How to Instantly Prove or Disprove Russian Hacking
by WashingtonsBlog  /  November 14, 2017

“It’s newsworthy that CIA head Mike Pompeo recently met with Bill Binney – who designed the NSA’s electronic surveillance system – about potential proof that the DNC emails were leaked rather than hacked. It’s also noteworthy that the usual suspects – Neocon warmongers such as Max Boot – have tried to discredit both Binney and Pompeo. But there’s a huge part of the story that the entire mainstream media is missing. Specifically, Binney says that the NSA has long had in its computers information which can prove exactly who hacked the DNC … or instead prove that the DNC emails were leaked by a Democratic insider. Remember – by way of background – that the NSA basically spies on everyone in America … and stores the data long-term.

After the story of Pompeo’s meeting with Binney broke, Binney told Washington’s Blog:

Here’s what they would have from the programs you list [i.e. NSA’s Fairview, Stormbrew and Blarney spying programs, which Edward Snowden revealed] plus hundreds if not thousands of trace route programs embedded in switches in the US and around the world.

First, from deep packet inspection, they would have the originator and ultimate recipient (IP) of the packets plus packet series 32 bit number identifier and all the housekeeping data showing the network segments/path and time to go though the network.


And, of course, the number of packet bits. With this they would know to where and when the data passed. From the data collection, they would have all the data as it existed in the server taken from.  That’s why I originally said if the FBI wanted Hillary’s email, all they have to do is ask NSA for them. All this is done by the Narus collection equipment in real time at line rates (620 mbps [mega bits per second,] for the STA-6400 and 10 gbps [giga bits per second] for the Insight equipment).


Binney explained what these numbers mean:  Each Narus Insight device can monitor and record around 1,250,000 emails each second … or more than 39 trillion emails per year. Wired reported in 2006:

Whistle-blower Klein allegedly learned that AT&T was installing Narus boxes in secure, NSA-controlled rooms in switching centers around the country.

Binney told us there are probably 18 or so Narus recording systems throughout the U.S. deployed by the NSA at AT&T facilities, drawing our attention to the following NSA document leaked by Edward Snowden:

And this AT&T graphic:

(Binney has figured out their locations from publicly-available sources. He has also mapped out similar monitoring systems at Verizon facilities.) Binney also sent me hard-to-find company literature for Narus.  Here are some interesting excerpts:

Narus Insight …

  • Provides full visibility into network traffic
  • Analyzes at macro or micro level targeting specific or aggregate full-packet data for forensic analysis


Universal data collection from links, routers, soft switches, IDS/IPS, databases, etc. provides total network view across the world’s largest IP networks.


Binney also pointed me towards a couple of network engineering principles that show that figuring out who hacked the emails (or proving they were leaked) is well within NSA’s capabilities. Initially, when data is transmitted online, it is sent using the TCP/IP Packet format.  Put simply, data is not sent in a vacuum, but rather as part of a bundle containing a lot of other information. Here’s the TCP part of the bundle:

And here’s the IP part of the bundle:

So any data analyst can learn a tremendous amount about the source address of the sender, the destination address of the receiver and a boatload of other information by using a “packet sniffer” to  inspect the “packets” of information being sent over the web. Additionally, it’s simple to conduct “traceroute” searches. “Traceroute” is a computer network diagnostic tool for displaying the route and measuring transit delays of packets across an Internet Protocol network. Wired reported in 2006:

Anything that comes through (an internet protocol network), we can record,” says Steve Bannerman, marketing vice president of Narus, a Mountain View, California, company. “We can reconstruct all of their e-mails along with attachments, see what web pages they clicked on, we can reconstruct their (voice over internet protocol) calls.”

So NSA can easily use basic packet sniffers and traceroutes, and see this. Remember, Edward Snowden says the NSA could easily determine who hacked the Democratic National Committee’s emails:

Binney told us:

Snowden is right and the MSM is clueless. Do they have evidence that the Russians downloaded and later forwarded those emails to wikileaks? Seems to me that they need to answer those questions to be sure that their assertion is correct… You can tell from the network log who is going into a site.  I used that on networks that I had.  I looked to see who came into my LAN, where they went, how long they stayed and what they did while in my network…


Further, if you needed to, you could trace back approaches through other servers etc. Trace Route and Trace Watch are good examples of monitoring software that help do these things.  Others of course exist … probably the best are in NSA/GCHQ and the other Five Eyes countries.  But, these countries have no monopoly on smart people that could do similar detection software.

He explained:

If it were the Russians, NSA would have a trace route to them and not equivocate on who did it.  It’s like using “Trace Route” to map the path of all the packets on the network.  In the program Treasuremap NSA has hundreds of trace route programs embedded in switches in Europe and hundreds more around the world.  So, this set-up should have detected where the packets went and when they went there.


He added:

As Edward Snowden said, once they have the IP’s and/or other signatures of 28/29 [the supposed Russian hacking groups] and DNC/HRC/etc. [i.e. the DNC and Hillary Rodham Clinton], NSA would use Xkeyscore to help trace data passing across the network and show where it went. [Background.]


In addition, since Wikileaks is (and has been) a cast iron target for NSA/GCHQ/etc for a number of years there should be no excuse for them missing data going to any one associated with Wikileaks… Too many words means they don’t have clear evidence of how the data got to Wikileaks.


And he stressed:

If the idiots in the intelligence community expect us to believe them after all the crap they have told us (like WMD’s in Iraq and “no we don’t collect data on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans”) then they need to give clear proof of what they say. So far, they have failed to prove anything. Which suggests they don’t have proof and just want to war monger the US public into a second cold war with the Russians. After all, there’s lots and lots of money in that for the military-industrial-intelligence-governmental complex of incestuous relationships…


If you recall, a few years ago they pointed to a specific building in China that was where hacks on the US were originating. So, let’s see the same from the Russians. They don’t have it. That’s why they don’t show it. They want to swindle us again and again and again. You cannot trust these intelligence agencies period.


And he told Newsweek:

U.S. officials “know how many people [beyond the Russians] could have done this but they aren’t telling us anything. All they’re doing is promoting another cold war.”

Binney … compared allegations about Russian hacks to previous U.S. fabrications of intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the bombing of North Vietnam in 1964. “This is a big mistake, another WMD or Tonkin Gulf affair that’s being created until they have absolute proof” of Russian complicity in the DNC hacks, he charged during a Newsweek interview. He noted that after the Kremlin denied complicity in the downing of a Korean Airlines flight in 1983, the U.S. “exposed the conversations where [Russian pilots] were ordered to shoot it down.” Obama officials “have the evidence now” of who hacked the DNC, he charged. “So let’s see it, guys.“


NSA either doesn’t have solid evidence of Russian hacking of DNC emails – which means the Russians didn’t do it – or those with the power to demand NSA produce the evidence simply haven’t asked the right questions.”




DEFCON Hackers Found Many Holes in Voting Machines and Poll Systems
by Mark Anderson  /  3 Aug 2017

“E-voting machines and voter registration systems used widely in the United States and other countries’ elections can readily be hacked—in some cases with less than two hours’ work. This conclusion emerged from a three-day-long hackathon at the Def Con security conference in Las Vegas last weekend. Some of those hacks could potentially leave no trace, undercutting the assurances of election officials and voting machine companies who claim that virtually unhackable election systems are in place.

Def Con, an annual computer hacking conference celebrating its 25th year, hosted its first Voting Machine Hacking Village this year. In it, conference attendees were given access to many of the most popular voting machines and voter registration tracking systems in use around the world today. And before the Hacking Village organizers were even finished with their opening morning introductory remarks, a Danish hacker in the audience had already broken into one of the target machines wirelessly.

Soon after on the same morning, a second group in the room wirelessly hacked into a popular electronic poll book system, responsible for storing and maintaining voter registration information. In total, the inaugural e-voting hackathon turned up at least 18 new vulnerabilities to e-voting and e-poll book systems. (This may be a conservative estimate, as the hacks discovered at the Village are now being verified and studied before they’ll be compiled and counted as legitimate new hacks.)

“These people who hacked the e-poll book system, when they came in the door they didn’t even know such a machine exists. They had no prior knowledge, so they started completely from scratch,” says Harri Hursti, Hacking Village co-coordinator and data security expert behind the first hack of any e-voting system in 2005.

Harri Hursti, co-coordinator of Voting Machine Hacking Village event at DefCon 

The Danish hacker, Hursti added, also had no prior knowledge about the e-voting system he hacked. Both hacks, Hursti says, undermine critics who have claimed that computerized election system hacks are too elaborate and unrealistic to be used in real world settings. “I hacked the same e-poll book system in 2007,” Hursti says. But it took him two weeks instead of the few hours it took hackers last weekend.

One big difference between now and then is a key rule issued in October 2015, by the U.S. Copyright Office. That rule established that hacks to e-voting and electronic vote counting and tabulating systems are allowable under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act—so long as those hacks are used for research purposes.

Prior to 2015, Hursti says, the DMCA restricted e-voting machine access to hackers. And those few like Hursti who could access them had to ensure that the machines were not altered in any way that might affect their performance or void their warrantees. So, realistically, the Hacking Village couldn’t have happened anytime before the Copyright Office’s DMCA e-voting machine exemption, Hursti says.

The restricted access that real-world hackers previously had to voting machines made the weekend something of an opening of the floodgates. As Village co-organizer Matt Blaze, associate professor of computer and information science at the University of Pennsylvania, tweeted, “Overheard more than once (at the Hacking Village): ‘Wait, it can’t be that simple, can it?’” Another attendee added, “Default passwords, man. Default passwords.”

One disturbing aspect of a number of attacks was that a hacker might be able to cover their tracks. The untraceability of such hacks is nothing new. Hursti recalls an interaction he had with Ohio’s then-Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, who he says assured him there was not a single incident of any e-voting machine ever being hacked.

“I said if you continue to use these machines, that will always remain true,” Hursti says. “These machines have no capability of providing you any kind of evidence whether they were not hacked or hacked. There’s no protective locks, there’s no forensic evidence gathering. There’s absolutely nothing. The machine cannot prove it’s been hacked.”

And while this year’s Hacking Village concentrated on voting’s front-end—the e-voting machines and e-poll registration systems used at polling places—there are other spots for hackers to attack. “There has been a lot of interest in the voting machines, because that’s the customer-facing side. That is the machine the voter sees,” Hursti says. “That is just the tip of the iceberg. The whole system is the election management system, the ballot originating system, the tallying system, the reporting system, the voter registration system, the e-poll books. That is a humungous amount of infrastructure.”

Future DEF CON Voting Machine Hacking Villages plan to tackle such larger election cybersecurity challenges, the organizers say. In the meantime, Hursti is advocating for a return to a smart paper-ballot and scan machine system, plus regular audits. “A lot of these electronic voting machines are software unfixable,” he says. “The problem is in the hardware design. The problem is in the architecture. There’s nothing you can do in software to really fix them.”

On the other hand, Hursti disagrees with some e-voting critics who overcompensate and advocate a return to hand-counting paper ballots. “That is stupid,” he says. “Humans are extremely error prone. Humans have the capability of being dishonest. So paper ballots with the responsible use of technology—meaning, optical scan machines, software analyzing, and an audit process which will verify the machine-produced results. And whether the audit process is purely human, or by software and other scanners, those are other questions. Different jurisdictions will pick up different answers.”

“The sad part here is in 10 years nothing really has happened, except that the [voting officials] have moved on,” he says. “And we have shown it over and over again that electronic voting is currently beyond our technical capabilities… if we keep auditability and secrecy and privacy of the ballot, then we cannot have electronic voting. That’s a full stop.”




Human Compromise and the Protection Racket
by Paul D. Collins  /  11.2012

“When the Eliot Spitzer Emperors Club prostitution scandal broke out on March 10, 2008, the first person this author thought to call was retired legend, New York Police Detective James “Jim” Rothstein. As a cop, Jim took on organized pedophile rings, arrested Watergate burglar and CIA operative Frank Sturgis, and testified before the New York State Select Committee on Crime. Jim knows all about sexual blackmail operations, which he refers to as “human compromise.” To Jim, the Spitzer scandal was a perfect example. “It’s like déjà vu,” said Rothstein. And to Rothstein, GOP operative Roger Stone was the key to the compromising of Governor Spitzer (Rothstein). “Watch for this guy, Stone,” Jim said in a telephone interview on March 10, 2008. “I saw him in an interview about Spitzer a few days ago and thought I recognized him. I looked back at my old investigations and remembered that he was part of Roy Cohn’s whole thing.”

Jim was referring to Roy Cohn’s sexual blackmail operation. According to Jim, this operation was conducted “under the guise of fighting communism.” During his time as a police detective, Rothstein had an opportunity to sit down with infamous McCarthy committee counsel Roy Cohn. Cohn admitted to Rothstein that he was part of a rather elaborate sexual blackmail operation that compromised politicians with child prostitutes (Rothstein). Roger Stone began working with Cohn when he was the northeast chairman of Reagan’s 1980 campaign. Cohn and Stone had begun building an alliance a year earlier when Cohn introduced Stone to mobster Fat Tony Salerno at Cohn’s Manhattan townhouse (Labash). According to the Weekly Standard’s Matt Labash, “Stone loved Cohn.” Stone said of Cohn: “He didn’t give a [expletive] what people thought, as long as he was able to wield power. He worked the gossip columnists in [New York] like an organ” (Labash).

By his own admission, Roger Stone is the informant that told the FBI about Governor Spitzer’s use of prostitutes from the Emperors Club VIP four months before the New York Governor’s resignation (Bone). Stone’s operations against Gov. Spitzer began in June of 2007, when the Republican operative was hired for $20,000 a month, by Republican State Senate leader Joseph Bruno, to rid New York State Republicans of the pesky New York Governor (Labash). According to Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, top officials of the Spitzer administration had the state police create documents that would make it appear as if Senator Bruno had misused the New York state air fleet (Matthews). Gov. Spitzer was waging political war on Bruno. Bruno did not like that one bit and was looking for payback. But Senator Bruno was not the only one out to get Spitzer. According to Matt Labash, Roger Stone was working with “a loose collection of co-conspirators” to bring down the New York Governor. In Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express, Inspector Hercule Poirot remarked: “There are too many clues in this room.” The same principle applies in the Spitzer case.

The Wall Street Mafia
Students of Criminology are well aware that there are different varieties of organized crime. There’s the Italian mob. There’s the Japanese mob. There’s the Chinese mob. There’s even a Jewish mob. But what many people do not realize is that there is also a Wall Street mob. When Gov. Spitzer resigned, the Wall Street mob stood up and cheered … literally. According to Bloomberg reporter Chris Dolmetsch, a group of traders on the New York Stock Exchange floor began to applaud as they watched Spitzer resign on television.

When Eliot Spitzer was New York’s attorney general, he had sued New York Stock Exchange Chief Richard Grasso for failing to tell the board about Grasso’s compensation. One of the cheering traders, Timothy O’Connell of DRU Stock Inc., said the traders were angry with Spitzer because “Grasso was a voice for this community” (Dolmetsch). It is interesting that O’Connell referred to Grasso as Wall Street’s “voice.” Perhaps Richard Grasso had been speaking for Wall Street in 1999 when, as Chief of the New York Stock Exchange, he flew into a demilitarized region of Colombia’s southern jungle and savanna to talk face-to-face with members of the general secretariat of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (a.k.a. FARC) (see, “NYSE Chief Meets Top Colombia Rebel Leader”). As NYSE Chief, Grasso discussed “foreign investment and the role of U.S. businesses in Colombia” with the representatives of FARC’s high command.

Grasso wanted FARC to invest its money on Wall Street. Where exactly did FARC’s money come from? During his May 20, 2003 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, FBI Assistant Director Steven C. McCraw stated that FARC was “strongly tied to drug trafficking in Colombia” (“Testimony of Steven McCraw, Assistant Director, Office of Intelligence, FBI before the Senate Judiciary Committee”). On March 2, 2004, a federal grand jury charged two high-level FARC members, Simon Trinidad and Mono Jojoy, with “issuing orders regarding the acquisition, transportation and sale of cocaine by various fronts of FARC and the movement of drug money” (“High-Ranking Member of Colombian FARC Narco-Terrorist Organization Extradited to U.S. on Terrorism, Drug Charges”). A Department of Justice press release elaborated on the grand jury’s indictment of the FARC members:

The indictment alleges that Trinidad managed and controlled money for the FARC that was used by the organization to conduct cocaine trafficking activities. The indictment alleges that Trinidad announced to local coca growers the price the FARC would pay them for each kilogram of cocaine base, and advised them that the quality of their cocaine base was “inferior” and “needed to be improved.” The indictment further alleges that Trinidad met with and received money from or supplied money to other FARC drug traffickers, that he attended drug-trafficking meetings, and that he spoke of sending cocaine to the United States.

The FARC’s adventures into narcotics trafficking began in the 1980s (“Colombia’s most powerful rebels”). Since then, the FARC has taxed “every stage of the drug business, from the chemicals needed to process the hardy coca bush into cocaine and the opium poppy into heroin, right up to charging for the processed drugs to be flown from illegal airstrips they control.” The FARC brings in $300 million in drug money each year. According to the BBC, the FARC’s involvement in the drug trade has helped to make the group “the richest insurgent group in the world.” If the Wall Street mob is not above doing business with drug traffickers, they would certainly have no qualms with politically destroying the New York Governor.

Attorney General v. Predatory Lenders
Did Gov. Spitzer also incur the wrath of the Bush administration and its predatory mortgage lender cronies? In a February 14, 2008 article for the Washington Post, Spitzer claimed that, when he was New York’s attorney general, Spitzer joined with the other 49 state attorneys general in fighting lenders who “were misrepresenting the terms of loans, making loans without regard to consumers’ ability to repay, making loans with deceptive ‘teaser’ rates that later ballooned astronomically, packing loans with undisclosed charges and fees, or even paying illegal kickbacks” (Spitzer).

According to Spitzer, the state attorneys general “brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices” (Spitzer). Then Spitzer’s Washington Post article dropped a bombshell concerning the Bush Administration’s response to the state attorneys general actions against predatory lenders.

Spitzer accused the Administration of using the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) to obstruct the states’ efforts. According to Spitzer, the OCC’s invocation of an 1863 National Bank Act clause allowed the federal agency to usurp state laws concerning predatory lending. The OCC had also established new rules that rendered impotent the state consumer protection laws against national banks. Spitzer was essentially blaming the Bush Administration for the current crisis in the financial markets.

The Power Elite does not want every Establishment name on the Emperors Club VIP’s client list to get out. Only the disloyal are to have their skeletons pulled out of the closet. This means operatives may be in place to prevent collateral damage. One of those people may be Judge Leonard Sand. Sand is the federal judge that signed the warrant against Gov. Spitzer. According to James Rothstein, Judge Sand is a “good and honorable man.” But Sand is also someone who may stop a case when he feels the pressure coming down from the Establishment (Rothstein).

Bay of Pigs – JFK Connection
Rothstein’s own experience with Sand bears out this contention. When Watergate burglar and CIA operative Frank Sturgis sued James Rothstein in 1976 for false arrest and other charges, it was Judge Leonard Sand who had presided over the case. Rothstein had arrested Sturgis when Sturgis was on his way to the home of Marita Lorenz to kill her. According to Rothstein, Frank Sturgis claimed that the murder was sanctioned by powerful people. Powerful people had reasons to be angry with Lorenz. “Marita was sent by the CIA to Cuba to kill Castro,” said Rothstein. “But instead of killing him, she ended up shacking up with him.” According to Rothstein, Marita Lorenz was planning to go before the House Select Committee and tell all she knew about the Kennedy assassination.

Was Sturgis afraid Lorenz was going to incriminate him? Both Rothstein and Sturgis had been involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion (Rothstein). Rothstein decided to use this fact to find out a few things from Sturgis. “I was on the aircraft carrier Essex during the Bay of Pigs invasion,” said Rothstein. “The Essex was a ship that was not supposed to exist. When I told Sturgis I was on the Essex during the invasion, he told me, ‘The only way you could know that is if you were there.’ So I gained his trust and he talked to me for two hours” (Rothstein). During their discussion, Frank Sturgis claimed to James Rothstein that he was involved in the Kennedy assassination (Rothstein). “Sturgis said he was one of two shooters on the grassy knoll,” said Rothstein.

Was Marita Lorenz going to tell the House Select Committee about Frank Sturgis’ role in the JFK assassination? While Sturgis may have been following orders when he went to kill Lorenz, it is also possible that Sturgis did not want her to say anything that could land him behind bars … or executed. Sturgis did not want James Rothstein talking either, so he sued Rothstein. Apparently, there were powerful people who did not want Rothstein to testify about what Sturgis had told him about the JFK assassination. “Sturgis had the same lawyer that represented William Calley of the My Lai Massacre,” said Rothstein. “There is no way Sturgis could have paid for that representation.”

According to Rothstein, Judge Sand pulled him into his chambers and negotiated with Rothstein to not testify. “The city paid a fine and my partner and I received an accommodation,” said Rothstein. “And I didn’t talk. And that’s where I got out. Because I knew when to get out.” According to James Rothstein, Judge Sand could not allow Frank Sturgis’ lawsuit against Rothstein to become a slippery slope that would open up the issue of the JFK assassination.

Collateral Damage
So Judge Sand signed the warrant against Eliot Spitzer. But the Emperors Club VIP had almost certainly serviced other Establishment figures. Rothstein hypothesizes that the Governor’s enemies were being serviced by the same prostitutes, and found out through those prostitutes that Spitzer was a client. Judge Sand may have limited his actions to Spitzer alone because he did not want to incur the wrath of the Establishment (Rothstein).

The federal investigation against the ex-governor is headed by Michael J. Garcia, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Garcia is a Bush appointee (“Michael J. Garcia, Former Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE), 2003-2005″). Is it Garcia’s job to prevent that military doublespeak known as “collateral damage”? Michael Garcia is also involved in the case of Russian former GRU major and arms dealer Viktor Bout, nicknamed the “Merchant of Death.” Garcia indicted Bout for arms deals with the FARC (Casey), but Bout did not just do business with Colombian rebels. The Russian “Merchant of Death” has also done business with people close to U.S. Attorney Garcia’s boss, George W. Bush.

In 2004, it was discovered that the Pentagon, the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, the Air Force, and the Army Corps of Engineers were permitting U.S. contractors in Iraq to do business with Bout’s air cargo companies, in spite of the fact that the Treasury Department had labeled Viktor Bout an arms dealer and had frozen his assets (Braun). One of the firms doing business with Bout’s network was none other than Kellogg Brown and Root (KBR), which was, at the time, a subsidiary of the multinational corporation formerly headed by Vice President Dick Cheney known as Halliburton (Braun). Air Bas, a company tied to Viktor Bout’s aviation empire, flew supplies into Iraq for KBR at least four times in October of 2004 (Braun). In fact, Halliburton moved its corporate headquarters to Dubai at a time when Dubai was Bout’s base of operations (Grigg). It is possible that U.S. Attorney Michael Garcia became involved in the arms dealing case to prevent Viktor Bout from rolling over on clients that were close to George W. Bush. Will Garcia also make sure that the investigation into Spitzer does not touch other Establishment figures?”

Bone, James. “Roger Stone: I tipped off FBI about Eliot Spitzer sex scandal.” Times Online 24 March 2008

Braun, Stephen, et al. “Blacklisted Russian Tied to Iraq Deals.” Los Angeles Times 14 December 2004

Casey, Michael. “US Seeks Weapons Suspect’s Extradition.” Associated Press 7 March 2008

“Colombia’s most powerful rebels.” BBC 19 September  2003

Dolmetsch, Chris. “Cheers on NYSE Floor, Shock in Albany: Spitzer’s Fall.” Bloomberg 13 March 2008

“Eliot Spitzer Prostitution Scandal”

“High-Ranking Member of Colombian FARC Narco-Terrorist Organization Extradited To U.S. On Terrorism, Drug Charges.” Department of Justice 31 December 2004

Labash, Matt. “Roger Stone, Political Animal.” Weekly Standard 5 November 2007

Matthews, Cara. “Cuomo: Spitzer aides used State Police to try to damage Bruno.” Lower Hudson Online 24 July 2007

“Michael J. Garcia.” Wikipedia 13 March 2008

“Michael J. Garcia, Former Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), 2003-2005.” White House

“NYSE Chief Meets Top Colombia Rebel Leader.” Reuters 26 June 1999

Rothstein, James. Telephone Interview. 10 March 2008

Spitzer, Eliot. “Predatory Lenders’ Partner in Crime.” Washington Post 14 February 2008

“Testimony of Steven C. McCraw, Assistant Director, Office of Intelligence, FBI before the Senate Judiciary Committee.” Federal Bureau of Investigation 20 May 2003