According to major news networks, establishment politicians, and now Hollywood, Russia attacked our democracy by interfering in the 2016 US election.
But what exactly did they do?
People are still totally confused about what actually happened. When influential people are coming out claiming “We have been attacked” and “We are at war,” confused is not a good place to be. So I’m going to run through some of the facts.
Here’s what we know:
In March of 2016, Wikileaks published over 30,000 emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server during her time as secretary of State. No, these emails were not stolen. They were made available by the US state department as a result of a freedom of information act request.
In an interview on June 12, 2016, Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange announces that they have more leaks related to Hillary Clinton and they are planning to release them.
Two days later, on June 14, the cybersecurity firm hired by the DNC announced that they identified malware on the DNCs server that is believed to be closely related to the Russian government.
The same day, a Washington Post article states that DNC leaders were notified about a hack in late April, when their IT team noticed some “unusual network activity.” The article states that the DNC committee officials and the security experts (security experts = Crowdstrike) believe that the Russian government hackers gained access to their entire database of opposition research on GOP candidate, Donald Trump.
June 15, a day later and right on cue, an anonymous blogger by the name Gucifer 2.0, claims responsibility for the hack, and confirms the DNCs statement by posting an Opposition research document that just so happens to be more harmful to Donald Trump than the DNC. Guccifer 2.0 also claims to have provided Wikileaks with more files to be released.
July 22, Wikileaks published thousands of emails from top DNC officials, revealing their true goal of eliminating Bernie Sanders from the primaries.
August 9, 2016 - WIkileaks founder, Julian Assange comments on the death of a 27 year old DNC data analyst, who was shot and killed in D.C.
Wikileaks also announces they are offering a $20,000 reward for information leading to conviction for the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich.
In October, 2016, Wikileaks began publishing emails from Hillary Clinton’s Campaign chair, John Podesta. The emails exposed the transcripts to Hillary Clinton’s infamous paid speeches to big banks and corporations, where she advocated the need to have a public and a private position on policy, and admitted that she was out of touch with the middle class.
The election came and HIllary Clinton lost.
Everyone immediately turned to their attention to Russia. The American people were mesmerized by the propaganda. The mainstream media traded their integrity for profit and a tin foil hat.
Even though President Obama, FBI director, and the director of national intelligence told us
A report was released in January 2017, by the The FBI, CIA and NSA titled, “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections.”
When reading through this “assessment”, you’ll notice that the word “assess” is used 95 times in 25 pages ….only to end up on their page about to“Estimative Language” where they note, “Judgements are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents.”
In case you were wondering why the assessment doesn’t include a shred of evidence or give a single explanation about how they came to their conclusions….well that’s because the DNC denied them access to their server.
The report does admit that the “DHS assesses that the types of systems we observed Russian actors targeting or compromising are not involved in vote tallying.”
So the intelligence community had to settle for plan B, shifting their focus on the Russian government’s preference of Donald Trump, the so called “Russian Propaganda” from the news outlet RT, and the Russian influence campaign, aimed at harming hillary clinton’s electability...because apparently, it took the Russians for us to figure that out.
The Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, or VIPS is headed up by William Binney, former technical director at the NSA and co-founder of NSA’s Signals Intelligence Automation Research Program, along with many other former intelligence officers, including NSA specialists. They released a handful of memos demanding information and disputing Russian hacking claims, criticising the lack of evidence presented considering the NSA’s extensive trace capability to identify both sender and recipient when hacking is involved, stating:
“The evidence that should be there is absent; otherwise, it would surely be brought forward, since this could be done without any danger to sources and methods.” VIPS (US Intel Vets Dispute Russian Hacking Claims.)
On July 24, 2017, Vips released another memo citing new forensic studies to challenge the claim of hacked emails, by citing the forensic investigations into the “Guccifer 2.0” July 5, 2016 intrusion into the DNC server.
They state the key findings that the conclusion that the DNC was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an internet capability for a remote hack.” and that “the copying was performed on the East coast of the U.S.
They also point out the convenient time sequence of events involving Guccifer 2:
August 1, 2017, Big League Politics releases leaked audio of Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, Seymour Hersh, referencing an FBI report that names Seth RIch as the Wikileaks source.
So if RT is propaganda because it is funded by Russia, what is it called when journalists call the intelligence community for permission? Censored news? Approved news? The Ministry of Truth?
But maybe there is some hope. The director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, recently met with William Binney to discuss Russian hacking claims. The former NSA officer said that the CIA director asked him if he’d be willing to meet with the FBI and NSA to discuss his findings.
But we have to keep in mind that this is the same CIA director that referred to Wikileaks as a hostile non-state intelligence agency.
...But just try to remember that asking critical questions and wanting to see proof, doesn't automatically make you a Russian agent.
Youtube Video
