaks cash payment to Rich and arrangements completed for the mails transfer.

Now, it is a question of 'damned if you do and damned if you don't' release the evidence because WikiLeaks waited too long, and let the criminals surrounding Trump consolidate their power while investing deeply in the myth of the Russians hacked the election; a criminal cabal that will up the ante on the world stage to any level necessary to avoid accountability. WikiLeaks Idiots. WikiLeaks Morons.

Meanwhile, Murray subsequently barred from the United States (except that he applies for a visa, typically unnecessary for a British citizen) appears to have been, in a manner of speaking, a deep state message to Murray: 'thank you very much for the lapse of judgement, we have taken full advantage with the assassination of Seth Rich and we won't be requiring your services after this' (he'd be smart to stay away.)

The really sticky problem for WikiLeaks in this scenario is, Seymour Hersh asserts in the recorded call WikiLeaks had paid Rich for the leaked documents, damaging or reducing to element of pretense WikiLeaks claims of journalism & providing rationale for deep state prosecutors & judges to find this had been straightforward espionage. But they won't do it if the Rich-Murray meeting stays buried, a LOT is invested in 'the Russians did it' for the public consumption. If it DOES break open, Murray's 'goose is cooked.' It's now not only WikiLeaks problem in a larger sense, but Murray's, whether he does or doesn't admit the assassinated Seth Rich had been the DNC mails source.

Murray's reputation? C'est la mort.

A prime candidate for assassin of Seth Rich HERE: