NZ.
We know of NZ because Q specifies it as 5Eyes and likely involvement with unofficial channels of leaked intel.
OK. But why did NZ officials donate (who still does that?) to HRC?
Is it possible that any of the comms HRC would be concerned with were also of concern to present/past NZ officials?
Like former prime min. Helen Clark,ALSO who ran the money for the UN direct to CF for Haiti in relevant period
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Clark
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/evelyn-leopold/nations-pledge-nearly-10_b_521077.html
https://reliefweb.int/report/haiti/haiti-blueprint-redevelopment
This woman would have to have intimate knowledge and experience of the Haiti con as it happened. And as it was probably recorded by no such agency and,,, possibly… NZ SIGINT?
Still considered one of world's most powerful women:
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/96562190/helen-clark-named-third-most-powerful-woman-influencer
https://www.thehits.co.nz/random-stuff/helen-clark-joins-michelle-obama-and-hillary-clinton-in-most-powerful-women-list/
It would be useful if an NZ anon or UN anon had further info on the direct relations and interests of HRC and HC with this in mind: if Hil goes down for Haiti. what about others who participated in it?
Does EO of 12/2017 referring to intl/foreign actors potentially include such folk?
It is strange that this aspect of the NZ story has been overlooked, but when Q directs us somewhere it is a sound idea to cover the whole territory. It would also be interesting to look into the officials (too long for now) who ran/run the relevant NZ SIGINT dept (relevant also as it covers patches of Pacific and little islands otherwise hard to track).
The NZ SIGINT people would clearly know all about Clark and her relations with Clinton (and if there has been a worked deal to cover up anything in return for donations)..