Why CIA Claims of Russian Interference in U.S. Presidential Election Don’t Make Sense

The CIA has presented Congress with an assessment that shows Russia to have helped Donald Trump win the presidency, but there are so many other facts that don’t line up with the spy agency’s analysis.

The Washington Post published a feature-length article detailing the CIA’s assessment and Congress’ reaction.

Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.

I’m not ready to jump on the “fake news” bus just yet, but the Washington Post is furthering its reputation as a propaganda outlet for the ideological left.

If the CIA had “identified individuals,” why hasn’t the administration taken action? It is well within the President’s ability and right to demand extradition of the hackers, levy sanctions against Russia for harboring them or at least issue a sharp rebuke in public – none of which has happened.

Both CNN and the Washington Post had reported that the CIA said that the Republican National Committee had also gotten hacked, but the Russians only chose to leak the Democrat emails. As ABC News reported, that never happened.

“We contacted the FBI months ago when the [alleged hacking of the Democratic National Committee] issue came about. They reviewed all of our systems. We have hacking-detection systems in place, and the conclusion was then, as it was again two days ago when we went back to the FBI to ask them about this, that the RNC was not hacked,” Priebus said today on ABC News’ “This Week.”

A British Ambassador that has met the source for the leaked emails has also come forward to refute the CIA’s claims.

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.

Highly-respected UN Ambassador John Bolton came out on Sunday with serious questions about the CIA Claims. When the FBI reviewed Clinton’s computer they found no traces of Russian involvement and they didn’t expect to as Russia’s clandestine cyber warfare operations would have left none – because they are good at it. Then why would Russian-directed hackers leave fingerprints on the DNC’s computers?

“Why did the Russians run their smart intelligence service against Hillary’s server, but their dumb intelligence services against the election?” Bolton questioned.

When uncovering something so dastardly, motive becomes important. Why would the CIA come out with this now?

The drive to make this story stick is the same as the failed Green Party recounts in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin – the left is doing everything possible to delegitimize Donald Trump’s presidency in the hopes of weakening his ability to get things done. The entirety of the progressive agenda is at stake and they will protect it “by any means necessary.”

This story won’t die overnight, but there won’t likely ever be any real discoveries, actual evidence or final prosecution – because it’s what liberals call “fake news” and the rest of us have called propaganda for decades.