Hillary Clinton can’t blame the Russians for this.

A hacked email published by WikiLeaks Wednesday contains 10-megaton bombshell, proof that a top official in the United States Department of Justice was acting as a “mole” to the Clinton camp, leaking “heads up” information about upcoming congressional hearings that could embarrass the former secretary of state.

And this DOJ insider, this “mole,” happens to be the same man who just assured Congress that the Justice Department would be doing all it could to help the FBI investigate the hundreds of thousands of emails tied to scumbag former Democrat Congressman Anthony Weiner that led the bureau to renew its investigation of Clinton’s email scandal.

In a plot twist worthy of a John LeCarre spy novel, Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Peter Kadzik has been exposed as a secret “plant” inside the Justice Department, keeping old friend, longtime Clinton crony and currently Hillary’s campaign chairman John Podesta up to date on at least one segment of the email affair from inside the supposed “halls of justice.”


Sponsored


With this kind of cooperative connection inside the DOJ, you can see why Podesta is so valuable to the Democrat nominee.

“There is a HJC [House Judiciary Committee] oversight hearing today where the head of our Civil Division will testify,” Kadzik wrote to Podesta, his law school classmate.

“Likely to get questions on State Department emails. Another filing in the FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] case went in last night or will go in this am that indicates it will be awhile (2016) before the State Department posts the emails.”

kadzikemail1102

Podesta forwarded the email to several colleagues in the campaign, with the comment: “Additional chance for mischief.”

That’s putting it mildly. “Conspiracy to obstruct justice” might be a better way to phrase it.

As The Point and other conservative media have reported (and has been only lightly mentioned in the mainstream) Podesta and Kadzik share an old friendship going back to their law school days at Georgetown.

And both are intimately familiar with the Machiavellian ways of the Clinton world.

Kadzik represented Podesta as an attorney in private practice when Podesta was trying to avoid legal trouble as President Bill Clinton’s deputy chief of staff during the Monica Lewinsky scandal and subsequent impeachment.

After Podesta was promoted to chief of staff, Kadzik, obviously no choir boy himself, lobbied Podesta heavily for the disgraceful presidential pardon of fugitive financier Marc Rich. It was a stain of a different kind on the Clinton presidency, and possibly much worse than the more famous one that proved Bill was lying about sex with the young intern.

And when Kadzik was looking to move into “public service,” Podesta recommended him for a job in the Obama Justice Department in 2008, calling him a “fantastic lawyer” who “kept me out of jail.”

The two men even had dinner together on the night after Hillary Clinton’s 11-hour snow job of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, proving the woman’s physical fortitude at the least, if not her commitment to the truth. (That was before her coughing fits and public collapses started.)

Only this week, Podesta’s old friend was assuring Congress in writing that the Justice Department will devote “all necessary resources” to investigating the latest twist in the email saga – that top Clinton aide Huma Abedin had kept State Department emails on a laptop she shared with her sexting-inclined, estranged husband.

The WikiLeaks email about the hearing is only the tip of the iceberg, of course. If Kadzik was putting Justice Department information into “heads up” emails to his old college buddy, for the benefit of Hillary Clinton, God knows what he was saying when they got together for dinner and drinks in Georgetown after hours. Maybe what Attorney General Loretta Lynch was talking about behind closed doors at the DOJ? Maybe what information FBI investigators had reported internally that wasn’t yet deemed ready for public consumption? The possibilities are endless, and deeply disturbing.

Could anyone – at this point – take the word of any Clinton campaigner, or campaign associate, at face value?

In the final presidential debate, Clinton tried to divert attention about the WikiLeaks revelations by feigning outrage at some supposed Russian involvement in the hacks and releases of emails that have proven how deeply corrupt both she and her party are. It’s a claim that was already disputed by former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton, and a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, two men about as far apart on the political spectrum as can be imagined.

Now, with the election less than a week away, her campaign manager’s mole — Hillary Clinton’s mole — inside Barack Obama’s Justice Department is out in the open.

No matter how much she might want to, she can’t blame the Russians for this.


Sponsored