One of the recent WikiLeaks email dumps revealed some interesting things about hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking.
They add to Hillary Clinton’s conflicted public comments and private positions.
Regarding fracking, the leaked emails offer a glimpse into speeches she made to closed groups. One such speech was given to Deutsche Bank on April 24, 2013. There, she praised fracking as a tool to “make even more countries more energy self-sufficient.” She told the audience: “I’ve promoted fracking in other places around the world.”
Yet, everything she’s said in the campaign, paints a different picture.
Her policies are decidedly anti-fossil fuel. The party platform calls for “a goal of producing 100 percent of electricity from renewable sources by 2050.” In addition to promoting “enough clean renewable energy to power every home in America within ten years,” Hillary’s website outlines her desire to “reduce the amount of oil consumed in the United States and around the world.” She’s declared that banning fossil fuel extraction on public lands is: “a done deal.” While she won’t come out and clearly state that she’d ban fracking, at a March 6 CNN debate with Bernie Sanders in Flint, Michigan, she proudly stated: “By the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where fracking will continue to take place.” And, she has pledged to “stop fossil fuels.”
Then there’s her comment about green-group funding, as coming from Russia. It’s long been suspected that Russia is protecting its national oil-and-gas interests by funding anti-fracking activism—while not a new idea, the current attention makes it worth revisiting.
To the best of my knowledge, Russia’s reported involvement in shaping public opinion came to light in 2010, when different WikiLeaks revelations made public private intelligence from Stratfor—which had previously published a background brief on Shale Gas Activism—that speculated on Russian funding for the anti-fracking movie Gasland.
The idea that Russia is funding anti-fracking groups, such as the Sierra Club and the Natural Resource Defense Council, has popped up in a variety of outlets including the 2013 movie FrackNation, and in 2014 comments from NATO secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the former Prime Minister of Denmark. And then, in late 2014, the New York Times featured a story titled: “Russian money suspected behind fracking protests.” In 2015, The Washington Free Beacon reported on a Bermudian firm that had connections to Russian oil interests and was funneling money to anti-fracking groups in the U.S.
Despite all the multiple claims linking Russia to anti-fracking activity, there’s been scant hard evidence.
But now, thanks to WikiLeaks, Russia’s reported anti-fracking funding is back in the headlines: “Leaked emails show Hillary Clinton blaming Russians for funding ‘phony’ anti-fracking groups,” wrote the Washington Times.
With knowledge only someone with a high-level security clearance and an understanding of foreign relations, like the Secretary of State, would have, Hillary, in a June 2014 speech in Edmonton Canada, reportedly said the following to an audience:
“We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media. We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh that pipeline, that fracking, whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia.”
Remember, we are in an economic war and there are many who don’t want America to win. The cheap energy prices fracking has provided give the U.S. an economic advantage—hence the hostility toward it.