Another Back Door Attempt To Delegitimize Trump

The Inspector-General’s investigation of Comey is another Democrat Blame Game attempting to finger somebody or something for Hillary losing the election. According to Democrats, it is either Russian Hacking or FBI Director Comey who are responsible for Hillary’s loss…or both. Never mind that she was a poor candidate, in poor health and under indictment. By leaving out Hillary and Loretta Lynch they get absolved from all fault and all the blame gets put on the shoulders of Comey. This lets Hillary off the hook while Comey takes all the blame.

You see the Left feels that Trump didn’t win the election, he stole it.

We have refuted the Russian Hacking claim in the previous post. This time we take on the Comey charge:

The aim is obvious: If Comey’s statements were against protocol, then they will be portrayed as violations that caused Clinton to lose.


Former Prosecutor Andrew McCarthy reports:

Why Republicans Lose the Narrative Battle: The Inspector-General Gambit

To delegitimize Trump’s victory, the Left is setting the parameters of the controversy and the terms by which it will be discussed.

It is so frustrating to observe news coverage of Thursday’s announcement that the Justice Department’s inspector general will review the conduct of FBI and Justice Department officials tangential to — but, as I’ve explained, not at the core of — the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s e-mail scandal. As usual, the Left understands exactly what they are choreographing, beginning with Friday’s screaming New York Times page-one headline that “Comey” is the subject of a new Justice Department probe. As always, the Left is setting the parameters of the controversy and the terms by which it will be discussed.

And as night follows day, Republicans are at sea, not knowing quite what is being investigated. Precisely because of the way Democrats have teed things up, Republicans have been hoodwinked into thinking that they must figure out where to come down on FBI director James Comey’s rollercoaster announcements during the campaign stretch run.

In other words: The Democrats are more than halfway home. Republicans figure nothing important has really happened yet. The Left knows it has already set the table. By the time the GOP grasps what’s happening, the public’s understanding of the controversy will be set in stone.

Let me try, again, to help.

Please understand: The charade now underway has nothing to do with determining whether Justice Department protocols were violated by the statements of FBI and Justice Department officials who revealed non-public investigative information — in Comey’s case, to the public at large. That’s the pretext for convening something that can be called a “Justice Department investigation” (which sounds like we’re looking to identify a culprit) by the inspector general (which sounds like the investigation must be non-partisan, even though the IG is an Obama appointee who works with, although often not under the supervision of, Obama’s chosen attorney general).

To the contrary, what is going on here is a battle, which Democrats are hell-bent on winning, between two competing narratives.

I use the term “narratives” advisedly. What is going on is not about a search for truth, or getting to the bottom of a complex set of facts and regulations. The real agenda here is to engrave a story on the 2016 presidential election. That story will become the conventional wisdom about the legitimacy of the Trump presidency (or as the Left is determined to have you see it, the lack of legitimacy).

Now that the election is lost, the Democrats see no downside in portraying the Clinton e-mails investigation as its dispositive event — even though they told us during the campaign (which they expected to win and are still shocked that they lost) that the significance of the e-mails had been overblown, and that Director Comey had shown great integrity in clearing Mrs. Clinton of criminal culpability.

If the e-mail investigation is seen as the make-or-break episode in the campaign, then there are two possible narratives:

(1) Director Comey cost Mrs. Clinton the election by making public statements about the investigation that were in violation of Justice Department guidelines, including — critically — a statement just eleven days before the election that appeared to nullify his earlier exculpatory statements, and that could only have misled voters into believing that the FBI had discovered damning evidence against Clinton; or

(2) The Obama Justice Department conducted a sham investigation to ensure that Clinton, though patently guilty of serious national-security crimes, would not be charged — a scheme that included: refusing to open a grand-jury investigation; denying the FBI the ability to compel the production of critical evidence; granting immunity to any suspect who appeared guilty and might otherwise have been incentivized to cooperate against Clinton; imposing ludicrous restrictions on the FBI’s interviews of witnesses and examination of physical evidence; permitting subjects of the investigation who had received immunity agreements to appear as counsel for the main subject of the investigation, in violation of ethical rules and federal law; leaking information to the press that suggested Clinton and her confederates were cooperative and had no intent to harm the United States (which was not the legal standard for criminal liability); and a furtive meeting on an airport tarmac between the attorney general herself and President Bill Clinton, the spouse of the main subject of the investigation, only days before Mrs. Clinton submitted to a perfunctory FBI interview and was proclaimed innocent by Comey.

If those are the two narratives that could most conceivably stick, how do Democrats make sure that Narrative No. 1 prevails? Easy: by framing the public debate in a manner that ensures Narrative No. 1 is the only one that is considered.

The way they accomplish this is by sculpting the inspector-general investigation. Notice the IG’s press release, which I referenced in Thursday night’s column on this subject. There is not a scintilla of reference to anything related to Narrative No. 2. The principal thrust of the IG’s inquiry will be Comey, and the question whether his public statements were against DOJ guidelines. For appearances’ sake, there are a few other areas of inquiry. But make no mistake: The whole ballgame is Comey.

The aim is obvious: If Comey’s statements were against protocol, then they will be portrayed as violations that caused Clinton to lose — the argument will be that Trump’s victory was as razor thin as it gets, Clinton decisively won the popular vote, so surely Comey’s impropriety is what swung the few thousand votes Clinton would have needed in key states to win in the Electoral College. Therefore, the narrative goes: Trump’s victory, and thus his presidency, is illegitimate.

But wait, you’re thinking, this is surely wrong. First, Clinton was simply a terrible candidate — dishonest, corrupt, inept, Benghazi, Clinton Foundation, etc. She lost in 2008 because she was unpopular among Democrats. This time around, she got the nomination by rigging the contest against Bernie Sanders; then, in the general election, she proceeded to lose an overwhelming number of states, accounting for Trump’s seemingly comfortable Electoral College victory.

Second, if the Justice Department had done a fair, impartial investigation, Clinton would have been indicted and would have been replaced on the Democratic ticket. So forget about the election — her candidacy itself was illegitimate.

Right . . . so now do you see how this works?

The Democrats erase your first argument by reducing the whole election down to the e-mails investigation, such that Mrs. Clinton’s many other flaws as a candidate do not matter. The Democrats erase your second argument by making sure the IG investigation focuses on James Comey, not on Hillary Clinton’s crimes and the Justice Department’s outrageous machinations to make sure she was not prosecuted for those crimes.

There you have it. The public’s perception of Trump’s legitimacy may hinge on the public’s understanding of the Justice Department inspector-general’s probe. The Democrats fully grasp this and are lining things up so that they’ll win before Republicans even realize the game is on.

’Twas ever thus.

Read more at:

Russian Hacking Election Claim Is Domestic Information Warfare

The latest propaganda from what passes for ‘mainstream media’ these days about ‘Russian hacking’ continues to baffle anyone with any shred of common sense. The lack of evidence is more apparent than ever, and as we shall see here, they are not concerned about ever showing any evidence at all. But this hodgepodge of evidence-free assertions is still driving the 24/7 fake news cycle.

Two things;

First, here is an excellent video above on the Fake News of Russian Hacking. There is Russian hacking alright but not hacking that changed any votes in the 2016 election.

Second, the state we are in regarding cyber security has been made much worse by eight years of Obama doing absolutely nothing to combat it and fight back! He could have developed a cyber defense system and toughened up government hacking protection. He could have stopped these attacks on the United States, but like other hot spots in the world, he just stood by and watched and did nothing.

If you are not a listener to Rush you missed a great interview on this subject with American Defense and Security Expert Bill Gertz. Here is that interview:


Rush Talks with Bill Gertz, the Greatest Pentagon Reporter of Our Lifetime

RushRUSH: We’re gonna kick off now with a little chat with Bill Gertz, formerly of the Washington Times. He’s now journalist at large, and one of the — if not the — greatest reporter on the Pentagon and the Department of Defense systems, national security of the United States. He’s been around for as long as I can remember, he’s got his new book out. It’s called iWar, like in iPhone, the letter I. It’s iWar: War and Peace the Information Age. Bill, welcome. It’s great to talk to you. It’s been a long time. How are you doing?

GERTZ: Hey, Rush! I’m doing great. Great to be on the show. Thanks so much for having me on.

RUSH: You’re more than welcome. Now, your book covers much, much more than what’s in the news now. Folks, it’s an historical compendium of many of the challenges we’ve had with cyber attacks going back years and years, from North Korea, from the ChiComs, cyber attacks we’ve engaged in, success stories, failures, areas we’re strong and weak and so forth based on Bill’s investigation. But before we get to all that, since you’ve written this book and since you have been studying and reporting on the Pentagon and national security for so many years, as you watch the presidential campaign and now the transition and you hear like we all do every day that the Russians hacked our elections, that the Russians hacked Hillary Clinton’s emails… As somebody who knows about cyber wars and cyber security, how do you, Bill Gertz…? How do you process this stuff? How do you react to it? ‘Cause you know whether some of this stuff is true, legitimate or not. So how do you deal with it yourself?

GERTZ: Yeah. This is an amazing phenomenon. What we’re seeing is what I call information warfare. It’s basically the kind of warfare that’s gonna dominate our society because we live in an information age, and we’re under assault from all quarters, not just the Russians. The Chinese, the Iranians, and I even put the liberal left in the kind of domestic information warfare. It’s a broad-scale assault, and the United States is ill-prepared to deal with it. We just don’t have anything that can counteract these lies and disinformation the way we did during the Cold War.

RUSH: By that, do you mean we don’t have secure systems that would block cyber attacks, that we do not have good firewalls, we don’t have systems in place to be able to identify these attacks when they’re happening and be able to stop them?

GERTZ: Yes. We’ve learned that the internet is basically a lawless environment, and every time we build defenses, the bad guys find ways around them. The real solution is to go on the offensive, and under Obama, he has done absolutely nothing to counteract massive cyber attacks from the Chinese, now the Russians, and also the Iranians and North Koreans. Obama’s view was… He said back in October, he thought, oh, if we do something against the Russians for their hacking, then we start a Wild, Wild West exchange of cyber attacks.

RUSH: Now, wait, Bill. I mean, Obama told us that he called Putin in September and told him to cut it out.

iWar: War and Peace in the Information Age

iWar: War and Peace in the Information Age

GERTZ: Yeah. (chuckling) Yeah. Uh, obviously the message did not get through to the Kremlin.

RUSH: I wonder why. (laughing)

GERTZ: Yeah.

RUSH: Okay. So let’s get specifics. You are fully aware of the politics. I have to admit I am being a little unfair to Bill because Bill’s book is not, per se, about intraparty politics. It’s about the overall vulnerability of our country to all of this increasing cyber warfare, and he details how we have been hit that people don’t know. In other words, Chinese, Russian, Iranian, even Israeli success stories over the years. But specifically with everything you know, Bill, when you hear the actual phrase in the media “Russians hacked the election,” you know that that’s not actually what happened, correct?

GERTZ: Actually, it’s a combination. In the past, cyber attacks were primarily for stealing information for espionage purposes. That was the specialty of the Chinese. But in the case of the election campaign — not the vote, but the election campaign — the Russians attacked certain political figures on both sides. You know, Colin Powell emails were hacked. General Breedlove, the NATO commander, his emails were hacked by the Russians. And then these emails were leaked to select media that were conduits for Russian propaganda to achieve a certain political goal. That’s the difference here. It’s not just cyber espionage and stealing secrets to help Russian industry or Chinese industry.

RUSH: Exactly.

GERTZ: It’s really trying to influence.

RUSH: Yeah. By the way, for the Russians, the old Soviet Union, propaganda was the coin of the realm. In fact, Bill, I think if you want to try to categorize any of this as a positive, one of the things that has come out of this is that the Democrats, the liberals, whatever, have had to admit now what they denied for decades. All during the seventies and eighties and nineties, they denied the Soviet Union was infiltrating American universities. They denied the Soviet Union was trying to infiltrate the government. They denied the Soviet Union tried to infiltrate State Department. They denied the Soviet Union was trying to propagandize universities.


RUSH: And now they’re practically admitting it because it happened to them and their computer systems at the DNC.

GERTZ: Yeah, and I could tell you in the early part of the Obama administration when Hillary did her ridiculous reset attempt, the U.S. government throughout the law enforcement and national security community was ordered not to say anything negative about Vladimir Putin. In other words, Putin was their central person that they were trying to reset relations with. Well, and then of course Crimea happened. They invaded Crimea, and things turned south from there. But there’s been no pushback against the Russians. And Vladimir Putin realized that he’s dealing with a patsy in the Obama administration.

RUSH: That’s so crucial to point out because the Obama administration and the Democrats are trying to position themselves as the warriors opposing Putin, and Trump and the Republicans are the ones who were trying to sidle up and defend Putin. Which is dangerous because Putin’s a bad guy, he’s an enemy, and Trump thinks he’s a good guy. When in fact it was Obama who didn’t do anything negative to Putin, who didn’t challenge Putin and who in fact told one of Putin’s aides, “Tell Vladimir I’ll have more flexibility after the election.” They were talking about reducing our nuclear arsenal at that point.

GERTZ: Yeah. The chapter in my book on Russia is titled, “In Russia, President Assassinates You.” This is a guy who has killed his political opponents with impunity and continues to do so. This is a bad actor. I think we’re gonna see attempts by the Trump administration to try to reset relations, but Trump said the other day, look, he may get along with Putin but the chances are that he probably will not. It’s absolutely clear to me that Putin views the United States as its main enemy and is working to undermine and ultimately destroy the United States.

RUSH: And that’s nothing new. That’s been the strategic objective of Russians, and then the Soviet Union, and now the Russians for all of our lifetimes. Do you have any confidence, do you have confidence or not that Trump and his emerged national security team have Putin and the Russians properly understood and in perspective? Or are you worried that they don’t?

GERTZ: Uh, I think it’s becoming clear that he’s going to try to reset relations, but it’s not going to work. I was encouraged by a number of statements by his nominees. General Mattis was spot on in saying (summarized), “Look, we’ve got a major threat coming out of the Russians.” Rex Tillerson, the secretary of state, threw down the gauntlet against the Chinese in the South China Sea. He said, “Look, not only do they have to stop this but we’re going to block China from using the 3,000 acres of islands that they’ve built in this strategic international waterway.”

RUSH: As you have studied all of this, do you have any impressions yet on whether or not — and I’m sure this is why you write in the book, actually — how complacent do you think our population has become to threats against our country from foreign actors like Russia, like North Korea? For example, chapter two in your book is about North Korea and their rocket program and so forth. I’ll just share something: When the North Koreans launch a missile that lands 200 miles nowhere in the middle of the ocean, friends of mine joke that the North Koreans are a bunch of inept jokes and nobody needs to be worried about them. But you don’t think that’s the case at all, right?

GERTZ: Oh, absolutely. I think North Korea is one of the most dangerous threats. It emerged as a greater threat under Obama, where he ignored missile and submarine-launched ballistic missile developments, five nuclear tests. There’s been no sanctions imposed on this regime. This is a regime that has been accused of crimes against humanity. Here we are in the Twenty-First Century and this regime is allowed to continue? The reason is that the Obama administration farmed out its North Korea policy to Beijing. And guess what? The Chinese communists in Beijing supported the North Korean communists in Pyongyang.

RUSH: Right. Because it’s destabilizing and that’s to their benefit.

GERTZ: Yeah.

RUSH: I mean, communists are communists even though the Norks may be rank amateurs at it on the world stage. Here’s something else you write in chapter three, folks, which is entitled, “United States: 80% of Success Is Showing Up.” This assertion that you make, especially when I measure it against what we’re hearing today… For example, in setting up this point, folks, the news daily recording the Trump victory and the transition is that the CIA is utterly competent, that the CIA is on top of everything, and that the CIA is desperately trying to get Trump to listen to ’em, and the CIA is infallible.

Now, prior to this, the Democrat Party hated the CIA. Frank Church and other Democrats have tried to impugn and impair their activities. Now they’re best friends. But listen to what Bill writes here: Former CIA operations officer Brad Johnson, quote, “If the CIA were directed to conduct information warfare today, it would be unable to do so because it no longer has an effective and capable directorate of operations.” It’s right on page 77 of your book. Now, in this day and age, how in the world can that be, that we could not mount our own information warfare today if we had to? I mean, everybody thinks the CIA is on top of everything now.

Bill Gertz

Bill Gertz

GERTZ: It’s totally alarming. This has been politicization that has been underway for a long time, and it has accelerated under John Brennan where what happened was they took political appointees, turned them into analysts, most of them come from the left-wing academic community anyway.

RUSH: Oh, no. You’re kidding?

GERTZ: (laughing)

RUSH: See, I’ve told you, folks, they politicize everything. They’ve taken political left-wing hacks and turned them into analysts?

GERTZ: Yeah. And then they send them down to this training center near Williamsburg, and they give them a perfunctory course in the directorate of operations —

RUSH: Bill, these are people — (cross talk)

GERTZ: — make them spies.

RUSH: These are people who think the United States is the greatest problem in the world.

GERTZ: Yes, that is the problem. I mean, the academic community, that’s become an anti-American system. They are part of the new left radicalism that made the long march through the institutions. And they reached their zenith under the Obama administration.

RUSH: Now, in practically every answer that you’ve given me about the CIA and our national defense, cyber defense, every answer outside the campaign, I’ve heard you say the Obama administration. It sounds to me like you’re saying the deterioration has occurred during the Obama years. And I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but you’re making it sound like it’s almost purposeful rather than the result of incompetence or inattention.

GERTZ: It is purposeful. One of the startling things I uncovered from some of these leaks that came out during the campaign was that it was a vetting report for Susan Rice, who would go on to become Obama’s national security adviser. And the vetting report said that she shares the president’s view that the United States must engage America’s enemies, literally. It says that was one of the driving policies of President Obama was to engage America’s enemies. So you have the chance to help Iran become a more democratic place back in 2009. Instead, he sided with the mullahs. Same thing with Cuba. Same thing with Russia and China. This is a guy who has damaged national security in ways that are going to be felt for decades.

RUSH: Holy smokes. Well, I mean, a number of us knew it was bad. I didn’t know that they were turning academic hacks into analysts. I mean, the problem with that, folks, literally is these are people who think that the problem in the world is the United States as a superpower. They don’t see the United States as a solution to anything. These are uber-leftists. Here, further in the same chapter — and I know about the CIA — or, rather, the FBI, wiretapping and monitoring Martin Luther King. I had no idea the KGB had penetrated Martin Luther King’s inner circle. What was their purpose there?

GERTZ: Well, that was at a time when they were trying to influence the black nationalist movement as a subversive element to subvert the United States. And they had planted a number of agents within what they called the black nationalist movement. This was disclosed by a Russian defector called Vasili Mitrokhin.

RUSH: What was his name?

the Mitrokhin Papers

the Mitrokhin Papers

GERTZ: Vasili Mitrokhin. He wrote a book called the Mitrokhin Papers [sic], which didn’t get a lot of attention but it was clear that the black nationalist movement was thoroughly penetrated by the KGB.

RUSH: I thought you said Vitaly Churkin, who has been a propagandist as long as I’ve been alive.

GERTZ: Yeah.

RUSH: No matter what regime is running the Russians, the Soviets or the Russians, he’s there. Bill, I’ve got one more quick question, I gotta take a break. Can you hang on?

GERTZ: Sure.

RUSH: Bill Gertz here, folks, with his new book, iWar: War and Peace in the Information Age. Greatest Pentagon reporter of our lifetime.

RUSH:  The Iranian nuclear deal, Bill, there’s some confusion. The Democrats and Obama maintained, I saw him say in his swan song speech that he stopped the Iranians from getting a nuclear weapon. Other people say no, this speeds up the process. What’s the truth, and is there anything about this deal you’ve uncovered that we don’t know that is really eye opening?

GERTZ: Two words: Neville Chamberlain, peace in our time. The Iranian nuclear deal assures that Iran will have nuclear weapons in 10 years or less. This is going to happen. Just as we saw North Korea sign up for the nonproliferation treaty only to use it as a tool to gain nuclear technology for weapons, Iran is doing exactly the same thing. It remains to be seen as to whether the Trump administration will get rid of this terrible agreement.

RUSH: Yeah, I can’t get my arms around it. The president says he just stopped them from getting a nuclear weapon. Now, does he think that he did or is he lying to us? I don’t want to put the onus on you, but this just doesn’t compute.

GERTZ: Yeah. No, they are convinced that an agreement was based on the, quote, the hope that Iran will never seek to acquire nuclear weapons is going to be enough to prevent the mullahs in Tehran from developing —


GERTZ: — quote, nuclear missiles and warheads for those missiles.

RUSH: That’s why the Neville Chamberlain comparison. So you think there’s a good faith belief that the Iranians are good guys and wouldn’t lie to Obama, that’s what they think.

GERTZ: Yeah. And it was the whole engaging the enemy kind of thing, too.

RUSH: Well, in perusing the book, Bill, we don’t have time to get into it now but also he’s uncovered some other information about the San Bernardino attack, how that happened and what it really meant. His book is just chock-full, you know the headlines, you think you know the story, but you don’t in terms of what Bill has been able to uncover. Bill, where are you working daily now? You still submit stuff to the Washington Times?

GERTZ: Yes, I’m a national security columnist at the Washington Times and I’m a senior editor at the Washington Free Beacon, and having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have, as someone likes to say.

Intel Agencies Go Rogue. Try To Blackmail The President!

When the Intelligence Community included the made up hit piece that Buzzfeed published in its briefing to the President, President-Elect and members of Congress, they stepped over the line into partisan politics, something Federal Agencies are not allowed to do. It is quite evident that Obama has left to Trump a Federal Bureaucracy that has been politicized by the Left. He is going to have to DRAIN THE SWAMP.

American Thinker reports:

The Intelligence Community versus Donald Trump

The continuing campaign to discredit President-Elect Trump is increasing in intensity.  It is based on allegations that the Russians interfered in the U.S. election.  It is suggested that Hillary Clinton would have won the election if the Russians had not interfered.  The establishment media echo accounts by the administration’s anonymous sources frequently neglecting to include the word “alleged.”  In spite of their damaged credibility, they have demonstrated that they can still be influential.  In addition to anonymous sources, the media are relying on academics and retired intelligence personnel.

The New York Times has reported, “The assessment by American intelligence agencies that the Russian government stole and leaked Clinton campaign emails has been accepted across the political spectrum, with the notable exception of Mr. Trump.”  Apparently, the Times searched for people who supported Trump, but they were unable to locate them.  Trump’s critics are everywhere.

Critics of the president-elect have charged him with everything but being a KGB agent.  Former acting CIA director Michael Morell claims that Vladimir Putin has “cleverly recruited Trump as an unwitting agent of the Russian Federation.” Michael V. Hayden, former director of the NSA and CIA, says he prefers the term polezni durak.  “That’s the useful fool, some naif, manipulated by Moscow, secretly held in contempt, but whose blind support is happily accepted and exploited.”  Senator Harry Reid wrote to FBI director James Comey, “It has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisers, and the Russian government – a foreign interest openly hostile to the United States, which Trump praises at every opportunity.”  The New York Post quotes a CIA official: “It’s pretty horrifying to me that he’s siding with Assange over the intelligence agencies.”

Academics have weighed in.  Joshua Rovner of Southern Methodist University declared, “By ignoring intelligence, Trump risks policy tunnel vision.”  Rovner is an “expert” and the John Goodwin Tower distinguished chair of international politics and national security, so he must know what he is talking about.  CNN contributor and former CIA official Bob Baer, another “expert,” claimed, “Assange going on about a 14-year-old being able to hack Podesta is nonsense.”  Of course, Assange was exaggerating, which made his claim “nonsense.”  He should have said “15-year-old.”  John McAfee has pointed out that the Chinese stole every record that the FBI had, and in February, “a 15 year old boy hacked the FBI and published 30 thousand records including undercover agents of every agent within the FBI organization.”  The teenage hacking group “Cracka with Attitude” has also hacked into the email accounts of CIA director John Brennan and director of national intelligence James Clapper.

On October 7, 2016, the director of national intelligence issued a joint statement from the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on election security.  In it, they claimed that the hacked e-mails, “are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts.”  They added, “[W]e are not now in a position to attribute this activity to the Russian Government.”  This was enough for Rep. Elijah Cummings to claim, “Experts agree that there is overwhelming evidence that Russia interfered with the 2016 presidential election.”  California Rep. Eric Swalwell claimed that Trump’s denials are ridiculous.  “He [Trump] is denying that the sun sets in the West.”

Senator John McCain called Russia’s hacking “an unprecedented attack on our democracy” and suggested that it would be an act of war had Moscow’s action’s affected the results of the election.

People who disagree with the establishment narrative are unpatriotic.  When Tucker Carlson asked Rep. Adam Schiff for evidence to support his allegation that Putin ordered the hacking of Podesta’s emails, Schiff’s response was that Carlson was carrying water for Vladimir Putin and was an “apologist for the Kremlin.”  Senator Claire McCaskill declared, “The notion that the soon elected leader of this country would put Julian Assange on a pedestal compared to the men and women of the intelligence community … I think it should bring about a hue and cry.”  Senator Richard Blumenthal added, “I want to explore a little bit why these very demeaning and dismissive comments about our intelligent community are so dangerous.”

Trump is having trouble with the leadership of the intelligence community.  He may have wide support among the rank and file.  The leadership of the intelligence community has been politicized.  Information is frequently distorted. Fifty intel analysts have made a formal complaint about their reports on ISIS being altered.  Rep. Peter King claimed that CIA director John Brennan was orchestrating a “hit job.”

He stated, “We have John Brennan – supposedly John Brennan – leaking to The Washington Post, to a biased newspaper like The New York Times, findings and conclusions that he’s not telling the intelligence committee[.]”  The director of national intelligence, James Clapper, may have committed perjury and definitely misled Congress in his testimony in 2013 on NSA data collection.

All modern governments collect information on other governments, allied and enemy.  Ordinarily, they do not divulge what they know, because they do not want to jeopardize their sources.  It is no secret that the United States has used information it has gained to influence events in other countries.  There is no question that Russia “hacked” various U.S. databases.  The question is, did they use this information to influence the U.S. election?  U.S. intelligence cannot answer that question convincingly.  Only the Russians know for sure.  U.S. intelligence contends that the Russians did not attempt to attack U.S. the voter registration database.  However, attacks may have taken place.  Georgia’s Secretary of State Brian Kemp claimed that local authorities had tracked down the origin of a hacker attack on his voter registration database after the election.  “The attack was traced to an IP address of the Department of Homeland Security.”  WSB-TV in Atlanta reported that “two more states, West Virginia and Kentucky, confirmed that the same IP address accessed their election system.”

The establishment narrative is that Trump is a tool of Putin, and how can this tool of the Russians be sworn in while tensions with Russia are increasing at such a rapid rate?  But the Russians are being used as a tool to attack Trump.  His critics will oppose him on every issue.  Some of his harshest critics are within his own party.  Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham would have been more comfortable working with a President Hillary Clinton than with Donald Trump.

The Left Colluding With The Media Is Totally Obsessed With Taking Trump Out

Here is another try to destroy Trump. But Trump is not like Bush. He won’t let them get away with Fake News and slander the way Bush did. He will not turn the other cheek.

What they did to Trump here…he got Borked!

And who better to analyze this story than Rush:

Establishment Attempts to Smear Trump with Fake News

The media is out of control. The entire Washington establishment doesn’t know what to do, folks. They are clueless. They are witless now, and they are totally discombobulated. The normal techniques that they use to destroy their enemies just bounce off of Trump. It’s really nothing different.

They have not known how to deal with Trump since he entered this race. They try to plug Trump into their formula, their system, the establishment, the business of politics, the way they do things — which is a world they run, by the way. And in their own minds, the media run the establishment. They can take people out, they can build people up, and they have become accustomed to being able to do one or both whenever they want. They are totally ineffective with Trump, and they don’t know how to deal with it.

And this is a very crucial point. What is behind all of this… By the way, this story that BuzzFeed ran with last night? I don’t know how many of you heard all during the summer that… I heard from a number of you in emails, “Rush, I’m really worried. There’s some story on Trump out there that they’re just waiting to unload and it’s just gonna destroy him. I don’t know what the details are, but everybody’s got it.” Well, this is what it was.

For months, the Drive-By Media tried as hard as they’ve ever tried anything to verify what was in this 35-page intelligence report, and none of it could be verified. Month after month after month after month. They were desperate to release this during the campaign, during the debates. They were desperate to release this before the election. But nobody could verify it. So in their frustration at their inability to take Trump out and their inability to damage Trump — their inability to destroy people’s love and support for Trump — they have proceeded down the path of self-destruction.

They’re really destroying themselves now, and the intelligence community’s involved in this. But this is also a media operation as well. So they just decided… BuzzFeed last night releases this big story that everybody’s had all summer long, this 35-page detailed report on all kinds of perversion — behavioral perversion — that Trump and his associates engaged in on trips to Moscow and so forth. And one of the allegations — are you ready? — is that Trump bought a bunch of prostitutes and brought them into the presidential suite at a hotel in Moscow where Barack and Michelle Obama had stayed and then Trump had the prostitutes urinate on the bed in front of him.

That’s one of the fundamental ingredients of this story, and they’ve been trying to verify this, and the name Michael Cohen, one of Trump’s lawyers, is said to have been in the group witnessing and watching the urination by prostitutes on the bed. It was a way — it was a childish way — of supposedly getting even with Obama. It’s just absolutely ridiculous. It turns out that the Michael Cohen that this report claims was not Trump’s Michael Cohen. The whole thing is made up! The whole thing is just an absolute disaster.

So BuzzFeed last night decides, after CNN… There’s a coordinated effort. CNN reports on the existence of the report but they don’t detail it. Jake Tapper, who wants to be known as one of the most highly respected journalists in the world, decides to start vomiting this stuff. But he doesn’t get into details. That’s a signal for BuzzFeed to go ahead and release and publish all 35 pages. And BuzzFeed does so while telling everybody that none of it has been verified. (summarized) “We can’t confirm anything that’s in this report.

“Not a single shred of this can be verified as true. But we think you should see it so that you can make up your own minds,” and then this began a whole media — I don’t know what you call it — meltdown last night. And it was fascinating to watch, folks, ’cause you could go to one blogger after another and you could read the bloggers who really hoped it would be true. And if I wanted to, I could name the names for you. I spent a lot of time last night tracking this story, and I found the bloggers who wanted it to be true by hoping it was true.

They were holding out hope that there may be some backup for this, and others said, “It’s a disgrace. It’s a shame that any of this ever saw the light of day because none of it’s been verified.” It was a very eye-hoping moment. But what’s really happening here is that the Drive-By Media and everybody in the establishment (which includes the intelligence agencies) are used to being able to take out people, to destroy people, to ruin people with innuendo and allegation. That’s all they’ve ever needed. I give you Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill. I give you Robert Bork. I could give you example after example where, if they’ve wanted to target somebody and damage them or ruin them, all they’ve gotta do is broadcast innuendo and allegation. They don’t have to have evidence for it. It’s never been needed.

But they’re outclassed by Donald Trump.

What we have here, folks, is a variation on, “Yeah, we have no evidence, but the seriousness of the charge demands an investigation.”  We first heard that or I first became familiar with it during the Clarence Thomas, Anita Hill hearings. Actually, no!  I first heard about it when they alleged that George H. W. Bush flew on an SR-71 in the summer of 1980 to meet with the Iranians in Paris to arrange for the hostages to remain captive until after the election to facilitate the election of Reagan.

Gary Sick, a University of Columbia professor, wrote an entire book on this.  It was a total lie.  It was total fake.  It was total made up.  And Tom Foley, the Speaker of the House — Democrat — at time, said, “Well, the seriousness of this charge, even though there’s no evidence, mandates that we conduct an investigation.”  And it’s the same thing here.  This is a variation of that.  Here’s what is going on — and this is, I think, key to understanding this.  Members of the establishment — and they run the gamut from members of the intelligence committee to elected officials to key positions in various bureaucracies, in the media.

The establishment’s made up of a lot of people, and there’s a pecking order, and there is a rulebook, and there is a style sheet, and there is a modus operandi for everybody in it.  And systems have evolved and been built up over years and years and years and years and years as to how this establishment operates and how you avoid the pitfalls in it and so forth.  And it has evolved and been tailored to be effective specifically against fellow members of the establishment.  And it’s proved pretty effective.

The media, working with whoever they can find or whatever source they wish to associate with are used to being able to take people down or taking people out with simple innuendo, with simple allegation.  The Gary Sick example is a glaring example of the effort.  It didn’t work.  It was designed to reelect Jimmy Carter.  It didn’t work. But it created a cloud over George H. W. Bush that remained forever. Because the media, once it’s out there, it becomes part of the lifetime narrative of the individual, in this case George H. W. Bush.

So it was always remained an unanswered question: “Did Bush…?” ‘Cause there wasn’t any evidence, you see, and since there wasn’t any evidence, they couldn’t refute it.  Wait ’til you hear what the Daily Beast has done with this story today.  Hang on for that.  The Daily Beast, another left-wing website.  In this case, though, they’re dealing with somebody — and they still haven’t figured this out, and this is staring them right in the face.  Trump is not of their world.  Trump is not of their establishment.

Trump is not one of them and has not lived his life as one of them, has not tailored the way he’s lived his life — the private aspects, the personal and public aspects, he’s not tailored any of that — for the success or failure routes within the establishment.  But the establishment people, the media, they have their ways.  And they’ve been as effective as anything against fellow members of the establishment, usually Republicans.  They still haven’t figured out who and what they’re up against.  They continue to try to plug Trump into their systems.

And what they are missing is that Trump is of a totally different world.  He doesn’t enter their world with any fear. He didn’t enter their world with very much respect for them. He doesn’t enter their world with any desire to impress them. He doesn’t become president with any desire to be accepted among the establishment.  He’s running for president and won for totally different reasons.  And his reasons are specific and rooted to saving and improving the country and not climbing the ladder of success within the establishment and not being accepted as one of those people.

And since he’s choosing not to play by those rules, those rules do not affect him. As long as he remains honest and forthright with the people who elected him — as long as he maintains connection with his base — there’s not a thing these people are gonna be able to do to him.  And every attempt they make is only going to strengthen the ties Trump’s supporters have for and with him.  Like this episode.  It’s not gonna lose him any support; it’s gonna gain him support.  And I’ll tell you what else it’s gonna do.

It’s gonna inoculate him from the next charge they try to come up with, ’cause you can’t get much more outrageous than this.  If you’re gonna hit the king, you better take the king out.  In this case, if you’re gonna hit Trump, you better get rid of him, because if you don’t — and they failed here — then the next time they come at him it’s just gonna bounce off like a peashooter up against a battleship.  They haven’t the slightest idea how to deal with Donald Trump, and you know why?  Because they haven’t any experience dealing with real people.

And by “real,” I mean people that are not of a phony, narcissistic, cliquish type of existence, where success is defined by something that has very little to do with how good you are at something and how much you accomplish.  Trump comes from an entirely different world.  He comes from a merit-based world.  He doesn’t come from a PR or buzz world.  Well, there’s some of that with him, but he’s entirely merit based.  His success stories are genuine success stories.  They’re not lies and spin and PR where people are convinced he’s big and successful.

He actually is, and has to prove it. It has to be demonstrable.  And they don’t know how to deal with this.  They don’t know how to deal with somebody not part of the political establishment world.  Stop and think about the examples that I gave you, how they’ve succeeded with lines and innuendos.  Look at what they tried to do with Romney. Here comes Harry Reid saying, “Hey, a friend of mine says Romney hasn’t paid his taxes in ten years!” To this day, people still think Romney might not have paid his taxes.

Romney lost the election, and Harry Reid says, “Hey, he lost, didn’t he?  I don’t care if it was true or not. It worked, and I have no regrets about it whatsoever.” “Romney was a bully at prep school and Romney doesn’t like animals. He puts them on the roof of the station wagon for the family vacation!” All of this stuff is the same kind of stuff they’re trying with Trump, this is bouncing off because that’s not why he’s there.  He’s not there because he’s mastered the ladder of success within the political establishment.

He is there because he’s precisely not that, and the people in the establishment haven’t the slightest idea how to behave in any other way.  They are arrogant and condescending, and the establishment is all there is, and anything outside of that they look upon with contempt and derision, including Trump, including you, including me.  And their arrogance prevents them from actually learning anything about the people like Trump, in this case, covering him and who he really is. They are totally obsessed with one thing, and that’s destroying Trump.  They’re totally obsessed with taking Trump out.

They’re obsessed with damaging Trump’s reputation, his administration. That’s all they care about.  That’s all that matters.  That’s how they prove their self-worth.  It is how their success is decided and defined, as to who they can destroy and what they can build up.  But in the past, they haven’t needed evidence to accomplish their smears.  They were able to smear Clarence Thomas with no evidence whatsoever of sexual harassment against Anita Hill.  Look at what they did to Robert Bork.  There was not one shred of evidence that Robert Bork was anything other than a fine, upstanding man and a great judge and a great jurist, and they destroyed him with allegation and innuendo.

And this is their world and their experience.  They’re able to do that.  They don’t need to have evidence, they don’t need to have the truth.  That is irrelevant.  All they need is the seriousness of the charge.  And then their brethren elsewhere in the establishment coincide, get in gear, and help conduct the smear by going out and asking, “Well, where is the evidence that you weren’t in Moscow?”  And they just never give up.

But Trump’s a different animal.  They don’t know how to deal with it, and he’s making ’em look like children.  In this press conference today there was a man in the front row from CNN, a reporter in the front row, and he kept shouting at Trump like a little child. He demanded that Trump take his question. He started shouting at Trump while Trump was answering other questions, and Trump refused to take the question and looked at the him and said, “No, you’re fake news.”  And that’s when I started laughing and applauding here when we were covering this live.

So CNN’s been called out as fake news ’cause that’s what CNN is!  CNN is fake news!  BuzzFeed is fake news!  The thing that is different about this is the intelligence communities.  That’s what we haven’t seen before.  We’ve seen the media behave as they have, but we have not seen the intelligence communities behave — and I tell you I warned Trump when he first started commenting on the intel community and attacking them, I warned him right here on this program, “These are people that can cause you a lot of trouble because they deal in innuendo.”

They are the only ones who know what they know and they can tell anybody anything, and they can leak anything they want.  They’re kind of like law enforcement; nobody ever doubts ’em, even though there’s clear reason to doubt them, weapons of mass destruction, you name it.

The Daily Beast thing.  Let me find this.  ‘Cause, folks, this is classic.  You know, I’ve got two different stacks of this stuff here.  I can’t find this real quick — yeah, let me take a break.  I’ll come back and find it.  I’ll tell you what this ultimately is.  The Daily Beast runs a story claiming that elements have denied that there’s anything to this.  And the Daily Beast story says (paraphrasing), “Well, the denial doesn’t have much evidence.  The denial is rather thin.  We’re not sure we should believe the denial.”  It’s from the people who are responsible from the story.  It’s Orwellian, is what it is.

I’m trying to take this complexity and make it as simple as I can so people can get their arms around it.  There are two websites involved in this, aside from the intelligence community.  One is called 4chan, the numeral 4, c-h-a-n, the other is Reddit.  They are completely separate entities, completely different websites.  They have common users, but they are two different websites.

There is a politically incorrect forum on the 4chan website where this kind of stuff starts.  These are pranksters and storytellers and they try to one-up each other with fake news and funny stories and satire and parody.  And it is said that this report originated at 4chan.  Somebody wrote it up and summarized it and sent it to Rick Wilson, who is a noted anti-Trumper. I forget who he worked for during the campaign. Wilson then wrote up his own summary of it and gave it to the CIA.

The CIA accepted it and began looking into it and another summary of it was written, and at some point both Obama and Trump were briefed on it.

Now, because of this, because there was an intelligence briefing where both Obama and Trump were told of this story, news media outlets said, “Well, it’s news then. If Trump’s been briefed on it, for crying out loud, we’re gonna run it.” BuzzFeed and CNN figured, “Hell, we’ll run with it.”  It turns out no less than NBC is reporting that Trump was not briefed on this salacious series of details, that he was shown this memo, which alleged links between his campaign and Russia, among the urinating on the bed story. There were other examples of Trump pervert type behavior that would make him subject to blackmail by Putin.

They show this to Trump.  They show this to Obama.  The news media reads that the CIA briefed Trump and Obama, they figure it’s serious news then.  But it turns out that Trump was not briefed on it as something that actually happened.  It turns out that the CIA gave this to Trump as an example of the kind of disinformation that is out there.  They gave it to him as somewhat of an educational thing, as an example of disinformation.  They did have a briefing with him and they showed him this, but they told him it’s an example of disinformation.

They did not tell him that it was real.  If he had been told it was real and if Obama had been told it was real, believe me, we would have heard about this long before last night.  If anything in this had ever been real.  And you must understand that journalists from around the world have been chasing down the elements of this intel report for almost a year.  And they haven’t been able to confirm one thing in it.  And that’s why it was never used.

Now, the Daily Beast example.  Headline:  “4chan Claims It Invented the Trump Golden Showers Story.” The golden shower story is the prostitutes being hired to urinate on the bed in a hotel that Barack and Michelle Obama had slept in the previous visit.  “As news broke of an unverified document detailing supposed Russian dirt on President-elect Donald Trump — including sordid allegations involving urine and prostitutes in Russia — users on the subreddit The_Donald and 4chan’s forum took a victory lap. Not because they found the story funny, but because they claim they planted it as a fake.”

So people at both Reddit and 4chan are doing happy dances out there ’cause they totally made this up and made the CIA accept it as real and start conducting investigations.  Now, the way to translate this is the anti-Trumpsters at The Daily Beast want to believe that these unsourced and unverified stories are actually true.  But the 4chan people and Reddit people say that they’re not true, we made this all up, we can’t believe how gullible you people are.

I can.  I can believe it’s all made up, and I can believe they fell for it.  This is the establishment, this is how they operate.  They hate Trump. They despise Trump. You can’t overestimate how much he is hated by official Washington.  Folks, you cannot, and they will not stop trying to destroy him.  They will not stop in their efforts to make sure he does not succeed in anything.

So the Daily Beast reports here that the 4chan website bragged that they planted this story, they don’t like it, and they added “the evidence supporting the denial is very thin.”  So mind you here, the evidence of the underlying story is nonexistent.  There is no evidence to support one shred of this.

So in the insane world of the left, the evidence disproving an unproven allegation is subjected to a higher standard of proof than the bogus allegation itself.  This is mind-numbingly insane that we find ourselves in the middle of here.  Thank God you people have me to explain this and sort it out for you.

We’re gonna find out this dossier was generated as part of opposition research by anti-Trump Republicans, a guy named Rick Wilson, keep that name in mind.  I’ll tell you what this is, folks.  This is the next version of Bill Burkett and phony documents to Dan Rather at the Texas National Guard to get George W. Bush.  It’s exactly what this is.

I still have quite a lot to see here.  This is big, what they tried to do here today. They tried to take Donald Trump out last night. A combination of the intelligence agencies and the media tried to take Donald Trump out, and he just flattened them.  They are all now in meltdown.  CNN’s in meltdown.  I’ll tell you, there’s another name involved in this that I failed to mention, and I want to do that now.  A central figure in this is Senator John McCain.  Senator John McCain was deeply involved in passing these documents off to the FBI along with a Republican campaign operative by the name of Rick Wilson.

McCain passed them off to the FBI. Wilson passed them off to the CIA.  McCain actually called Comey on this and said, “Hey, there’s something you want to know, something Trump did! It’s horrible. It’s despicable. They’re stand…”  It’s just pathetic.  Now McCain is issuing statements trying to distance himself, saying he had no idea if any of this is true or not.  Well, that’s what CNN is saying.  “Well, we didn’t know if it was true.”  For crying out loud, you people in media, this start tick me off.  They have known for months there was nothing to this story.

You wanted to run this story all last summer, all during the fall.  They wanted to run this story. They desperately looked for evidence to find that this story was true, and there isn’t any, because if there had been they would have found it; we’d have heard about it before last night.  So what happened, CNN decides to run the story anyway as a, “You wouldn’t believe what’s out there” kind of story. “You wouldn’t believe what’s out there, folks. We’ve been trying to run this down.  But we’re not gonna tell you what’s in it ’cause we can’t verify any of it.”

That signaled BuzzFeed.  BuzzFeed was next in the news chain. After CNN, led by Jake Tapper, alludes to the story yesterday afternoon, BuzzFeed then says (summarized), “Oh, we’ll publish the whole memo! We’ll publish all 35 pages,” and they did, and they issued caveat after caveat. They said there’s nothing to it. There’s no verification. We can’t find any evidence whatsoever, but, man, is it serious! You make up your own mind. So they published the whole thing, and then that begot reactions to it and the reactions were multifaceted.

You could tell blog by blog who hoped it to be true, who wanted it to be true, who held out possibilities it was true.  Others, like John Podhoretz, slammed it for what it is:  The most pathetic descent into unprofessionalism in his experience for the Drive-By Media.  And that’s exactly what this is.  They are so desperate, they are so ineffective with Trump, they are so at their wits’ end.  Every bit of technique and ammunition that they have been able to use any time they want to destroy anybody (usually Republicans), doesn’t work on Donald Trump and so they don’t know what to do.

So they keep ratcheting it up. They keep trying what they think are even more powerful examples of the same type of thing.  Now, I mentioned before the break at the top of the hour that there is something out there that happened that’s very, very close to this, and that is, remember this guy Bill Burkett that Dan Rather and Mary Mapes at CBS found? This guy was lurking around Texas, hanging around in obscure, dark corners. He claimed to have official documents from a commander at the Texas Air National Guard that George W. Bush got the guard position because he was a coward.

And his daddy got him the point to the National Guard and Bush never showed up. And so Dan Rather gets these documents from Bill Burkett and they run a story on it, and it turns out it’s totally false. It’s made up. It isn’t true.  Dan Rather gets fired.  Mary Mapes gets fired.  The media has an awards dinner for Dan Rather, because the media realized that if they allow this to stick, it would damage all of them.  I’ll never forget this.  They actually created some new award, they had a dinner, and they awarded some lifetime journalism thing for Dan Rather after this episode.

Mary Mapes got blown out. Burkett’s nowhere to be found.  Here’s the difference:  All during that episode, George W. Bush said not a word.  Karl Rove said not a word.  Nobody in the Republican Party said a word.  Donald Trump comes out first having some people react to it last night; then Trump does a press conference today (previously scheduled) and nukes it, destroys it. Story over. Drive-By Media embarrassed. Media now melting down, running away from the story claiming, “Hey, hey! It was legit! We didn’t say anything specific. We just told people that it was the seriousness of the charges. Some very, very bad stuff potentially out there.

“We didn’t do anything! We didn’t do anything. You can’t prove anything. We didn’t do it. We didn’t do it.”  They’re melting down, they’re running away from it, all because Trump had the evidence to blow this through the moon, through sky-high, and it’s a beautiful thing to watch.  But it’s going to continue.  As I say, what is new here is the involvement of the intelligence communities.  That’s something that we haven’t seen. The media do this and their sources have been many and varied, but we actually appear to have active participation by politicized elements of the intelligence community joining with the media trying to destroy Donald Trump and his presidency.

This is the thing about leftists.  They really believe — some of them — that climate change is destroying the planet.  They really believe that the Russians hacked the election.  Now, let me break this down a bit.

I do believe that at the upper echelon of liberalism where they strategize this stuff, I think these people know that it’s all BS.  But their rank-and-file eats it up as verbatim. The people on the protest March — the average, ordinary leftist Democrat showing up to vote, 90% of the media — they believe it. They literally believe that Trump benefited from Putin hacking the election and they believe that happened because they think so Putin would rather see Trump because now they think Putin has stuff on Trump they can blackmail him with.

Because they can’t intellectually understand the country rejecting Hillary Clinton.  They are that out of touch.  They cannot… They can’t come… They think these last eight years have been the road to nirvana, and they can’t understand the American people rejecting this. So it has to be some trickery, and they’re not gonna let go of it until they have something else to replace it.  Four years from now, eight years from now.

They are going to continue to say and try to persuade as many people in the public as possible that Trump’s illegitimate.  That’s all they’ve got.  All they’ve got is whatever technique they can come up with to delegitimize the Trump win.  Same thing with George W. Bush after the Florida recount in 2000.  They just… They don’t accept reality.  Remember, to understand ’em, to them there is no reality.  Reality is just what we build and construct to exclude them.

Trump Hired Prostitutes To Pee On A Bed In Moscow That Barrack And Michelle Had Previously Used

Buzzfeed reports such ridiculous unverifiable claims. And he did all this because of his deep hatred of Obama. This is the Left and the media unhinged. This is Fake News and this is slander. All this is being done to lend credence to the unsubstantiated Russian Hacking of the election. Once again Trump Derangement Syndrome is trying to deligitimize Trump. And as it fails over and over again the charges become more bizarre by the minute.

RT reports:

Ain’t that a p*sser? #GoldenShowers trends after unverified report of Trump sexcapades

After unverified reports surfaced that President-elect Donald Trump once had Russian prostitutes urinate on each other in a bed the Obamas previously shared, the #GoldenShowers hashtag shot up the trending charts on Twitter.

‘BuzzFeed Runs Unverifiable Trump-Russia Claims’ 

Photo published for Fake News: BuzzFeed Runs ‘Unverifiable’ Trump-Russia Claims

Fake News: BuzzFeed Runs ‘Unverifiable’ Trump-Russia Claims

The online news site BuzzFeed on Tuesday published a letter containing salacious allegations — which even the website acknowledged are unverified — against President-Elect Donald Trump. The letter,…

On Tuesday, CNN published an article stating that US intelligence officials presented a two-page synopsis of classified documents, which included claims that Russian operatives have compromising personal and financial information about Trump, to the president elect and President Barack Obama. The information was included as an annex to the classified version of the report prepared by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Russian influence on the 2016 presidential election, CNN reported.

Later in the day, Buzzfeed News published the entire set of memos, which were purportedly “prepared for political opponents of Trump by a person who is understood to be a former British intelligence agent.” The dossier had been circulating among elected officials, journalists and the intelligence community for weeks, according to Buzzfeed’s Ken Bensinger.

Included in the report was the accusation that Trump has “personal obsessions and sexual perversion,” including for graphic sex acts.

35 page PDF published by Buzzfeed on Trump is not an intelligence report. Style, facts & dates show no credibility. 

Photo published for Trump Intelligence Allegations

Trump Intelligence Allegations

Source document contributed to DocumentCloud by Jeremy Singer-Vine (BuzzFeed).

WikiLeaks has a 100% record of accurate authentication. We do not endorse Buzzfeed’s publication of a document which is clearly bogus.

While staying at the Moscow Ritz Carlton, Trump reportedly requested the presidential suite, where he knew Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama had previously stayed during an official trip to Russia. His conduct there included “defiling the bed where they had slept by employing a number of prostitutes to perform a ‘golden showers’ (urination) show in front of him,” the documents said.

Although news outlets tried to play it straight, reporters tried to one-up each other for the best urine-related jokes. And they weren’t the only ones. Social media was flush with with references to golden showers; what started with a trickle soon turned into a full-blown outpouring of references on Twitter streams.

#PEEOTUS, a play on the abbreviation for president-elect of the United States, quickly began trending as well.

Many on social media criticized CNN and Buzzfeed for reporting unverified reports.

“Trump and Russia”. Still waiting for the evidence…

Trump and Russia are intrinsically linked. I have inside information that tells me Russia is a country.

Yep – but this time, the IC is putting a very indirect, anonymous, vague and untraceable stamp of approval on it. 

Trump’s camp, through lawyer Michael Cohen, “emphatically” denied the claims in the dossier, Mic reported. Indeed, Buzzfeed News described the allegations it contained as “unverified,” adding that “the report contains errors.”

Regardless of its veracity, the outlet published the whole document so that Americans could decide for themselves.

“Publishing this document was not an easy or simple call, and people of good will may disagree with our choice,” Buzzfeed editor-in-chief Ben Smith wrote in an email to staff. “But publishing this dossier reflects how we see the job of reporters in 2017.”

The best part about this PEEOTUS story is that 4chan made it all up and successfully trolled the CIA


Obama’s Legacy


How will history judge the national security and foreign policies of President Barack Obama? At the end of his two terms in office, is the world a better place? Is it a safer place? The evidence, sadly, says no.


As Obama prepares to leave office he keeps telling us how good things are and how he has so improved American life. Methinks the President is looking through rosy colored glasses.

The Daily signal reports:


Obama at his farewell address

According to President Barack Obama, the last eight years have been just swell. But his rendition of history leaves out a few important facts about the state of America following his two terms as president.

In two videos, we run through 13 facts about his administration’s domestic and foreign policy record he conveniently ignores.

On the domestic front, the national debt has almost doubled on his watch. He is responsible for an unparalleled expansion of the job-killing regulatory state. And his signature policy, the Affordable Care Act, has proven to be anything but affordable for many Americans.

His foreign policy and national security record also paints a bleak picture. By any objective measure, transnational terrorist threats are far greater today than when Obama took office in 2009. His policy of appeasement toward hostile regimes in Iran and Cuba have not made Americans safer or the Cuban people freer. And his refusal to adequately fund the U.S. military has threatened the readiness of our country’s armed forces.

Scandals of the ‘Scandal-Free’ Obama Administration

The Obama Administration is claiming it has had eight years of scandal-free government. The plain fact is that the President, like most on the Left, is either lying once again or is in denial.

Let’s take a look at some of his scandals:

  • Fast & Furious
  • IRS targeting Conservative & Christian Groups
  • VA Scandal
  • Obamacare – “You can keep your plan, you can keep your doctor, premiums will decrease by $2500.00”
  • AP Phone Records Scandal – Rosengate
  • Benghazi – It was the video, remember?
  • Ranson Payments for Iranian Hostages
  • Bowe Bergdahl Swap
  • Secret Service Scandal
  • Clinton E-Mail Scandal
  • The Clinton Foundation Scandal
  • The murder of Seth Rich
  • Debbie Wasserman Schultz exposed undercutting Bernie Sanders
  • Donna Brazile feeding questions to be asked to Hillary
  • Project Veritas exposes Robert Creamer
  • The Pigford Scandal
  • Solyndra
  • Former EPA Head Lisa Jackson uses E-Mail name of Richard Windsor on government E-mails
  • In both the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections, the Obama campaign purposely disabled the credit card verification system for its Web site donations, allowing anyone from any foreign country to donate with no limit and no proof of identity
  • GSA Spending Spree
  • NSA: Spying on Americans
  • Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers