Original Silsby Pizzagate claims

That William Craddick article is false. He was the redditor who started the false Silsby Clinton narrative posted under the username PleadingtheYiff. He also posted here on Voat. He started this posting on TheDonald reddit where any dissenting views were deleted. This probably helped him as the central claim of his post is obviously false and any posts pointed this out would have been deleted.

Why they are false

We can say without a doubt he has zero evidence for this claim.

Hillary has a LONG history of interest in Ms. Silsby.

This is completely false and the Wikileaks emails have evidence of why this is false. He bases his claim on this.

Wikileak emails dating back till at least 2001 have been found in her archives discussing Laura's NGO.

There's multiple things wrong with this sentence. Emails? No, a single document, not plural. OK a single email from 2001 then? No. The document in question is not an email and is not from 2001. Wikileaks has this document miscategorized and the wrong date.....And this isn't even the most obvious of the evidence as we will get to later.

He then says this

Huma Abedin was constantly forwarding Hillary articles on this woman's organization:

This is true if you mean for a couple of weeks after Silsby got arrested. It's false if he means Human sent anything before this woman got arrested. His writing is deceptive and the intent is to give the impression. Hillary and Huma were closely following this woman since 2001.

He says

One of the first things the Clintons did when they took over the scene in Haiti was to have Bill get Laura off the hook:

Except this didn't happen. Neither Clinton stepped in. Any discussions with the Haitian government was handled at a lower level in the State Department and followed the usual procedures for when an American is arrested overseas. Laura Silsby stayed imprisoned in Haiti and went to trial in a Haitian court months later. We'll examine this claim too.

This is unrelated to the Clintons but I want to comment on this

And the attorney who represented Laura Silsby? A man who was himself convicted as a sex trafficker:

Um, this guy was a conman and not a lawyer. He acted as a spokesman for some of the group, but he was not lawyer anywhere and certainly not in Haiti where he didn't even speak the local languages. Silsby had lawyers from Haiti actually representing her in court.

The Truth

There are several reasons why the above claims are false.

Let's start with the obvious.

There is no way that Clinton had been following Silsby and her NGO since 2001.

How can I say this so definitively?

Laura Silsby started her NGO in 2009. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Life_Children%27s_Refuge_case

The New Life Children’s Refuge (NLCR) was founded in November 2009 by Laura Silsby and Charisa Coulter

It didn't exist in 2009.

That's just for one. For two the Clinton emails Wikileaks has are from her time as the Secretary of State. They were released by the State Department.

Hillary Clinton was not Secretary of State in 2001.

The private email domain that was at the heart of the Clinton email controversy at State was "clintonemail.com." This domain was not registered until Jan. 13, 2009: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/03/10/hillary-clintons-emails-a-timeline-of-actions-and-regulations/?utm_term=.a7f2a0f1d4ab

Document is obviously from 2010. NOT 2001.

So how did William Craddick/PleadingTheYiff get this SO VERY WRONG? He uses this document from Wikileaks to support his claim. https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/3776

However, if you know what that document is and how it got in Hillary's emails it shows the opposite of what he claims.

The first thing to note this is not an email. Look at the To: and From: fields. there's no information there. View as a PDF, you can see it has no email metadata whatsoever attached to it. It looks like a PDF of a Word document. Even if this was just an email draft the From: would be filled in. This document is dated. 2001-01-01 However, this is incorrect. He did not make up this date, it's in the Wikileaks system with an incorrect date. The State Department has a date of n/a for this document meaning not applicable. So someone Wikileaks mistakenly added a date of 2001-01-01 on this. Probably an automated glitch.

Secondly Read the document. It's obviously NOT from 2001 as it describes the aftermath of the 2010 Haitian earthquake and Silsby's plans to go to Haiti in January 2010.

Thirdly, we know exactly what this document is and how it got to Clinton because of a different email in the Wikileaks archive. This email has been released since 2015 explains exactly how Clinton learned of Laura Silsby and her team.

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/3765

From: Mills, Cheryl D MillsCD@state.gov Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2010 5:39 PM To: H Subject: Fw: 10 AmCits arrested with 33 children, headed to DR. Now under arrest in Port au Prince Attachments: nIcrhaitianorphanrescuemission.pdf

The document that Pizzagate researchers claim was in Hillary's emails in 2001 was sent to her on Jan 30 2010. AFTER Silsby was arrested. It was not an email, the document is the attachment to this email. It's a PDF file.

Note the subject: "10AmCits arrested......" AmCits stands for American Citizens. That is why Huma and the State Department were sending emails. The State Department is involved any time American Citizens are arrested abroad.

Arrest or Detention of a U.S. Citizen Abroad

**One of the highest priorities of the Department of State and U.S. embassies and consulates abroad is to provide assistance to U.S. citizens incarcerated abroad. **The Department of State is committed to ensuring fair and humane treatment for U.S. citizens imprisoned overseas. We stand ready to assist incarcerated citizens and their families within the limits of our authority in accordance with international law, domestic and foreign law. https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/international-travel/emergencies/arrest-detention.html

This is why Huma and others were sending emails, because the State Department is routinely involved in the cases of American's arrested abroad. Look at the Amanda Knox case of an American arrested and then falsely convicted of murder in Italy. The State Department followed that case from the beginning. https://www.seattlepi.com/amanda-knox/article/Cables-show-State-Department-has-monitored-Knox-1383417.php

The Silsby case reached the level of the Secretary of State because it was an international incident and Secretary Clinton, President Obama and others could be sure to be asked questions about this case at press conferences. That is why they were trying to find out so much information. That is routine. It's not because of some personal interest on behalf of Secretary Clinton.

If you read the whole email thread that contains the PDF, that Craddick/Yiff claims was from 2001 https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/3765 you can see how the PDF got to Clinton. The embassy in the Domincan Republic was alerted by Haitian Police was alerted 10 American Citizens were arrested, they contacted Consular Affairs and many other groups/people in the State Department were alerted that they had an issue on their hands and a State Department employee googled their name and found that PDF on a Church Website.

The group is called the New Life Children Refuge America Organization (NLCR). Bill Bistransky found the attached "Plan of Action"(P0A) on their web site when he googled that name.

So the email threads make clear nobody at the State Department knew who these 10 American Citizens were or what they were doing when they got arrested. All the emails were after they were arrested.

Silsby was not gotten off the hook.

The link that claims Bill got Silsby off the hook relies on the same UK Times report I have shown to be wrong elsewhere in the thread. Look at the Footnotes in that professor's article in the Harvard Human Rights Journal. He based his claim on the UK times, he didn't do original reporting. So this is the same single claim. This would have a been a huge story worldwide and in Haiti and to this day the UK Times was the only paper that made this claim and they dropped this claim and never followed up on it. No Haitian sources have reported it and this would have been discovered during the 2016 campaign if it actually happened. Silsby and her aide Coulter remained in prison in Haiti after Clinton left. Coulter was let go in March and Silsby face trial in May. She was convicted at trial.

Thank you for your perseverance in giving us a more complete understanding of Silsby’s nefarious and despicable history.