Blaming the Russians for Hillary’s defeat is just so much of what makes the green grass grow. The Russian Hacking charges have not been proved. There is no evidence. It’s all poor speculation.
This all started with Trump’s cozying up to Putin. Granted perhaps all Trump wanted was to start off his Presidency with good relations with Russia and an ability to discourse freely with Putin. But the Democrats seiazed on this overture as some sort of sinister plot – that Trump was teaming up with the Russians against the Democrat Party. And as with any Liberal/Left Democrat crazy idea, when it gets reiterated over and over again in the media, the fantsy takes on a life of its own. Before you know it, it is an accepted “fact.”
“The CIA has concluded, in a secret assessment,” the very top of the front page of my Washington Post informed me, yesterday, “that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to the officials briefed on the matter.”
I did a double take. This assessment was “secret”?
Do they mean as secret as the news scroll in Times Square? As silent as the faint whisper of a thousand bullhorns?
Printing a story on the front page can lead to many outcomes. Secrecy isn’t one of them.
Then, what happened, undoubtedly, is obvious: America’s top spies have chosen me — seasoned newspaper reader and your admired, if not beloved, Townhall columnist — to be the one person in the know. Every one of the other six million souls in the greater metropolitan Washington, DC, area must have received a newspaper with a differentfront-page story.
“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here,” my special report goes on to relate, “was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected” — at least according to the “senior U.S. official” quoted by the Post, who had been “briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators.”
Who are these senior officials? That is secret. Even from this trusted columnist.
I guess we could be talking about elderly government employees who have a friend who has a friend — since the officials and their positions in the government are unknown, and they were at best briefed about a briefing.
But for certain — according to people who were told by the people who were told about the secrets we cannot be told about — that it is “quite clear” that the Russian motive was to elect Trump. And please note that that clarity is a direct quote . . . from an anonymous source.
Just so you know this isn’t fake news.
Turns out, the CIA-conducted download to U.S. senators last week “fell short of a formal U.S. assessment produced by all 17 intelligence agencies.” Reportedly, “there were minor disagreements.”
(As an aside: doesn’t it seem unintelligent to have 17 different intelligence agencies?)
The New York Times echoed the Post. “American intelligence agencies have concluded with ‘high confidence’ that Russia acted covertly in the latter stages of the presidential campaign to harm Hillary Clinton’s chances and promote Donald J. Trump, according to senior administration officials.”
The Times also related that its sources expressed “high confidence” that “the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee’s computer systems in addition to their attacks on Democratic organizations, but did not release whatever information they gleaned from the Republican networks.”
You know, the more I read that the intelligence folks have “high confidence” in their conclusions, the less confidence those conclusions inspire.
For the record, RNC officials have claimed the organization itself has not been hacked, while some of the party’s individual hacks have been.
“These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,” jabbed a rapidly released statement from the Trump camp.
Here Are All The HOLES In That CIA Report On Russia Election Hacking
Reince Priebus Battles NBC’s Chuck Todd on Russian Election Hacking — ‘Chuck This Is Insane’
Sunday on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming chief of staff Reince Priebus got into a long, heated exchange with show moderator Chuck Todd over reports that the CIA has concluded Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election.
After insisting the RNC was not hacked, Priebus said to a combative Todd, “I don’t know why you are so hot about this.”
Todd shot back, “It’s not about me.”
Later in the exchange Todd said, “Do you believe — let’s clear this up. do you believe — does the president-elect believe that Russia was trying to muddy up and get involved in the election in 2016?”
Priebus said, “Number one, you don’t know it. I don’t know it. There’s been no conclusive or specific report to say otherwise.”
Todd asked, “Do you dispute 17 intelligence agencies that have assessed that Russia agents were behind this? You dispute this?
Priebus said, “Chuck, this is insane. In the same article about the 17 agencies, it said it was inconclusive.”