Posted on 12/11/2016 2:33:01 PM PST by Brad from Tennessee
I have watched incredulous as the CIA’s blatant lie has grown and grown as a media story – blatant because the CIA has made no attempt whatsoever to substantiate it. There is no Russian involvement in the leaks of emails showing Clinton’s corruption. This rubbish has been the lead today in the Washington Post in the US and the Guardian here, and was the lead item on the BBC main news. I suspect it is leading the American broadcasts also.
A little simple logic demolishes the CIA’s claims. The CIA claim they “know the individuals” involved. Yet under Obama the USA has been absolutely ruthless in its persecution of whistleblowers, and its pursuit of foreign hackers through extradition. We are supposed to believe that in the most vital instance imaginable, an attempt by a foreign power to destabilise a US election, even though the CIA knows who the individuals are, nobody is going to be arrested or extradited, or (if in Russia) made subject to yet more banking and other restrictions against Russian individuals? Plainly it stinks. The anonymous source claims of “We know who it was, it was the Russians” are beneath contempt.
As Julian Assange has made crystal clear, the leaks did not come from the Russians. As I have explained countless times, they are not hacks, they are insider leaks. . . if Hillary Clinton had not connived with the DNC to fix the primary schedule to disadvantage Bernie, . . .not received advance notice of live debate questions to use against Bernie, if she had not accepted massive donations to the Clinton foundation and family members in return for foreign policy influence, if she had not failed to distance herself from some very weird and troubling people, then none of this would have happened. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at craigmurray.org.uk ...
Has the CIA ever actually officially said this? Or is this “unnamed sources” in the CIA?
For all we know that could be Plame, Petraeus, and McMuffin.
“WTF is the CIA doing meddling in domestic affairs?
They have no mandate to operate at the domestic level”
Tell JFK that. Tell people who enjoyed the flood of Cocaine through Mena Arkansas that.
If I recall correctly...
You don’t. Jack Ryan was never a senator..never an incumbent.
Obama did not defeat Jack Ryan. Obama defeated Alan Keyes.
Jack Ryan’s divorce/child custody battle secrets were revealed by a paid Republican campaign consultant who claims to be a conservative. Almost certainly the paid consultant was paid by RNC treasurer Kjellander on behalf of Hastert-LaHood establishment Republicans.
And what was Jack Ryan’s scandal? He didn’t have kinky sex with his sex goddess wife.
If Jack Ryan had taken the advice in 2002 to reveal it himself early (Carville’s advice) then it would have been no big deal in 2004. So, bottom line, Jack Ryan did it to himself, just as Aiken, Murdoch and Walsh did it to themselves in 2012.
The victim card played by our side is getting rather boring.
After eight years are there any good people left in the CIA? Or is it all leftist liars?
Absence of Conviction?
Well, Maybe President Trump And AG Sessions will rectify that, and we will see these traitorous leftist liars at the CIA convicted and imprisoned.
DISMANTLE C.I.A.
A good house cleaning is needed at Langley.
5.56mm
Ya can’t spell alciada without the CIA right in the middle!
Thanks for link.
read better. fine not incumbent, not important.
i said the sealed info was leaked. not by whom. the democrats picked it up and ran with it. ryan dropped out and keyes stepped in. obama benefitted from this leak.
no one on their side said the election was stolen because of leaked info. no democrat called for investigations and punishment of the leakers.
pointing out hypocrisy isnt being a victim.
look at any so called whistleblower on republicans, the dems call them patriots and the seriousness of the charges, etc. republican whistleblowers are persecuted and called traitors and they want them charged with crimes for whatever they can attempt to make stick.
pointing out the hupocrisy of the other side is just that. if you interpret that as being a victim that is your peronal baggage.
I had a call from a Guardian journalist this afternoon. The astonishing result was that for three hours, an article was accessible through the Guardian front page which actually included the truth among the CIA hype:
The Kremlin has rejected the hacking accusations, while the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has previously said the DNC leaks were not linked to Russia. A second senior official cited by the Washington Post conceded that intelligence agencies did not have specific proof that the Kremlin was “directing” the hackers, who were said to be one step removed from the Russian government. Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of Assange, called the CIA claims “bullshit”, adding: “They are absolutely making it up.” “I know who leaked them,” Murray said. “I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things. “If what the CIA are saying is true, and the CIA’s statement refers to people who are known to be linked to the Russian state, they would have arrested someone if it was someone inside the United States. “America has not been shy about arresting whistleblowers and it’s not been shy about extraditing hackers. They plainly have no knowledge whatsoever.”
democrats picked it up and ran with it
Wrong. It was Hastert-LaHood-Shimkus-Edgar-Kjellander, the Republican establishment who ran with it. The Democrats just sat back and laughed.
The treatment of leakers is whether they are establishment or anti-establishment regardless of party. Snowden and Assange arent a Republican or Conservative. They are anti-establishment...or it could be said ... Pro-truth.
The establishment also has plenty of leakers (to the Compost, etc). But the treatment of them is different because they are pro-establishment.
Speaking of interfering in the politics/election/leadership of another country, the Department of State under Hillary Clinton had it’s own ‘cia’ go into Libya, grab the President and hand him over to the citizenry to be raped and murdered.
I can't because that is not what happened, nor what they are claiming.
They are claiming that Russia Hacked the DNC servers (not Hillary's private server) and that the Russians ALTERED the DNC emails to make Hillary's CAMPAIGN look bad. This, despite the fact that none of the emails were altered at all.
Which is why Debbie WS was fired/resigned. Which is why all these corrupt politicians and appointees quit. It blocks any further investigation.
Because...
Neither of them are Russian citizens, nor Russian spies, nor Russian anything.
Because more answers lead to more questions. Questions the politicians don't want asked.
No answer leads to loss of interest in the subject. This is how they've always done it (with the help of the media) and they stick with what works.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.