5 Problems With CIA Claims Of Russian Hacking

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Claire Bernish via TheFreeThoughtProject.com,

When unnamed officials with the CIA recently claimed Russia hacked the U.S. presidential election, but failed to provide any evidence, suspicions immediately circulated that the allegation constituted a fabrication — particularly as left-leaning corporate media unquestioningly parroted the story.

This, after the Washington Post first tried — and miserably failed — to convince the U.S. populace professional Russian propagandists were running nearly every alternative and independent media outlet, and had plotted to smear Hillary Clinton to ensure Donald Trump’s victory.

In tandem with the ratcheting up of anti-Russia propaganda by the left political and media establishment has been the equally laughable war on putative fake news, because — according to Clintonite Democrats and a smattering of Republicans — fake news also helped Trump win.

Of course, the irony in all this is the mainstream media’s articles on the CIA’s claims and allegations of Russian meddling are the exact sort of fake news which threatens to do actual, physical, palpable damage — whether by crushing dissent or instigating war with the U.S.’ old Cold War foe.

Fortunately, alternative media — sans any paychecks from President Putin — and a few journalists with integrity have brilliantly torn through the American propaganda machine to shine the light of truth on claims of Russian hacking.

One mainstream journalist, Ben Swann — who frequently breaks ranks with the corporate-approved narratives proffered by his colleagues — offers a much-needed Reality Check on the situation.

Swann notes there are five, specific problems with the CIA claiming Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s emails — worsened, he says, because “most media” isn’t “actually asking for evidence of these claims.”

The CIA, he explains, did not formally release a report about Russia’s hacking — rather anonymous sources inside the agency allegedly leaked the “conclusion” to the Washington Post and New York Times. This is highly problematic for obvious reasons, not the least of which is the near impossibility of verification — both of the sources and the information.

According to the Post, who first reported the story, “The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment 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 officials briefed on the matter.

“Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials.”

Leaking this supposed information to the corporate press might indeed represent the easiest way to launch propaganda without the burden of proof — proof it most likely lacks.

As Swann explains, this absence of evidence — and that the sources remained anonymous — means there “is no one accountable to provide that proof.” No politicians or other media outlets have any way to verify claims printed by the Post and Times.

The third major problem with the Russian hacking story, Swann reports, is — put simply — “the CIA lies.”

Indeed, the CIA could be considered notoriously mendacious, and has made public claims that have been proven untrue. For one, Swann notes, “the Senate Intelligence Committee blasted the CIA in 2014, for an ‘ongoing culture of misinformation,’ which they said has undermined the public’s trust in America’s Intelligence leadership.”

Senator Ron Wyden, quoted by Swann, said at the time, “That trust has been seriously undermined by senior officials’ reckless reliance on secret interpretations of the law and battered by years of misleading and deceptive practices” within the CIA.

An easy second example concerns the CIA’s torture program as exposed in a four-year study by the Senate which found the agency repeatedly lied about the use of brutal techniques and more.

Swann’s fourth problem of note surrounds a little-discussed fact from the Post’s article — even CIA investigators don’t unanimously agree on the assessment Russians hacked those systems. Reported the Post:

“A senior U.S. official said there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.”

 

“Well, what does that mean?” Swann asks. “What are those disagreements? And without providing that information, how can we trust these disagreements are actually minor, since that’s, of course, a relative term?”

Indeed, considering these CIA ‘officials’ felt the need to remain anonymous lends credence to the idea the discord is anything but minor — but we have no way of knowing for certain.

And that brings us to the fifth problem: The one person with the most intimate knowledge about the DNC and Podesta files, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, has repeatedly asserted the information was leaked from the inside, not hacked at all — and certainly not by Russians.

In fact, former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan Craig Murray — a close friend of Assange — recently said “he has met the person who gave the DNC emails to Assange and to Wikileaks, and he says it is not the Russians,” Swann explains.

“I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider,” Murray said. “It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.”

Just because a report sounds official coming from the CIA does not give it instant viability — and the allegation Russian agents hacked the system is too shaky to stand on its own.

Swann concludes, “So what you need to know is that on top of all of these questions is one fundamental issue that everyone is missing: The claim is that Russia decided to hack the election — not by altering voting results — but by making public actual emails from the Clinton campaign and the DNC.

“Look, I have said this before and I will say it again: how bizarre is it that the argument is not that the Russians were trying to influence the election through lies or electronic voting; but, rather, the claim — if you really boil it down — is that the Russians swayed the election for Donald Trump by revealing the truth about the Clinton campaign and the truth about the DNC.”

 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
AllTimeWhys's picture

Pretty soon the left is going to yell about russia so much that they'll start accusing each other of being a russian spy if one of them so much as looks at another funny.

erkme73's picture

I have a man-crush on Swann

Silver Swan's picture

 

It's like blaming the witness and ignoring the crime. The left always ignores their own hypocrisy.

 

Mr. Universe's picture

I didn't even need to read the article, I already know the five problems.

1. They lie

2. They lie

3. They lie

4. They lie

5. They lie

Holy hand grenade of Antioch's picture
Holy hand grenade of Antioch (not verified) Mr. Universe Dec 20, 2016 12:44 PM

Only 5?

USisCorrupt's picture

Rudy Giuliani BLOWS Pizzagate WIDE OPEN !  Today December 20th !

http://archive.is/IDBh5

This is HUGE!

say it aint so's picture

Holy fuck if this is true Rudys gonna meet the nail gun

 

putaipan's picture

well ... that's either the coolest fake news thingy i;ve everseen (and you can kiss rudy and the first amedment's ass goodbye)

or, it's on ....

nope-1004's picture

This fake news thing is pretty obvious.  Goes something like this:

Disgruntled population votes in change and while doing so, express their discontent for the bought and paid for fake MSM.

Trump then wins.  In desperation, MSM and .GOV tries to save its horrible reputation by taking control of the term "fake media", taking it from real news outlets and the disgruntled people and adopting it for their own purposes, turning it 180 degrees back on the originators of the term by lashing out against anyone disseminating real news.

Nice government.  Time for pitchforks people.

 

CuttingEdge's picture
Classic fake news, is easy to spot. Take a story, twist it to project your bullshit. E.g. a headline in the Telegraph:

 

Record number of electoral college voters defect as Donald Trump is officially confirmed as 45th president

 

Which would leave the sheeple with the impression (unless they bothered to read the story) that Trump won but there was a bit of a rebellion against him. When, according to the statistics of the electoral college votes, Hillary was 250% less approved of than DJT.

How many times does the bitch of Clinton past need to lose before the fuckwits in the FMSM get the message and start doing something productive and beneficial to their readerships? Like topping themselves en masse.

And no prizes for guessing what the "F" stands for.

booboo's picture

Hillary is now a FOUR time loser to

1. Obama

2. Trump.

3. Jill Stein recount

4. Electoral college

want make it 5 you stupid bitch, please someone take her shovel away.

WTFUD's picture

My heart skips a beat in unbridled joyous anticipation at the mere mention of pitchforks.

DollarMenu's picture

It is really strange that 'leaked' e-mails once leaked, become propaganda.

Why are the contents of the e-mails being ignored?

None have been denied as original/true.

IMO, some portion if the CIA is trying to foment some kind of coup, as they do and have done throughout the world.

That is ther purpose.

By their deeds you shall know them.

Holy hand grenade of Antioch's picture
Holy hand grenade of Antioch (not verified) DollarMenu Dec 20, 2016 12:55 PM

"Why are the contents of the e-mails being ignored?"

 

Snowflakes don't give a shit about "content" (unless it has to do with grabbing pussies)

lasvegaspersona's picture

Donna Brizille says hers were not real...she is being 'persecuted'. So maybe ....Satan?....

Mr. Universe's picture

Persecuted? Let's get her some Turkish Police Protection.

SmittyinLA's picture

Jamie Gorelick ran the CIA, Jamie of the WAPO, Jamie "CIA-FBI wall girl", Jamie hired torture shrinks, Jamie was also their lawyer/agent...to Jamie's committee.

Jamie is WAPOs own "source" on Russian hacking, Jamie is also the Abengoa, DOD,DOJ, IRS, and EPA.

We're all Jamie's toys.

peippe's picture

He's lucid, speaks English, 

wears a suit well. Boyish good looks, 

I could go on, but, then I'd sound gay.  

undercover brother's picture

All you need to know to conclude this entire Russian hack thing is fake news is that the WaPo and the NY Times were the newspapers of choice for this alleged CIA leak.  

hannah's picture

i am so sick of this hacking shit stories....anyone that has worked for a major software developer will tell you that the fed gov requires access to your software. in the last 16 years most of the programmers have been visa russians and indians. not only the fed gov but the russians built backdoors into practically every bit of software we use. THEY DONT NEED TO HACK ANYTHING....THEY HAVE THE FUCKING KEY TO THE FRONT DOOR.

 

all our programs are wide open to the russians and the mafia and china and indian mafi.....get use to it.

SmittyinLA's picture

Yes, but Russian hackers are real, our DOD hired a Russian team to help our military with air defense systems.

Then this shit happens......
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2027.htm

Hillary probably got a cut of that too!

Dilluminati's picture

The biggest fallacy in the narrative the Russians swung the election is that we already knew that Hillary was a ridiculous cunt and a career criminal.  

Marc Rich

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Rich

Charles Ortel

http://charlesortel.com/

Haitian Relief

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Haiti#Clinton_Foundation_and...

 

The fact that Hillary got up on stage with rappers who called blacks niggers which alientated blacks who attend church didn't help.

The fact that Hillary was caught cheating in the debates and cackled about it afterwards didn't help.

Screwing over Bernie didn't help.

 

No that ridiculoud cunt lost that election all by herself and never visited states she needed but met with every wall street donor with a dollar.

Any claims Merkel lost due to russia is just as ridiculous

 

 

Joe Davola's picture

This election has turned the phrase "Success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan" on it's head - Hillary's failure is attributed to many varied problems, but Trump's success is only due to Putin.  Shows how anything involving the Clinton's is bastardized.

JollyCharlie's picture

I haven't heard anything from Charles Ortel since Sep 6, when he indicated more would be coming from him in the next few days.  Is he OK?

SmittyinLA's picture

Ridiculous cunt cant help but think of Bruce Jenner

Stan522's picture

I like Ben Swann's work....

Surprised the deep state haven't "offed him" yet....

gregga777's picture

The CIA (Central Insanity Agency) IS the United States government. It controls all of the other so-called independent intelligence agencies. Would the CIA lie to overturn the 2016 Presidential elections? Would the CIA commit treason to overturn the 2016 Presidential elections? Well, the CIA are the very same people who:

* for decades have had hundreds of nationally and internationally prominent so-called journalists on the CIA payroll and controlled the stories reported by Western Mainstream Conporate News Media;
* carried out the Iranian coup that Installed Mohammed Reza Pahlavi as the Shah of Iran;
* trained the Savak, the Iranian Secret Police, in how to keep the Shah on the Peacock Throne;
* assassinated President John F. Kennedy because they were furious about the failure of their insane Bay of Pigs fiasco, the peaceful resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis, etc., etc., etc.;
* faked the Gulf of Tonkin intelligence to get the United States Congress to pass the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution giving the bloodthirsty Generals and Admirals and President Lyndon B. Johnson the false flag incident to drastically escalate the Vietnam War–closely located to the Golden Triangle's highly coveted rich heroin supplies–and all of the attendant decades of lying about that war;
* destabilized the government of Afghanistan to encourage an invasion by the Soviet Union;
* created, supported and armed the Sunni Mujahideen, which morphed into Al Qaeda following the Gulf War, to fight against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan;
* encouraged President Jimmy Carter to give the Shah of Iran political asylum to create the pretext for decades of enmity between Iran and the United States and to destroy Jimmy Carter's Presidency;
* encouraged Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait to give President George H. W. Bush the pretext to declare war on Iraq;
* were behind the 9/11/2001 false flag attacks on the World Trade Center towers, and their destruction with controlled explosives demolitions charges, and the Pentagon and then lied that it was all an Al Qaeda plot;
* lied about Al Qaeda's role in 9/11/2001 to justify the invasion of Afghanistan with its highly coveted, rich poppy fields for heroin production;
* lied about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to justify President George W. Bush's war of aggression against Iraq;
* created, finances, arms and supports ISIS;
* plans and carries out false flag operations (e.g., 9/11/2001, Sandy Hook, Orlando Pulse nightclub, etc.) to influence public opinion;
* concocted the preposterous lies that Russia hacked the US Presidential elections in all 50 states to coverup the facts that insider leaks doomed Clinton's campaign;
* lies about whatever whenever it suits their agenda;
* controls the 'narratives' in the Feral gangster government's organs of state propaganda (mainstream & social media and entertainment oligopoly);

And far, far more. But, I got tired of typing and I don't want to bore the readers. The point being that they are ALL professional liar's and the love of truth and the American Republic is not in them.

So. Yes, of course the CIA would lie to overturn the 2016 Presidential elections. Yes, of course the CIA would commit treason to overturn the 2016 Presidential elections.

By the way, without a doubt, some of the 535 members of the United States Congress are proven liar's and traitors. Some of the 535 members of Congress would readily lie to overturn the 2016 Presidential elections. Some of the 535 members of Congress would readily commit treason to overturn the 2016 Presidential elections. For proof of that look at the lying by the disgusting Senator Harry Reid, DimmoMarxist-Nevada, during the 2012 Presidential elections, the traitor Senator John McCain, Repussican-Arizona, and the treasonous Congressional acceptance of non-citizen, LGBTQQPedophile-K9HorseDonkeyGoatKat-MonkeyBLMWhatever and Kenyan Marxist Barrack Hussein Obama as quasi-dictator for 8 years.

not dead yet's picture

Jimmy Carter himself destroyed relations with Iran and his other actions killed his presidency. He pulled the rug out from under the Shah and the Iranian military. Khomeni sent glowing letters to Carter claiming he was a man of peace and only wanted to go back to Iran in it's time of need for peace. At the time the Iranian military was under the influence of the US and when they requested guidance about what to do when Khomeni arrived Jimmy told them to stand down. Within days Khomeni execution squads killed military leaders on the spot.

Zbignew Brezhinski said he informed Carter before signing the directive to create Al Qaeda to support Afghan rebels the expressed purpose of that directive was to draw the Russians into Afghanistan. No CIA help needed as the great peacemaker was never that.

After the Cuban missile crisis the military was furious when JFK ended it peacefully. They wanted to use the crisis to nuke the USSR back to the stone age. With that and JFK making noises about pulling out of Vietnam a case could be made that the military killed JFK. The USSR put missiles in Cuba in retaliation for the US putting missiles in Turkey. The US agreed to remove their missiles if the USSR removed theirs from Cuba. The US did remove the missiles in Turkey and later on pulled a double cross and put them back. Just like when Russia negotiated a cease fire in Yugoslavia the US started their reign of terror bombing campaign the next day.

The US encouraged and supported Saddam in his war with Iran, even supplying gas which he used on them. Of course not a peep out of the US about that. As a consequence of the war Saddam was broke and his friends in the Gulf who lent him money to fight their battle were calling in their markers. Saddam was also pissed that Kuwait was stealing his oil so he prepared to invade. At the last moment to head of the invasion Saddam appealed to Bush for aid and was told to go pound sand. For a fraction of the cost of the war Bush could have given Saddam cash and prevented the war. Bush only went to war because of the PR campaign initiated by Kuwait, the highlight was the presentation of a Kuwaiti nurse who claimed the Iraqi's stole incubators and smashed the babies on the floor which was totally false as the girl was the daughter of the Kuwati ambassador to the UN and it was all a PR ploy, and the world demanded action to end the "slaughter".

Good thing you got tired of typing as the screens on this site would have turned brown from the fake conspiracy bullshit you've been spouting sprinkled with some but few facts.

Mr Pink's picture

I have a question? What exactly are they claiming the Russians hacked?

The voting machines? The recount didn't find any evidence of that

The DNC emails? Seth Rich LEAKED these. NOT hacked

Podesta emails? He was tricked into changing his password. Any 14yr old could have done this

Bigger question....how is the truth about Hillary's corruption getting leaked interfering in our elections?

konputa's picture

They must've hacked the political rallies too, you know like when Trump consistently packed 20-30k person venues and Clinton struggled to get 300 people.

divingengineer's picture

Probably 30k Russian operatives, not supporters.

Ignatius's picture

"Hack" is another one of those wonder words, like "fuck," that can mean almost anything (which is why they used it).

any_mouse's picture

@Mr Pink.

"Bigger question....how is the truth about Hillary's corruption getting leaked interfering in our elections?"

It interfered with the election of the Deep State's (CIA and backers) primary candidate.

Caleb Abell's picture

"The DNC emails? Seth Rich LEAKED these. NOT hacked"

We don't know for sure about that, because right after the leak he was murdered in a random robbery by a criminal who had no idea who he was.  Sadly, the murderous robber was so dumb that he forgot to steal Seth's expensive wristwatch and the pocket full of cash that he had with him.  Go figure.

Perhaps Michael Hastings can look into this and solve this mystery.

Farmer Joe in Brooklyn's picture

The liberal media relies on the citizens of the US continuing to suffer from a mass case of cognitive dissonance....

Oldwood's picture

No one gives a FUCK about reality.

onewayticket2's picture

"In other news, CBS46 received a shipment of nailguns today....with no return address!?"

silverer's picture

"The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment..."
Yep, Mr. President. Most transparent government ever.

Reaper's picture

Trust is earned not by prior lying.

1stepcloser's picture

The CIA is still looking for WMD.  Just sayin!

gregga777's picture

I hate, despise and loathe the Clinton's and their KKKPR (Klinton Krime Klan Pedophiles R' Us) more than any string of words could ever describe. They are human filth and garbage. They leave a trail of Arkancided (aka murdered) bodies and steaming, stinking, oozing corrupt slime everywhere they go and on anything they touch. They represent everything that is wrong with America and nothing that is good about America.

Have you ever seen bloated dead bodies covered by swarms of flies and crawling with fat, pasty-white maggots? That's the vision that comes to mind every time I hear the names Hillary "Rotten Rodent" Rodham Clinton or William Jefferson "Bill the Pedophile" Clinton. They are vile, disgusting, nasty, loathsome maggots.

I hope to outlive both Clinton's because I'm going to celebrate the anniversaries of their deaths annually for as long as I live. I just hope to live for a very very long time so that I can have a lot of Clinton death day celebrations.

By the way, none of that has anything to with Russia in any way, shape or form.

Pliskin's picture

THIS ^^^^

Hey dude, let's meet annually for the pissing on the graves celebration.

I promise to look away while you defecate, if you'll do the same?

 

 

Rich Monk's picture

The CIA has been corrputed since old man Bush ran it and it is even worse now! 

Bastiat's picture

The CIA was corrupted from the start: Truman knew it, Eisenhower knew it, Kennedy knew and was going to do something about it but they killed him.

Read The Devils Chessboard and Mary's Mosaic for some perspective on what the CIA was from the start.

Caleb Abell's picture

Funny that you mention Truman.

A few years ago, folks were saying that W was the worst president ever.  More recently, the golfer earned that place of honor[sic].

Both were the wrong choice.  The little haberdasher deserves that honor hands down.  He was the odious traitor that signed the National Security Act of 1947 into law, and gave birth to the cancerous national security state the US has become.