Should we trust the CIA on Russian hackers? By Gamaliel Isaac
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/12/should_we_trust_the_cia_on_russian_hackers.html#ixzz4TEu5ww26
Democrats are creating a big brouhaha over the possibility that Russia
tried to influence the American presidential election by
leaking information to WikiLeaks. The argument is that it wasn’t a fair
election if a foreign power influenced it.
That is true only if the foreign power deceived American voters. If the
information was true, then that foreign power did us a favor in
informing our voters. The better informed our voters, the fairer the
election.
Catholics and Evangelicals who were considering voting for Hillary could
make a decision that was more in their own interest once they knew that
her campaign advisers and liberal allies mocked them. Likewise,
Southerners, Latinos, and other victims of Clinton campaign vitriol were
better off knowing the true attitude of members of the Clinton campaign
toward them. The email revelations exposing corruption of the Clinton
Foundation and the unethical tilting of the primary election playing
field against Bernie Sanders are revelations that helped voters make
informed choices.
The Democrats would have us believe that the blame lies with the
Russians, but the Russians are not to blame for the corruption of the
Democrats. The Democrats are.
Democrat outrage that an outside country may have influenced the recent
American election is hypocritical when one considers the steps Obama’s
and Hillary’s State Department took to influence the Israeli election
against Netanyahu, including supporting an Organizing for America-type
campaign with digital ads, billboards, and phone calls.
Democrat hypocrisy becomes even more apparent when one remembers Mr.
Obama’s admission to Russian president Dmitri Medvedev that he’d be more
flexible in meeting Russian demands after the 2012 American election.
Obama was willing to withhold information about his plans to make
concessions to Russia from the American people in order to get elected.
An American president hiding the truth from the American people in order
to sway an election is much worse than a foreign leader revealing the
truth to the American people.
The hypocrisy of the Democrats becomes even more blatant when one
considers how they blocked voter ID so that foreigners present illegally
in the United States could influence the elections. Even more
outrageous is the death threats by Democrats that have been leveled at
members of the electoral college in order to intimidate them into voting
against Trump.
Far more serious than the possibility that the Russians influenced the
American elections is the probability that the CIA is trying to
undermine the American elections by convincing the electoral college to
vote against Trump. When federal lawmakers demanded that the CIA
provide proof of the Russian hacking allegations, the CIA refused to
show up to provide congressional testimony. This has led to suspicion
that the CIA may be trying to manipulate the electoral vote.
Representative Devin Nunes said, “It is unacceptable that the
intelligence community directors would not fulfill the House
Intelligence Committee’s request to be briefed tomorrow on the
cyber-attacks that occurred during the presidential campaign.”
“The Committee is deeply concerned that intransigence in sharing
intelligence with Congress can enable the manipulation of intelligence
for political purposes.”
Representative Peter King arrived at the same conclusion and said the
behavior of the intelligence agencies was “absolutely disgraceful.”
Furthermore:
There is no consensus opinion, and yet we find it in the New York Times
and the Washington Post, and yet the House Committee on Intelligence was
told nothing about this. This violates all protocols, and it’s almost
as if people in the intelligence community are carrying out a
disinformation campaign against the president-elect of the United
States.
The probability that the CIA is trying to sway the electoral college is
increased by the fact that the CIA director, John Brennan, has a history
of lying as well as the motivation to prevent Donald Trump from becoming
president. Mr. Brennan has lied in the past about collateral damage of
U.S. drones and was involved in creating the false talking points used
by Susan Rice about the Benghazi debacle.
Brennan’s motivation becomes clear when one considers that he opposes
Donald Trump on key issues. Trump has made clear that he wants to end
the disastrous deal Obama made with Iran. Brennan has said that ending
the Iran deal would be “disastrous” and the “height of folly.” Trump is
not against waterboarding and more extreme measures for dealing with
terrorists, while Brennan is. Trump is against jihadis coming to
America; Brennan says “jihad” means “to purify oneself or to wage a holy
struggle for a moral goal.”
It is quite possible that in the future, Brennan will release more
“intelligence” to prevent Trump from becoming president and carrying out
policies he believes are disastrous. It is important that the electoral
college treat Brennan’s intelligence with a grain of salt.
Democrats are creating a big brouhaha over the possibility that Russia
tried to influence the American presidential election by
leaking information to WikiLeaks. The argument is that it wasn’t a fair
election if a foreign power influenced it.
That is true only if the foreign power deceived American voters. If the
information was true, then that foreign power did us a favor in
informing our voters. The better informed our voters, the fairer the
election.
Catholics and Evangelicals who were considering voting for Hillary could
make a decision that was more in their own interest once they knew that
her campaign advisers and liberal allies mocked them. Likewise,
Southerners, Latinos, and other victims of Clinton campaign vitriol were
better off knowing the true attitude of members of the Clinton campaign
toward them. The email revelations exposing corruption of the Clinton
Foundation and the unethical tilting of the primary election playing
field against Bernie Sanders are revelations that helped voters make
informed choices.
The Democrats would have us believe that the blame lies with the
Russians, but the Russians are not to blame for the corruption of the
Democrats. The Democrats are.
Democrat outrage that an outside country may have influenced the recent
American election is hypocritical when one considers the steps Obama’s
and Hillary’s State Department took to influence the Israeli election
against Netanyahu, including supporting an Organizing for America-type
campaign with digital ads, billboards, and phone calls.
Democrat hypocrisy becomes even more apparent when one remembers Mr.
Obama’s admission to Russian president Dmitri Medvedev that he’d be more
flexible in meeting Russian demands after the 2012 American election.
Obama was willing to withhold information about his plans to make
concessions to Russia from the American people in order to get elected.
An American president hiding the truth from the American people in order
to sway an election is much worse than a foreign leader revealing the
truth to the American people.
The hypocrisy of the Democrats becomes even more blatant when one
considers how they blocked voter ID so that foreigners present illegally
in the United States could influence the elections. Even more
outrageous is the death threats by Democrats that have been leveled at
members of the electoral college in order to intimidate them into voting
against Trump.
Far more serious than the possibility that the Russians influenced the
American elections is the probability that the CIA is trying to
undermine the American elections by convincing the electoral college to
vote against Trump. When federal lawmakers demanded that the CIA
provide proof of the Russian hacking allegations, the CIA refused to
show up to provide congressional testimony. This has led to suspicion
that the CIA may be trying to manipulate the electoral vote.
Representative Devin Nunes said, “It is unacceptable that the
intelligence community directors would not fulfill the House
Intelligence Committee’s request to be briefed tomorrow on the
cyber-attacks that occurred during the presidential campaign.”
“The Committee is deeply concerned that intransigence in sharing
intelligence with Congress can enable the manipulation of intelligence
for political purposes.”
Representative Peter King arrived at the same conclusion and said the
behavior of the intelligence agencies was “absolutely disgraceful.”
Furthermore:
There is no consensus opinion, and yet we find it in the New York Times
and the Washington Post, and yet the House Committee on Intelligence was
told nothing about this. This violates all protocols, and it’s almost
as if people in the intelligence community are carrying out a
disinformation campaign against the president-elect of the United
States.
The probability that the CIA is trying to sway the electoral college is
increased by the fact that the CIA director, John Brennan, has a history
of lying as well as the motivation to prevent Donald Trump from becoming
president. Mr. Brennan has lied in the past about collateral damage of
U.S. drones and was involved in creating the false talking points used
by Susan Rice about the Benghazi debacle.
Brennan’s motivation becomes clear when one considers that he opposes
Donald Trump on key issues. Trump has made clear that he wants to end
the disastrous deal Obama made with Iran. Brennan has said that ending
the Iran deal would be “disastrous” and the “height of folly.” Trump is
not against waterboarding and more extreme measures for dealing with
terrorists, while Brennan is. Trump is against jihadis coming to
America; Brennan says “jihad” means “to purify oneself or to wage a holy
struggle for a moral goal.”
It is quite possible that in the future, Brennan will release more
“intelligence” to prevent Trump from becoming president and carrying out
policies he believes are disastrous. It is important that the electoral
college treat Brennan’s intelligence with a grain of salt.
Comments are closed.
