Did the Russians hack the election?
MSM (Main-stream-media) would have you believe the incoming Trump administration is negligent in its duties to assess ‘actionable intelligence’ that, we are assured, paints Russia as an enemy.
But this implication of negligence only stands if ‘actionable intelligence’ pointing the finger at Russia truly exists.
Tentatively, we can reasonably assert that evidence of Russia’s involvement is not forthcoming. In fact, the latest report out of the Director’s Office of National Intelligence alleging Russia’s involvement enunciates that their report:
Curiously enough, the report maintains that the evidence accrued by the intelligence community can only be presented in a classified context.
I find it strange how heads of state can openly threaten Russia with retaliatory cyber-attacks (Joe Biden), but cannot disclose to the public, or Russia for that matter, their evidential basis for said attacks.
It seems to me that if Russia did indeed hack the elections, it would not much damage U.S. national security to simply release the classified details of the IC report. In truth, the IC needs to do this in order to garner public trust. Especially in light of the Snowden revelations.
“Russia, like its Soviet predecessor, has a history of conducting covert influence campaigns focused on US presidential elections that have used intelligence officers and agents and press placements to disparage candidates perceived as hostile to the Kremlin.”
Is that so? Just wait a minute. How many foreign elections have the U.S. rigged in the name of ‘national security’, thwarting the entrance of candidates deemed hostile to U.S. interests?
Look to the books or Google the question. Whether you opt to scour the internet or turn the pages of Tim Weiner’s history of the CIA Legacy of Ashes, this is the answer – the U.S. has manipulated many elections, therefore there is no moral basis for objecting Russia’s alleged hack of the U.S. election.
But is there a ‘national security’ basis?
What is implied by the ICA report is this: Donald Trump should be replaced by Hillary Clinton.
If Russia indeed perceived Clinton as a threat, I cannot reprehend them. Who could trust such a person? But alas, the IC report seemingly defends her:
“We assess with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election, the consistent goals of which were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency.”
Undermine public faith in the democratic process? Well, yeah. The DNC hack and emails exposed concerning Clinton kind of supply the public reason to distrust the democratic process. Go back to the situation with Bernie Sanders. Why wasn’t he considered a viable candidate for office? Oh yeah, because the Democratic party was set on Clinton from the get-go.
Come now people. Should you trust this intelligence entity that cannot be frank enough to supply an inkling of detail which would ascertain without doubt Russia’s involvement? I wouldn’t.
And by the way, I don’t support Trump. I don’t support any candidate. I merely want the truth.
The 25-page IC report titled ‘Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections’ was released yesterday and can be found in its entirety on Public Intelligence.