FBI Changes Story, Now Supports CIA Claim that Russia Intervened in US Election

The questions before us are the following:  Did Russia hack into Democratic email servers to gather and then distribute via WikiLeaks emails that were damaging to the Clinton campaign?  If so, did that affect the outcome of the election?  And did Russia engage in any other nefarious hacking activities that might have directly changed the ballot count?

First off, Mr. Obama himself has denied that anyone has actually hacked the voting machines or the tabulation process.  Since he would jump on any evidence that such had happened, we can safely dismiss the third question above.

Anyone following this story knows that powerful Democratic operatives would like for us to believe that at least the first two questions above should be answered in the affirmative.  This is by no means certain.  And as the case is examined more closely, one finds far more contradictions and unsubstantiated claims than hard facts.

For one thing, Attorney General Lynch announced that there is no evidence of any “technical interference” with the elections by the Russians.  She would hardly be considered to be a supporter of Donald Trump.

Judge Napolitano of Fox News claimed that there is no evidence of Russian involvement.  He then went so far as to suggest that members of the US intelligence community released those damaging emails as retaliation against Hillary for her criminal irresponsibility in handling classified documents that could have placed the lives of intelligence operatives in danger.  He further claimed to have been handed evidence of just that happening personally.

We've also watched as the CIA proposed that the Russians did hack Democratic servers.  At the same time, the FBI claimed there was no evidence of such hacking.  Now the FBI has flipped and is supporting the CIA position.

It must be pointed out that the FBI Directory Comey has not done a good job of handling the publicity surrounding the investigation into Mrs. Clinton's alleged criminal mishandling of classified documents.  Something that has driven some of his agents to the verge of revolt.

WikiLeaks leader Assange claims he did not get the emails from Russia. That's not proof of anything, but it further casts doubt on the claims of Russian interference.

Here's where things seem to stand — for now, anyway.

The FBI supports a CIA assessment that Russia deliberately attempted to intervene in the election to help President-elect Donald Trump win, The Washington Post reported on Friday.

Both FBI Director James Comey and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stand by the CIA assessment, the report said.

“Earlier this week, I met separately with (Director) FBI James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” CIA Director John Brennan wrote in a message to staff, according to the report.

“The three of us also agree that our organizations, along with others, need to focus on completing the thorough review of this issue that has been directed by President Obama and which is being led by the DNI,” Brennan reportedly added.

So the FBI, for some reason, has changed its tune.

Russia denies involvement and is demanding proof from Obama that they did.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called the report of Putin’s involvement “nothing but nonsense.”

“I think this is nothing but nonsense. There is not a chance that anybody could believe that,” he said Thursday.

The Kremlin on Friday also demanded that the U.S. provide evidence that Russia was directly involved in the cyberattack before making any more public accusations.

“They should either stop talking about that or produce some proof at last,” said Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov. “Otherwise it all begins to look unseemly.”

President Obama on Friday addressed Russia’s call for evidence.

“We will provide evidence that we can safely provide that does not compromise sources and methods,” Obama said during a White House press conference.

“But I will be honest with you, when you are talking about cyber-security, a lot of it is classified and we are not going to provide it, because the way we catch folks is by knowing certain things about them that they might not want us to know, and, if we are going to monitor this stuff effectively going forward, we don't want them to know that we know.”

So, Mr. Obama is going to claim that while he will have proof, he will not be able to reveal it as much of the proof is classified or would otherwise compromise informants and intelligence gathering methods.

So here's a prediction:  There will be no proof provided.  Accusations will continue to fly, but Obama as well as those in the intelligence community will hide behind the alleged need to protect classified information and informants to explain away their inability to provide the proof that Russia is demanding and that would be damning evidence of Russian involvement.

More than likely, it's not a matter of the “proof” being classified, but rather that it just doesn't exist.

Then again if you want an alternative theory to play with, perhaps the CIA is just so used to meddling in other nations' elections and overthrowing foreign governments that it just cannot conceive of Russia not doing the same to the US, the lack of any evidence notwithstanding.

Source:  The Hill



Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest