Republicans ready to launch wide-ranging probe of Russia, despite Trump’s stance … Congress is doubling down on promises to investigate Russia, after President-elect Donald Trump dismisses evidence that Russia was involved. – Washington Post
In the new year, Congress may authorize and urge wide-ranging investigations into the alternative media under the guise of claiming that non-mainstream reporting cooperated with Russia in generating “fake news” that undermined US elections.
Within the context of legislative accusations, “fake news” is apparently not generated by the mainstream and can only be found in non-mainstream news and information. The result could be the hounding of the alternative media at the expense of the mainstream media.
Leading Senate Republicans are preparing to launch a coordinated and wide-ranging probe into Russia’s alleged meddling in the U.S. elections and its potential cyberthreats to the military, digging deep into what they view as corrosive interference in the nation’s institutions.
Such an aggressive approach puts them on a direct collision course with President-elect Donald Trump, who downplays the possibility Russia had any role in the November elections — arguing that a hack of the Democratic National Committee emails may have been perpetrated by “some guy in his home in New Jersey.”
The fracture could become more prominent after Trump is inaugurated and begins setting foreign policy. He has already indicated the country should “get along” with Russia since the two nations have many common strategic goals.
… The loudest GOP calls for a Russia probe are coming from McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.). Both have taken a hard line on Russia and have been highly critical of Trump, particularly his praise of President Vladimir Putin.
In a previous article HERE we reported on statements from the head of Britain’s international military intelligence (MI6) who said he was “deeply concerned about the risks posed by hybrid warfare, where countries take advantage of the internet.”
Alex Younger, aka “C,” said he was worried about countries that“further their aims deniably through means as varied as cyberattacks, propaganda, or subversion of democratic process.”
Even Pope Francis recently added his voice to “fake news” denunciations, reportedly making the point that politicians in particular ought not to be criticized.
The statements from British law enforcement are laying the groundwork for action aganst fake news. This could be where the US is headed as well. (Certainly, a false flag might help …)
A step in this direction can be seen in a recent interview between TV host Tucker Carlson and Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff on Tucker’s FOX News program.
HERE, from PowerlineBlog.com:
The subject under discussion was Russian cyber hacking in connection with our just concluded election … Among other highlights, Schiff accused Carlson of “carrying water” for Vladimir Putin and the Kremlin before counseling him not to resort to “personal insults.”
… Schiff took it a step further, saying that Carlson’s show should be moved to RT, the news network funded by the Russian government. Schiff repeatedly dodged Carlson’s demand that Schiff attribute the hacking of John Podesta’s email account to the Russian government. In its own way this makes for compelling viewing.
Does this seem like a kind of McCarthyism? … Accusing a reputable journalist of working on behalf of an “enemy” of the United States because that reporter is posing unwelcome questions. You can see the video HERE.
Carlson seemed a bit taken aback by Schiff’s accusations. This may be because Carlson – as politely confrontational as he is – didn’t fully understand the program that certain elements of Congress have apparently embarked upon.
The funding for this program is already being put in place. The House has passed a bill, “H.R. 6393, Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017” that will ultimately provide resources to establish that the alternative media is disseminating Russian propaganda and thus aiding and abetting the “enemy.”
Almost the entire House voted for the bill which is now with the Senate. One might think that the Senate will not pass this bill in advance of Donald Trump’s presidency. In fact, there is only about a 30 percent that the bill will be passed, according to some estimates.
But it is surely feasible that the bill will pass because there is a sizable anti-Trump rump of Senate Republicans that would be as pleased to fund attacks on the alternative media as their Democratic colleagues. Support is probably being lined up very quietly even now.
Trump himself has not spoken out on the bill, nor has he said much about hearings that will establish the basis for upcoming attacks that may be aimed at him as well. The alternative media provided Trump with a good deal of support during his campaign.
We have suggested that Rand Paul might speak out on behalf of his father who has already been labeled as a Russian propagandist despite his near successful GOP presidential candidacy. You can see that article HERE: “Will Rand Paul Fight Fake News With a Filibuster?”
It is possible that anti-media campaign is being pushed forward mostly by the Clintons and their allies. Hillary Clinton had suggested she would attack the alternative media once she won the race but even though she lost perhaps her plan was initiated anyway. There are certain “hurried” elements about it.
Conclusion: It is hard to tell at the moment whether this is perhaps a Clinton/CIA gambit or whether it has the full backing and support of the London’s City financial establishment. If it is the former, it may not succeed. The latter group, on the other hand, is not always efficient but far more powerful.
Editor's Note: The Daily Bell is giving away a silver coin and a silver "white paper" to subscribers. If you enjoy DB's articles and want to stay up-to-date for free, please subscribe here.
More from The Daily Bell:
Will Rand Paul Fight Fake News With a Filibuster?
‘Populism Vs. Globalism’ – a Meme That Doesn’t Exist in Reality
Elites Plot to Replace Austrian Free-Market Economics?