Carl Bernstein: FBI Would Not Reopen Case Unless New Evidence Was “A Real Bombshell”


[It hasn’t been said, but the real bombshell underlying the Clinton e-mail scandal is espionage. Clinton has been dumping state secrets on her doorstep for years. That means that any passerby could help himself – Russian, Chinese, anybody, in exchange for a donation to the Clinton Foundation. Clinton was using her unsecured server as what is known as a ‘dead drop’ in espionage. Mossad is well known for trading the secrets of their ‘allies’ with the secret services of Russia and China. Jonathan Pollard’s secrets were sold to the Russians. If I may state the obvious, Clinton was another Jonathan Pollard. To suggest that she was merely careless is nonsense. In good English, she is what is commonly known as a traitor. – Gordon Logan]

Related Video:  Interview with Carl Bernstein

CARL BERNSTEIN: Well, there’s no question that the e-mails have always been the greatest threat to her candidacy for president, that her conduct in regard to the e-mails is really indefensible and if there was going to be more information that came out, it was the one thing, as I said on the air last night, actually that could really perhaps affect this election.

We don’t know what this means yet except that it’s a real bombshell. And it is unthinkable that the Director of the FBI would take this action lightly, that he would put this letter forth to the Congress of the United States saying there is more information out there about classified e-mails and call it to the attention of congress unless it was something requiring serious investigation. So that’s where we are…

Is it a certainty that we won’t learn before the election? I’m not sure it’s a certainty we won’t learn before the election.

One thing is, it’s possible that Hillary Clinton might want to on her own initiative talk to the FBI and find out what she can, and if she chooses to let the American people know what she thinks or knows is going on. People need to hear from her…

I think if she has information available to her from the FBI or any other source as to her knowledge of what these e-mails might be, hopefully she will let us know what they are and what is under discussion here.

Right now we’re all talking in a vacuum but I want to add here that in the last, oh, 36, 48 hours, there has been an undercurrent of kind of speculative discussion among some national security people that something might surface in the next few days about e-mails, and I think the expectation in this chatter — and I took it as just chatter but informed chatter, to some extent — was that it would relate to another round of WikiLeaks e-mails, which our Justice Department people seem to be saying is not the case, but there has been some noise in the national security community the last day or two of this kind of possibility of some kind of revelation.

But this is her achilles heel and we have to remember that it also comes on the — back to the word heel — of the revelations about the Clinton Foundation. So the confluence of all of this is bad for her as it stands now but with some knowledge she might be able to stop, turn things around, and give us some idea of what’s going on in a way we might not otherwise know, and also it’s very possible that some members of congress very quickly are going to get an idea of what these e-mails are, and what this is all about, and for whatever purpose put some information out there.

Posted by Gordon Logan – the agent who brought down the Soviet Union in August 1991. 25 years on, he and his family are still being hounded by the British secret police.


11 Responses to “Carl Bernstein: FBI Would Not Reopen Case Unless New Evidence Was “A Real Bombshell””

  1. Chris B says:

    sorry, my last email just got wiped for some odd reason. I can’t be bothered to type it again other than to say that Assange is 100% confirmed alive – and in fact in his “cometh the hour, cometh the man moment” – how’s Jimmy [ex-NSA] ‘Stone the bloody crows;’ going to come back from this after assuring us Assange is 100% dead and anything from Wikileaks from now on is CIA disinfo? I do hope Jimmy boy has an alternative post November job plan in place.
    From John Pilger (or are he and Murray disinfo too Jim?)

    • Tapestry says:

      The story was about Assange being taken off line by the Ecuador Embassy prior to the US election after pressure was applied to the Ecuadorian Government, combined with a list of recent suspicious deaths of people associated with Wikileaks. Stone said he didn’t believe Assange could be taken offline, and until he sees him talking with today’s paper on the video recording – which must last a good hour, will be believe Assange is alive. I gave his post the headline ‘Assange Is Gone’. Stone was quite careful in how he phrased it all. I was not.

    • ferryt says:

      Gordon Logan,

      Would you mind clarifying the term ‘intelligence services’

      Much obliged,

    • ferryt says:

      Sorry double post below.

      Murray is disinfo.

      Why do you think otherwise Chris B?

    • ferryt says:

      Do you not see the setup that Murray provides?

      You never leave the Z

      Z = cia, mi6, mossad etc

      Theatre even for the ‘awake’.

  2. Nollidge says:

    This came about because of a New York cops investigation into Anthony Wiener’s (Huma’s husband) “sexting” a 15 year old girl in another state.They had to hand this info to the FBI,& that left the FBI with no choice but to re-open their investigation.In short,Comey’s hand was forced.

  3. RabbiT says:

    For any comment of more than a few lines I find it good practice to open a word document, write the piece there then copy and paste. If a successful post then don’t bother saving the document. If not, you can always save and try again and vice versa copy the comment to word and try later.

  4. Gordon Logan says:

    That all the major intelligence services were monitoring her unsecured server for years is certain. To claim that Clinton was merely ‘careless’ is nonsense. Her unsecured server was a dead drop.

  5. ferryt says:

    Gordon Logan,

    Would you mind clarifying the term ‘intelligence services’

    Much obliged,

    • Gordon Logan says:

      What do I mean by intelligence services? Firstly Mossad. It is likely that she works for Mossad. She could never get into the White House without their support. If she was pitched, I don’t see her refusing. They would have suggested the private server idea, which is unheard of in Washington bureaucracy. Secondly, Mossad are a clearing house for US secrets e.g. Jonathan Pollard and they would have been quite happy for the Russians and the Chinese to help themselves to whatever was on the server.. This looks very much like a case of treason. Claims of carelessness are nonsense. She must have been briefed on security many times.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.