SAG: No? Uh, whether it's a piece of paper. Have you downloaded anything? Emailed anything out?
RW: No.
SAG: No? Okay. Mm.
******
SG: So you're positive you've never printed anything out that was outside of your work role?
RW: Trying to think.
*****
SG: Okay. Reality, what if I said that I have the information to suggest that you did print out stuff that was outside of that scope?
RW: Okay. I would have to try to remember.
Then Agent Taylor brings the interview to a pause, seems to give Reality a chance to lawyer up, when he outs the cat from the bag:
Reality-uh-you know-we obviously know a lot more than-than what we're telling you at this point. And I think you know a lot more than what you're telling us at this point. I don't want you to go down the wrong road. I think you need to-to stop and think about what you're saying and what you're doing. Uhm, you know-I-I think it's a-an opportunity to maybe tell the truth. Because, uh, telling a-telling a lie to an FBI agent is not going to be the right thing.
It's time to lawyer up. But, crucially, she goes on to confess. And in the end, after all is banally said and said, and Reality offers up her head, Miranda is surely too late to matter, if she continues. She continues. They ask her about a previously unexamined incident at another federal facility, where she previously worked, involving a thumb drive, which she seemed to be scheming to use to exfiltrate secret information from a server. She admits she tried but failed and "threw the stupid thumb drive away." So, with the PKI, the NSA document, and now this thumb drive incident, the FBI has established a pattern of criminal intent.
They circle back to the motivation behind the Intercept subscriber's desire to fold and tuck the secret NSA document down her pantyhose (the scene is depicted). She's already told us that she's "no spy," and "I wasn't trying to be a Snowden or anything." The FBI agents push her to reveal why she 'went postal' that fateful day and mailed the top secret NSA document to the Intercept. Fox News, on all the time, doesn't help. ("For God's sake, put A1 Jazeera on, or a slideshow with people's pets," she recounts her exasperation.) And then the document screams at her: The Russians meddled in our election and may have helped Trump ascend deviantly to the presidency. Inside her, a tea kettle lost its mind and blew its steamy whistle. How come They weren't reporting this information about spear-phishing and last minute shenanigans at the polls? Why? Why? Reality whips out a stamp and licks it. We'll see 'bout dat.
The five-page document was published online at Intercept and is deeply uninteresting. It is full of hesitant analytical language and comments that suggest caution to conclusions drawn. We read words: "likely used data (p.1)," "potentially used (p.2)," "ostensibly associated with (p.2)," "presumably with the purpose of (p. 2)," "appeared to be designed (p.2)," and "it is likely that (p.3)." And the top secret is sprinkled commentary which generally runs along tis flavor line:
Given the content of the malicious email it was likely that the threat actor was targeting officials involved in the management of voter registration systems. It is unknown whether the aforementioned spear-phishing deployment successfully compromised the intended victims, and what potential data could have been accessed by the cyber data.
Where Reality saw as under-reported villainy, I saw a chance for a chuckle festival. WTF garbage is this I wondered as I read, and why did Intercept publish a document from NSA and categorize it in their lede as evidence of anything? I'm a subscriber, too, I thought. What about me and my needs? Check it out:
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
