Previous month:
June 2019
Next month:
August 2019

July 2019

"I robbed my first house at 7 - tax cuts risk more kids like me" - lousy cheap politicking shot from their ABC

What about a few stories of people doing worthwhile things with their own money?

Not from Their ABC.

This politicking is beyond the pale.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-10/tax-cuts-could-starve-social-services-increase-crime/11293336


Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 3.42.45 pm

 

I robbed my first house at the age of seven.

I dealt drugs, my brother was in and out of court, my father was imprisoned briefly for cannabis.

My mother was often institutionalised due to major mental health issues.

We moved from house to house with periods of homelessness in between. The houses were raided regularly for my father's cannabis or the goods my brother and I had stolen.

Persistent exclusion from the community meant there was little protection from the steady stream of paedophiles we encountered throughout our lives. I was on my own, without a parent, by 14, using methamphetamine, and expelled from school.

We grew up resenting police, resenting a society we believed had no place for us.

At 21, I finally gained the stability to integrate with society — but not everyone is so lucky.

I went on to graduate from university with distinction, and now work a fulfilling career within advocacy and human services.

What was it that turned my life around?

I never went to prison to be "corrected", but instead benefitted from service provision. I was rewoven back into the fabric of society.

It was my youth worker who helped with the stitching of the loose threads, the frayed ends of my life. He was the one I called in a crisis.

When I was experiencing problems with drug use, violence, or mental health relapse, he was there, ready to pick me up and get me the help I needed.

Even more than that, encouragement back into school. A voice I desperately needed to tell me of the life I was capable of.

Even today, I still have his number in my phone.

It was not fear of harsh sentencing, but mental health intervention, housing, youth services and a chance at an education that enabled me to break the cycle of offending in my family.

If only I'd had even more early intervention, it could have prevented so much harm.

Instead, the services that transformed my life are being starved of funding by a Government prioritising tax cuts and a return to surplus, whatever the public cost. Labor has voted alongside the Coalition to put more money in the pockets of the well-off, while refusing to raise payments for the most impoverished.

I grew up resenting a society I felt had no place for us. That resentment threatens to return now as we see a government, on both sides, turn its backs on the community.

Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 3.46.46 pm

Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 3.42.45 pm

UPDATE

Good comment!

Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 4.34.53 pm


We can thank Julie Bishop, George Brandis and Turnbull for inviting the UN in to supervise our jails

We first published this piece in December 2017.

Brandis is gone, big-noting Bishop's gone, Turnbull's gone - but the rest of us, particularly staff working in our prisons are left to deal with the aftermath of their virtue-signalling with the UN now headed our way for full on inspections.

 

Julie Bishop hands to the UN supervision of our prisons, juvenile & immigration detention centres & psychiatric facilities

Are we so bereft of self-confidence that we need the UN to help us avoid torturing people?

Saudi Arabia, China, Zimbabwe?

Julie Bishop thinks so.

And what's worse, she thinks doing this is an "achievement".

Screen Shot 2017-12-26 at 5.25.08 pmScreen Shot 2017-12-26 at 5.25.25 pm


UN torture watchdog coming to meddle in Australia - thanks to ABC coverage suggesting we're torturers

The ABC is apparently very proud of its role in convincing the UN that Australia has a torture problem that only UN intervention can solve - "Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT) chair Sir Malcolm Evans said it was these incidents (featured on ABC programs) that would be placed under the microscope".

Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 10.04.43 am

Alleged human rights violations in Australia and the treatment of prisoners will soon be scrutinised by the United Nations in a landmark visit.

The UN subcommittee on prevention of torture has announced it would visit six countries, including Australia and Nauru, to conduct random inspections in prisons, youth detention centres even aged care facilities.

The visit comes in the wake of the case of an intellectually impaired Indigenous boy who was kept naked in a Brisbane watch house.

In May, Four Corners revealed several cases where children as young as 10 were being held in adult watch houses for weeks on end, one was placed in isolation for 23 days.

Another, a teenage Indigenous boy who had both a neurodevelopmental disability and foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, had been stripped naked when he refused to wear an anti-suicide smock.

Subcommittee on Prevention of Torture (SPT) chair Sir Malcolm Evans said it was these incidents that would be placed under the microscope.

"Clearly things like that absolutely should not be happening but regretfully they do," Sir Evans said.

"We are not here to investigate individual allegations that people have made but that is precisely the sort of thing that, by our work … we should try to ensure cannot happen."

The Federal Government ratified the optional protocol to the convention against torture in December 2017, which was designed to prevent the mistreatment of people in detention, through inspection processes.

It is the first time Australia will be subject to the UN inspections, with the investigators given unlimited access at random to any facility in the country.

Without notice the group can speak to any individual, at any hour of the day, see any part of the facility and access all documentation.

By the same token, Australia will only be given three to four months' notice before the investigators' visit.

"We always try to ensure we visit newly joining countries as soon as we possibly can ... to get to know what the issues in those countries are," Sir Evans said.

"We never say which places of detention we are going to go to in advance, we simply turn up.

"Our mandate extends to prisons, police stations, psychiatric hospitals where persons may be detained and not free to leave, social care institutions, immigration detention.

"The protocol is very clear on this and I have no reasons to suppose that Australia will not fully respect our mandate."


Marise Payne in London to attend "Global Conference for Media Freedom"

Screen Shot 2019-07-09 at 11.53.22 pm

That's rich!

Marise Payne lecturing the world about freedom of of the press and preventing "attacks" against journalists.

Australia is ranked 21 in the world for press freedom.

https://rsf.org/en/australia

Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 12.23.23 am

These are the sorts of stories that have the rest of the world's media shaking their heads.

Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 12.24.45 am
Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 12.24.45 am
Screen Shot 2019-07-10 at 12.24.45 am

Harvard University's Nieman Foundation for Journalism recently published this comprehensive analysis of Australia's media landscape.

Wonder what they'll think of us after hearing from Marise Payne!

 

Why this week’s raids on Australian media present a clear threat to democracy and press freedom there

Australia has more national security laws than any other nation. It is also the only liberal democracy lacking a Charter of Human Rights or other foundational document that protects media freedom.
 

The Australian Federal Police has this week conducted two high-profile raids on journalists who have exposed government secrets.

On Tuesday, seven officers spent several hours searching News Corp journalist Annika Smethurst’s Canberra home, her mobile phone and computer. The police linked the raid to “the alleged publishing of information classified as an official secret.” This stemmed from Smethurst’s 2018 article, which contained images of a “top secret” memo and reported that senior government officials were considering moves to empower the Australian Signals Directorate to covertly monitor Australian citizens for the first time.

Soon after, 2GB Radio presenter Ben Fordham revealed he had been notified by the Department of Home Affairs that he was the subject of a similar investigation, aimed at identifying the source of classified information he had reported regarding intercepted boat arrivals.

And then on Wednesday, the federal police raided the ABC’s Sydney headquarters. This dramatic development was in connection with the 2017 “Afghan files” report based on “hundreds of pages of secret defense force documents leaked to the ABC.” These documents revealed disturbing allegations of misconduct by Australian special forces.

The reaction to the raids was immediate and widespread. The New York Times quoted News Corp’s description of the Smethurst raid as “a dangerous act of intimidation towards those committed to telling uncomfortable truths.” Prime Minister Scott Morrison was quick to distance his government from the federal police’s actions, while opposition leader Anthony Albanese condemned the raids.

But to those familiar with the ever-expanding field of Australian national security law, these developments were unlikely to surprise. In particular, enhanced data surveillance powers and a new suite of secrecy offensesintroduced in late 2018 have sparked widespread concern over the future of public interest journalism in Australia.

The crackdown of the past few days reveals that at least two of the core fears expressed by lawyers and the media industry were well-founded: first, the demise of source confidentiality, and second, a chilling effect on public interest journalism.

Source confidentiality

Upon finding out he was the subject of an investigation aimed at uncovering his sources of government information, Fordham declared, “The chances of me revealing my sources is zero. Not today, not tomorrow, next week or next month. There is not a hope in hell of that happening.” Source confidentiality is one of journalism’s central ethical principles. It is recognized by the United Nations and is vital to a functioning democracy and free, independent, robust, and effective media.

One of the greatest threats to source confidentiality is Australia’s uniquely broad data surveillance framework. The 2015 metadata retention schemerequires that all metadata — that is, data about a device or communication but not the communication itself — be retained for two years. It may then be covertly accessed by a wide array of government agencies without a warrant. Some reports suggest that by late 2018, some 350,000 requests for access to metadata were being received by telecommunications service providers each year.

The government was not blind to the potential impact of this scheme on source confidentiality. For example, obtaining metadata relating to a journalist’s mobile phone could reveal where they go and who they contact, easily pointing to their sources. This led to the introduction of the “Journalist Information Warrant,” or JIW. This warrant is required if an agency wishes to access retained metadata for the direct purpose of identifying a professional journalist’s source.

So access to a professional journalist’s metadata in order to identify a confidential source is permitted, provided the access has a particular criminal investigation or enforcement purpose and the agency can show it is in the public interest and therefore obtain a JIW.

This week’s raids suggest that either JIWs could not be obtained in relation to Smethurst, Fordham, or the ABC journalists; the journalists’ metadata did not reveal their sources; or federal police did not attempt to access their metadata. If metadata had identified the journalists’ sources, it is unclear why this week’s dramatic developments took place.

After 2015, journalists were advised to avoid using their mobile devices in source communications. They were also encouraged, wherever possible, to encrypt communications.

But in 2018, the government went some way to closing down this option when it introduced the complex and highly controversial Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Act 2018.

As well as expanding computer access and network access warrants, the Act provided a means for government agencies to co-opt those in the telecommunications industry to assist agencies with their investigations. This could include covertly installing weaknesses and vulnerabilities in specific devices, circumventing passwords, or allowing encrypted communications to be decrypted. A warrant would then be required to access the device and communication data.

It is impossible to know whether Australian journalists have been targeted under the Act or had weaknesses or spyware installed on their personal devices. This week’s raids suggest the Australian Federal Police would be prepared to target journalists under this framework in order to identify journalists’ confidential sources. However, this could only be done for certain purposes, including in the investigation of a secrecy offense.

Secrecy offenses

In June 2018, the government introduced a suite of new espionage, foreign interference, and secrecy offenses. This included an offense of current or former Australian officers communicating information, obtained by virtue of their position, likely to cause harm to the nation’s interests. This offense is punishable by imprisonment for seven years. If the information is security classified or the person held a security classification, then they may have committed an “aggravated offense” and be subject to ten years’ imprisonment.

This week’s raids reveal just how common it is for public interest journalism to rely on secret material and government sources. But the journalists themselves may also be facing criminal prosecution. The 2018 changes include a “general secrecy offense,” whereby it is an offense (punishable by imprisonment for five years) to communicate classified information obtained from an Australian public servant. Fordham’s radio broadcast about intercepted boat arrivals was, for example, a clear communication of classified information.

Again, journalists are offered some protection. If prosecuted, a journalist can seek to rely on the “journalism defense” by proving that they dealt with the information as a journalist and that they reasonably believed the communication to be in the public interest. The meaning of “public interest” in this context is unclear and untested, but it would take into account the public interest in national security and government integrity secrecy concerns as well as openness and accountability.

Protecting media freedom

Australia has more national security laws than any other nation. It is also the only liberal democracy lacking a Charter of Human Rights or other foundational document that would protect media freedom through, for example, rights to free speech and privacy.

In this context, journalists are in a precarious position — particularly journalists engaged in public interest journalism. Their work is vital to government accountability and a vibrant democracy, but it has a tense relationship with how Australia’s government conceives of national interests.

National security law has severely undercut source confidentiality by increasing and easing data surveillance. National security laws have also criminalized a wide array of conduct related to the handling of sensitive government information, both by government officers and the general public. And these laws are just a few parts of a much larger national security framework that includes control orders, preventative detention orders, ASIO questioning and detention warrants, secret evidence, and offenses of espionage, foreign interference, advocating or supporting terrorism, and more.

JIWs and the inclusion of a journalism defense to the secrecy offense recognize the importance of a free press. However, each of these protections relies on a public interest test. When government claims of national security and the integrity of classifications are weighed into this balance, it is difficult to see how other interests might provide an effective counterbalance.

One of the most disturbing outcomes is not the potential prosecutions or even the raids themselves, but the chilling of public interest journalism. Sources are less likely to come forward if they face risk to themselves and a high likelihood of identification by government agencies. And journalists are less likely to run stories if they know the risks posed to their sources and perhaps even to themselves.

Against this background, the calls for a Media Freedom Act, by groups such as the Alliance for Journalists’ Freedom, have gained significant traction. It may take this kind of bold statement to cut across the complexities of individual laws and both recognize and protect the basic freedom of the press and the future of public interest journalism in Australia.

 


Bill Clinton issues statement on his ties to Jeffrey Epstein

Screen Shot 2019-07-09 at 9.53.16 am

This extract is from the New Yorker magazine

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/people/n_7912/index2.html

What attracted Clinton to Epstein was quite simple: He had a plane (he has a couple, in fact -- the Boeing 727, in which he took Clinton to Africa, and, for shorter jaunts, a black Gulfstream, a Cessna 421, and a helicopter to ferry him from his island to St. Thomas). Clinton had organized a weeklong tour of South Africa, Nigeria, Ghana, Rwanda, and Mozambique to do what Clinton does. So when the president's advance man Doug Band pitched the idea to Epstein, he said sure. As an added bonus, Kevin Spacey, a close friend of Clinton's, and actor Chris Tucker came along for the ride.

While Epstein got an intellectual kick out of engaging African finance ministers in theoretical chitchat about economic development, the real payoff for him was observing Clinton in his métier: talking HIV/aids policy with African leaders and soaking up the love from Cape Town to Lagos.

Epstein brings a trophy-hunter's zeal to his collection of scientists and politicians. But the real charge for him is in seeing these guys work it. Like former Democratic Senate leader George Mitchell, for example. In Epstein's mind, Mitchell is the world's greatest negotiator, based on his work in Ireland and the Middle East. So he wrote the senator a bunch of checks. Says Mitchell: "He has supported some philanthropic projects of mine and organized a fund-raiser for me once. I would certainly call him a friend and a supporter."

But it is his covey of scientists that inspires Epstein's true rapture. Epstein spends $20 million a year on them -- encouraging them to engage in whatever kind of cutting-edge research might attract their fancy. They are, of course, quite lavish in their praise in return. Gerald Edelman won the Nobel Prize for physiology and medicine in 1972 and now presides over the Neurosciences Institute in La Jolla. "Jeff is extraordinary in his ability to pick up on quantitative relations," says Edelman. "He came to see us recently. He is concerned with this basic question: Is it true that the brain is not a computer? He is very quick."

Then there is Stephen Kosslyn, a psychologist at Harvard. Epstein flew up to Kosslyn's laboratory in Cambridge this year to witness an experiment that Kosslyn was conducting and Epstein was funding. Namely: Is it true that certain Tibetan monks are capable of holding a distinct mental image in their minds for twenty minutes straight? "We disproved the thesis," says Kosslyn. "Jeff was on his cell phone most of the time -- he actually wanted to short the Tibetan market, because he thought the monk was so stupid. He is amazing. Like a honeybee -- he talks to all these different people and cross-pollinates. Just two months ago, I was talking to him about a new alternative to evolutionary psychology. He got excited and sent me a check."

Epstein has a particularly close relationship with Martin Nowak, an Austrian biology and mathematics professor who heads the theoretical-biology program at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. Nowak is examining how game theory can be used to answer some of the basic evolutionary questions -- e.g., why, in our Darwinian society, does altruistic behavior exist? Epstein talks to Nowak about once a week and flies him around the country to his various homes to deliver impromptu lectures. Over the past three years, he has written $500,000 worth of checks to fund Nowak's research. This past February, Epstein had Nowak over for dinner at the 71st Street townhouse. It was just the two of them (not including the wait staff), and Nowak, making use of a blackboard in the formal dining room, delivered a two-hour highly mathematical description of how language works.

After dinner, Epstein asked if Nowak wanted to meet up with his new friend President Clinton, and off they went to a nearby deli, where Clinton regaled the starstruck former Oxford professor with tales from his own Oxford days. "Jeffrey has the mind of a physicist. It's like talking to a colleague in your field," says Nowak. "Sometimes he applies what we talk about to his investments. Sometimes it's for his own curiosity. He has changed my life. Because of his support, I feel I can do anything I want."

Danny Hillis, an MIT-educated computer scientist whose company, Thinking Machines, was at the forefront of the supercomputing world in the eighties, and who used to run R&D at Walt Disney Imagineering, thinks Epstein is actually using scientific knowledge to beat the markets. "We talk about currency trading -- the euro, the real, the yen," he says. "He has something a physicist would call physical intuition. He knows when to use the math and when to throw it away. If I had acted upon all the investment advice he has been giving me over the years, I'd be calling you from my Gulfstream right now."

On the 727 these days, he has been reading a book by E. O. Wilson, the eminent scientist and originator of the field of sociobiology, called Consilience, which makes the case that the boundaries between scientific disciplines are in the process of breaking down. It's a view Epstein himself holds. He wrote recently to a scientist friend of his: "The behavior of termites, together with ants and bees, is a precursor to trust because they have an extraordinary ability to form relationships and sophisticated social structures based on mutual altruism even though individually they are fundamentally dumb. Money itself is a derivative of trust. If we can figure out how termites come together, then we may be able to better understand the underlying principles of market behavior -- and make big money."


2GB slips in Sydney radio ratings - plus some history on 2UE

This is the latest Sydney radio ratings survey - out today.

2GB remains on top but is slipping somewhat - with the ABC catching up.

Alan Jones is down .2 - Hadley has lost 1.7 ratings points down to 16 from 17.7

The way the ratings are reported has an overlap of one hour in the Afternoon (Chris Smith) and Drive (Ben Fordham) slots so it's not possible to be 100% accurate in reporting on either of them without more data breakdown.

Between 7PM and midnight 2GB is down from 16.1 to 14.3 - a drop of 1.8.

Screen Shot 2019-07-09 at 9.23.48 am

Here are the average numbers of listeners during each slot.

Alan has 155,000 average at any time during his show.

Hadley 114,000 and the numbers (as is always the case for talk radio) drop away during the day as people turn more to music to relax.

Screen Shot 2019-07-09 at 9.23.48 am

PS - look for Macquarie Sports Radio 954- the once great 2UE - 0.8% market share.

To put the 2UE result in perspective, here's some analysis from the mediaspy.org website - I present it here in good faith, I haven't analysed the source data myself and if you've any comments, criticism or better data please let me know!

https://forums.mediaspy.org/t/historical-metro-ratings/1190/61Screen Shot 2019-07-09 at 9.41.19 am

 


The Epstein case is being handled by the US Attorney's Public Corruption Unit

Right at the bottom of the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York's announcement about the Jeffrey Epstein child sex trafficking charges is this fascinating disclosure

https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/jeffrey-epstein-charged-manhattan-federal-court-sex-trafficking-minors

Screen Shot 2019-07-09 at 12.36.21 am

"The case is being handled by the Public Corruption Unit" not the Human Trafficking office, which is only providing assistance.

Epstein is not a public official.

This strongly suggests that current or former public officials might have cause for concern.

We ran this story on Saturday, 5 November 2016 when the Obama administration well and truly ran the US Justice Department.

The story centres on the US Southern District, New York and what our informant said was shocking material found on the Weiner laptop.

The inside story of NYPD's discovery of the sickening details of Clinton crimes

 

You know that our work on the Clinton Foundation is fed into a network of "concerned citizens" from legal, police and other circles in the United States.  Erik Prince's statements here have been endorsed by enough of them for me to take it as gospel.

One man who is unanimously endorsed by that group is the fearless US Attorney General for New York South Preet Bharara.  We first wrote about him in January 2013 and more recently several times in the Clinton/Gillard/Rudd/Bishop/Wong/Downer frauds. Erik mentions him in this interview.   That's great news for the good guys and very bad news for the Clintons and friends.  He's no Dyson Heydon.

 

Erik Prince: NYPD Ready to Make Arrests in Anthony Weiner Case

by John Hayward

4 Nov 2016

Blackwater founder and retired Navy SEAL Erik Prince told Breitbart News Daily on SiriusXM that according to one of his “well-placed sources” in the New York Police Department, “The NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants and the additional arrests they were making” in the Anthony Weiner investigation, but received “huge pushback” from the Justice Department.

Prince began by saying he had no problem believing reports that the FBI was highly confident multiple foreign agencieshacked Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

“I mean, it’s not like the foreign intelligence agencies leave a thank-you note after they’ve hacked and stolen your data,” Prince said to SiriusXM host Alex Marlow.

Prince claimed he had insider knowledge of the investigation that could help explain why FBI Director James Comey had to announce he was reopening the investigation into Clinton’s email server last week.

“Because of Weinergate and the sexting scandal, the NYPD started investigating it. Through a subpoena, through a warrant, they searched his laptop, and sure enough, found those 650,000 emails. They found way more stuff than just more information pertaining to the inappropriate sexting the guy was doing,” Prince claimed.

“They found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times,” he said. 

“The amount of garbage that they found in these emails, of criminal activity by Hillary, by her immediate circle, and even by other Democratic members of Congress was so disgusting they gave it to the FBI, and they said, ‘We’re going to go public with this if you don’t reopen the investigation and you don’t do the right thing with timely indictments,’” Prince explained.

“I believe – I know, and this is from a very well-placed source of mine at 1PP, One Police Plaza in New York – the NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants and the additional arrests they were making in this investigation, and they’ve gotten huge pushback, to the point of coercion, from the Justice Department, with the Justice Department threatening to charge someone that had been unrelated in the accidental heart attack death of Eric Garner almost two years ago. That’s the level of pushback the Obama Justice Department is doing against actually seeking justice in the email and other related criminal matters,” Prince said.

“There’s five different parts of the FBI conducting investigations into these things, with constant downdrafts from the Obama Justice Department. So in the, I hope, unlikely and very unfortunate event that Hillary Clinton is elected president, we will have a constitutional crisis that we have not seen since, I believe, 1860,” Prince declared.

Marlow asked Prince to clarify these revelations.

“NYPD was the first one to look at that laptop,” Prince elaborated. “Weiner and Huma Abedin, his wife – the closest adviser of Hillary Clinton for 20 years – have both flipped. They are cooperating with the government. They both have – they see potential jail time of many years for their crimes, for Huma Abedin sending and receiving and even storing hundreds of thousands of messages from the State Department server and from Hillary Clinton’s own homebrew server, which contained classified information. Weiner faces all kinds of exposure for the inappropriate sexting that was going on and for other information that they found.”

“So NYPD first gets that computer. They see how disgusting it is. They keep a copy of everything, and they pass a copy on to the FBI, which finally pushes the FBI off their chairs, making Comey reopen that investigation, which was indicated in the letter last week. The point being, NYPD has all the information, and they will pursue justice within their rights if the FBI doesn’t,” Prince contended. 

“There is all kinds of criminal culpability through all the emails they’ve seen of that 650,000, including money laundering, underage sex, pay-for-play, and, of course, plenty of proof of inappropriate handling, sending/receiving of classified information, up to SAP level Special Access Programs,” he stated.

“So the plot thickens. NYPD was pushing because, as an article quoted one of the chiefs – that’s the level just below commissioner – he said as a parent, as a father with daughters, he could not let that level of evil continue,” Prince said.

He noted that the FBI can investigate these matters, “but they can’t convene a grand jury. They can’t file charges.”

“The prosecutors, the Justice Department has to do that,” he explained. “Now, as I understand it, Preet Bharara, the Manhattan prosecutor, has gotten ahold of some of this. From what I hear, he’s a stand-up guy, and hopefully he does the right thing.”

Marlow agreed that Bharara’s “sterling reputation” as a determined prosecutor was “bad news for the Clintons.”

Prince agreed, but said, “If people are willing to bend or break the law and don’t really care about the Constitution or due process – if you’re willing to use Stalinist tactics against someone – who knows what level of pressure” could be brought to bear against even the most tenacious law enforcement officials?

“The point being, fortunately, it’s not just the FBI; [there are] five different offices that are in the hunt for justice, but the NYPD has it as well,” Prince said, citing the Wall Street Journal reporting that has “exposed downdraft, back pressure from the Justice Department” against both the FBI and NYPD, in an effort to “keep the sunlight and the disinfecting effects of the truth and transparency from shining on this great evil that has gone on, and is slowly being exposed.”

“The Justice Department is trying to run out the clock, to elect Hillary Clinton, to prevent any real justice from being done,” he warned.

As for the mayor of New York City, Prince said he has heard that “de Blasio wants to stay away from this.”

“The evidence is so bad, the email content is so bad, that I think even he wants to stay away from it, which is really telling,” he said.

Prince reported that the other legislators involved in the case “have not been named yet,” and urged the NYPD to hold a press conference and name them.

“I wish they’d do it today,” he said. “These are the unusual sliding-door moments of history, that people can stand up and be counted, and make a real difference, and to save a Republic, save a Constitution that we actually need and love, that our forefathers fought and died for. For any cop that is aware of this level of wrongdoing, and they have veterans in their family, or deceased veterans in their family, they owe it to them to stand up, to stand and be counted today, and shine the light of truth on this great evil.”

“From what I understand, up to the commissioner or at least the chief level in NYPD, they wanted to have a press conference, and DOJ, Washington people, political appointees have been exerting all kinds of undue pressure on them to back down,” he added. 

Marlow suggested that some of those involved in keeping the details quiet might want to avoid accusations of politicizing the case and seeking to influence the presidential election.

“Sure, that’s it. That’s the argument for it,” Prince agreed. “But the fact is, you know that if the Left had emails pointing to Donald Trump visiting, multiple times, an island with underage sex slaves basically, emails, you know they’d be talking about it. They’d be shouting it from the rooftops.” 

“This kind of evil, this kind of true dirt on Hillary Clinton – look, you don’t have to make any judgments. Just release the emails,” he urged. “Just dump them. Let them out there. Let people see the light of truth.”

Prince dismissed the claims of people like Clinton campaign CEO John Podesta and DNC chair Donna Brazile that some of the damaging emails already released by WikiLeaks were fabricated, noting that “forensic analysis done shows that, indeed, they are not fabricated; they are really legitimate.”

“This is stuff coming right off a hard drive that was owned by Weiner and his wife Huma Abedin, Hillary’s closest adviser for the last 20 years,” he said of the new bombshells. “This is not from some hacker or anybody else. This is a laptop seized from a warrant in a criminal investigation.”

Prince confirmed that based on his information, Abedin is most likely looking at jail time, unless she cuts a deal with prosecutors.

“There’s a minimum of obstruction of justice and all kinds of unlawful handling of classified information,” he said. “Because remember, this laptop was in the possession of Weiner, who did not have a security clearance. And many, many of those emails were from her Yahoo account, which had State Department emails forwarded to them, so she could easier print these messages, scan them, and send them on to Hillary. That’s the carelessness that Hillary and her staff had for the classified information that the intelligence community risks life and limb to collect in challenged, opposed areas around the world.”

“That’s not who you want in the White House,” Prince declared.