The Chris Moeller Archives

The hack that wasn't?

You wouldn’t know it from reading the center-right papers, but The Nation, a politically-liberal periodical that serves as the oldest continuously-published weekly magazine in the U.S. (1865), has set forth a report that stands to debunk the entire narrative of Russian election hacking. The Clinton-bots were wrong, and this blog was right in its skepticism of the Commie plot that now seems to have been orchestrated instead by CIA spooks.

According to The Nation, a group of former U.S. intelligence officials have presented forensic evidence that the so-called “hack” of the Democratic National Committee in July of last year was not a hack at all, but an insider leak, one conducted in the Eastern Time Zone of the United States, by somebody with physical access to the DNC computer. The group is called Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) and was founded in 2003, when they quickly debunked the theory that Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons. The new report contradicts the unsubstantiated “intelligence” we've been told about, but not shown, that the hacker Guccifer 2.0 did any hacking of the DNC or turned over documents to WikiLeaks. Further-- and this part is crucial-- investigators found that some of the “Guccifer” files had been deliberately altered by copying and pasting their text into a word-processing document that had Russian-language settings.

It seems that the FBI never even investigated the DNC servers after John Podesta's email was hacked, and Vladimir Putin has been set up. His fingerprints were manufactured, and we can only assume that these Cold War-era war games were only performed with the purpose of cranking up tension between the Russian Federation and the United States. A substantial number of officials within the Deep State were spoiling for a standoff with Russia over the territory of Crimea and over expanding Russian influence in Eastern Europe, with our Cold Warriors backing a group of anti-Russian neo-Nazis in Ukraine, and Hillary Clinton’s electoral defeat in November was a proverbial gut punch to that entire initiative.

This was always the more plausible narrative-- that a DNC official, likely pissed off over Candidate Clinton’s coronation within the DNC power structure in opposition to the upstart, outsider campaign of Independent presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, slipped the embarrassing emails to WikiLeaks. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has claimed very openly since the beginning that his source was indeed someone from inside the DNC. Track back to June 12, 2016-- Assange announces that he has documents that will deeply damage the Clinton campaign-- and Clinton is not yet nominated by the party. Two days later, with the DNC having been placed on notice, Crowdstrike, a private company that does cybersecurity and is in the employ of the DNC, announces that they have found malware on the committee’s servers and begins claiming immediately that the Russians are responsible for such. The FBI relies entirely upon the reports of Crowdstrike and the media moves to focus its attention on the “hack” that can be pinned to the Russians, rather than on the contents of the emails themselves that are, indeed, deeply embarrassing to the Clintons and her advisory team.

We believe what we’re told to believe though. And we’re most gullible to believe what we want to believe. This is a deeply embarrassing report for the DNC, coming as it does from a news outlet that holds high favorability with the Left. This is also embarrassing for the news media, which again has been caught marching unquestioning in lockstep with the Intelligence State. The media has largely ignored this new information a year later because of course it has to. Not only does its existence reveal yet another failure of the political news media to act as the watchdog it pretends to be, but it shows that the gatekeepers of official information have been duped for the better part of a year over a story that turns out to be as fictitious as that saga of Iraqi WMDs. The president has been labeled a Russian agent. Assange has been labeled a Russian agent. Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein has been labeled a Russian agent. One of the only news agencies to pick up the story is Breitbart News, so of course this stands to lift the standing of that organization to the exclusion of almost all others-- and again, this is a report published by a highly-respected left-wing news organization. Notice that the report (linked above) makes no effort to name a culprit, only to debunk a faulty theory, revealing an absence of political motivation.

The damage that has been done by the Russian panic should be obvious. An authoritarian president with racist sympathies gets re-enforced behind his most powerful and substantive rhetoric-- that his enemies are out to get him, and that he is being sabotaged by Washington insiders, which in this critical instance, is the truth. And to what end? To further protect the political career and legacy of Hillary Clinton and the DNC establishment, which has done more to damage the cause of progressive action in this country than any other entity. The misinformation campaign has also ratcheted up the tension between two countries with very powerful military arsenals during a politically-dangerous time, and has served to again distract from real scandals involving the current administration and from truly-impactful electioneering upon the U.S. system by foreign governments the likes of Israel and Saudi Arabia.

posted by CM @ 12:07 PM