Did
Hillary Scapegoat Russia to Save Her Campaign?
By Mike Whitney
August
01, 2017 "Information
Clearing House"
- The “Russia hacking” flap has nothing to do
with Russia and nothing to do with hacking. The
story is basically a DNC invention that was
concocted to mitigate the political fallout from
the nearly 50,000 emails that WikiLeaks planned
to publish on July 22, 2016, just 3 days before
the Democratic National Convention. That’s what
this is really all about. Russia didn’t hack
anything, it’s a big diversion that was conjured
up on-the-fly to keep Hillary’s bandwagon from
going down in flames.
Put
yourself in Hillary’s shoes for a minute. She
knew the deluge was coming and she knew it was
going to be bad. (According to Veteran
Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, DNC
contractor Crowdstrike claimed to find evidence
of Russian malware on DNC servers just three
days after WikiLeaks announced that it was about
“about to publish “emails related to Hillary
Clinton.” Clearly, that was no coincidence. The
plan to blame Russia was already underway.)
Hillary knew that the emails were going to
expose the DNC’s efforts to rig the primaries
and torpedo Bernie Sanders campaign, and she
knew that the media was going to have a
field-day dissecting the private communications
word by word on cable news or splashing them
across the headlines for weeks on end. It was
going to be excruciating. She knew that, they
all knew that.
And how
would her supporters react when they discovered
that their party leaders and presidential
candidate were actively involved in sabotaging
the democratic process and subverting the
primaries? That wasn’t going to go over well
with voters in Poughkeepsie, now was it? Maybe
she’d see her public approval ratings slip even
more. Maybe she’d nosedive in the polls or lose
the election outright, she didn’t know. No one
knew. All they knew was that she was in trouble.
Big trouble.
So she
reacted exactly the way you’d expect Hillary to
react, she hit the panic button. In fact, they
all freaked out, everyone of them including
Podesta and the rest of the DNC honchoes. Once
they figured that their presidential bid could
go up in smoke, they decided to act
preemptively, pull out all the stops and “Go
Big”.
That’s
where Russia comes into the picture. The DNC
brass (with help from allies at the CIA) decided
to conjure up a story so fantastic that, well,
it had to be true, after all, that’s what the 17
intel agencies said, right? And so did the elite
media including the New York Times, the
Washington Post and CNN. They can’t all be
wrong, can they? Sure, they goofed-up on
Saddam’s WMDs, and Iran’s imaginary nukes
program, and Assad’s fictional chemical weapons
attack, but, hey, everyone makes mistakes,
right? And, besides, have I told you how evil
Putin is lately and how much he reminds me of
Adolph Hitler? (sarcasm)
In any
event, they settled on Russia mainly because
Russia had rolled back Washington’s imperial
project in both Ukraine and Syria, so the media
was already in full demonetization-mode and
raring to go. All the DNC needed to do was utter
the words “Russia meddling” and they’d be off to
the races.
Does
any of this sound even remotely believable?
Former CIA analyst, Ray McGovern seems to think
so, because he expounded a very similar scenario
about a month ago in an interview on You Tube.
Check it out:
Ray
McGovern– “What did Hillary do? …Hillary
gathered her war council together and one fellow
says, “I know what we can do. We’ll blame it on
the Russians.”
And
someone else says, “But it wasn’t the Russians
it was WikiLeaks.”
(Guy
number 1 says)”Well, that’s a twofer. We hate
them both equally , so we’ll say WikiLeaks is
working with the Russians.”
(Ray
McGovern) That was two days before the
convention.
And
someone else says, “What would the rationale
be?”
(Guy
number 2 says) “C’mon, the Russians clearly want
Trump to win.”
(Number
1) “But what about the major media?”
(Number
2) “Well, the major media really want Hillary to
win, so if we get the major media on board,
well, we really got it wired.”
(Ray
McGovern again) “And if you watch the coverage
since the WikiLeaks leak, two days before the
convention, the media content was not ‘how did
Hillary steal the election’ but ‘How did the
Russians do it?”’
He’s
right, isn’t he? Hillary and Co. pulled off the
whole ruse without a hitch. The media focused on
the “Russia meddling” angle, and the calculating
Ms. Clinton slipped away with nary a scratch.
It’s amazing!
No
Advertising
- No
Government
Grants
-
This
Is
Independent
Media
But
there was one glitch to the ‘Blame Russia’
scheme. There was no hard evidence of Russian
involvement. And, now, 10 months into multiple
investigations of Russian hacking, there’s still
no evidence. How can that be?
Well,
for one thing, the FBI was never given access to
the DNC computers.
Let me
repeat that: In the biggest and most
politically-explosive investigation in more than
a decade, an investigation that has obvious
national security implications– alleged
cyber-espionage by a hostile foreign power,
alleged collusion by high-ranking officials in
the current administration, alleged treason or
collusion on part of the Chief Executive, and
the possible impeachment of a sitting president–
the FBI has not yet secured or examined the
servers that may or may not provide compelling
forensic evidence of cyber-intrusion by Russia.
Why?
Why would the FBI accept the analysis of some
flunky organization that no one has ever heard
of before (Crowdstrike) rather than use all the
tools at their disposal to thoroughly
investigate whether or not the hacking actually
took place or not? Isn’t that their job?
Yer
damn right it is. The reason the FBI never
insisted on examining the DNC servers, is
because they knew the story was baloney from the
get go. Otherwise they would have kicked down
the doors at the DNC, seized the computers
through brute force, and arrested anyone who
tried to stop them. Those computers are Exhibit
A in the Trial of the Century. They should be
under lock and key at FBI Headquarters not
collecting cobwebs in the basement of the
DNC-HQ. The fact that the servers have not been
seized and examined just proves what a joke this
whole Russia-deal really is.
You
see, when a law enforcement agency like the FBI
fails so conspicuously in carrying out its
duties, you have to assume that other factors
are involved, mainly politics. It’s all
politics, right? There is no rational
explanation for the FBI’s behavior other than it
is following a political script that coincides
with the agenda and ambitions of the DNC and
other power players behind the scenes.
Investigative journalist Gareth Porter summed it
up perfectly in a brilliant article titled
Foisting Blame for Cyber-Hacking on Russia. He
said:
“…the history
of the US government’s claim that Russian
intelligence hacked into election databases
reveals it to be a clear case of politically
motivated analysis by the DHS and the
Intelligence Community. Not only was the
claim based on nothing more than inherently
inconclusive technical indicators but no
credible motive for Russian intelligence
wanting personal information on registered
voters was ever suggested.” (“Foisting
Blame for Cyber-Hacking on Russia“,
antiwar.com)
Right
on, Porter. Facts don’t matter in the Russia
hacking case. They never have. The whole
approach from Day 1 has been to drown the public
with innuendo and baseless accusations, while
the MSM Carnie barkers pretend that “Russia
meddling” is already settled science and that
only “Putin puppets” would ever doubt the
veracity of the media’s loony claims. Got that?
But
facts do matter and so does evidence. And on
that score we’re in luck because McGovern’s
group, the Veteran Intelligence Professionals
for Sanity (VIPS), released a blockbuster report
last week that produced the first hard evidence
that Russia most certainly DID NOT hack the DNC
servers. It was a DNC insider. Here’s an excerpt
from the VIPS article titled “Was the “Russian
Hack” an Inside Job?”
“Independent cyber-investigators have now
…come up with verifiable evidence from
metadata found in the record of the alleged
Russian hack. They found that the purported
“hack” of the DNC …was not a hack…(but)
originated with a copy …by an insider. The
data was leaked after being doctored with a
cut-and-paste job to implicate Russia….
Key among the
findings of the independent forensic
investigations is the conclusion that the
DNC data was copied onto a storage device at
a speed that far exceeds an Internet
capability for a remote hack. Of equal
importance, the forensics show that the
copying and doctoring were performed on the
East coast of the U.S.” (“Was the “Russian
Hack” an Inside Job?“,
CounterPunch)
Capisce? There was no hack. Someone working
inside the DNC (a disgruntled employee?) –who
had access to the computers, and who worked on
the East Coast– copied the data onto a storage
device and transferred it to WikiLeaks. That’s
what you call a “leak” not a “hack”. There was
no hack. Russia was not involved. The official
narrative is bullshit. End of story.
Naturally, the MSM has completely ignored the
VIPS report just as they ignored Sy Hersh’s
brilliant article that proved that Assad DID NOT
launch a chemical weapons attack in Syria. That
bit of information has been locked out of the
MSM coverage altogether as it doesn’t jibe with
Washington’s “Assad must go” policy. So too,
McGovern’s “verifiable forensic evidence” that
the Russians did not hack the DNC servers will
likely be consigned to the memory hole like
every other inconvenient factoid that doesn’t
fit with Washington’s foreign policy objectives.
The
fact that the FBI has not seized the DNC
computers is just one of many glaring omissions
in this farcical investigation, but there are
others too. Like this: Did you know that there
are two eyewitnesses in the case that have not
yet been questioned? That’s right, there are two
people who claim to know the identity of the
person who gave the stolen emails to WikiLeaks;
Julian Assange and Craig Murray.
Murray,
who is the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan
and a human rights activist, claims he met the
person who took the emails from the DNC in a
wooded area in Washington DC last year. In other
words, Murray can settle this matter once and
for all and put an end to this year-long
witch-hunt that has consumed the media and
Capital Hill, prevented the Congress from
conducting the people’s business, and increased
the probability of a conflagration with
nuclear-armed Russia.
But
here’s the problem: The FBI has never
interviewed Murray or made any effort to
interview him. It’s like he doesn’t exist. In
other words, we have a credible witness who can
positively identify the person who leaked the
emails, gave them to WikiLeaks and set off a
political firestorm that has engulfed the
Capital and the country for the last year, and
the FBI hasn’t interviewed him?
Will
someone explain that to me, please?
That’s
why I remain convinced that the Russia hacking
story is pure, unalloyed bunkum. There’s not a
word of truth to any of it.
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)