The news is saturated with Russia in an attempt to delegitimize the election. Now, a group of ten members of the Electoral College – nine Democrats and one Republican – are saying they want an intelligence briefing specifically regarding this issue. And they want it before they vote on Monday. They wrote to the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, in part:
“The Electors require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations. We further require a briefing on all investigative findings, as these matters directly impact the core factors in our deliberations of whether Mr. Trump is fit to serve as President of the United States.”
This paranoia regarding Russian hackers has been fomenting in the media, and it’s all based on speculation and wishful thinking. Apparently, those things are sufficient in order for the “real” news to pass something off as fact, and if you question the narrative, ask for sources or evidence, you must hate America.
Once again, Julian Assange has reiterated that his source for the DNC leaks and John Podesta’s emails did not come from Russia.
Of course, the first thing that liberals are going to do is ask for evidence. We don’t have evidence that WikiLeaks’s source was not Russia. The only way to prove that is for Assange to provide the identity of his sources. That’s something that he will not do in order to protect them.
I think we can say without fear of contradiction that if he were to reveal the source of the DNC leak and of John Podesta’s emails, that person would be found the next day to have died in a “bizarre gardening accident,” or from suicide by beheading himself. If you listen to the interview with Sean Hannity, you can sense quite clearly that Assange isn’t happy with his friend and former UK Ambassador Craig Murray divulging as few details as he did about his clandestine meeting with the source in a D.C. wooded area.
Liberals’ asking for evidence is a little silly, considering that no one has yet to provide evidence to support their current narrative. No one’s done any vetting to verify the “conclusions” written about in the Washington Post and New York Times.
We just reported on that story about how a 5-year-old boy died in Santa’s arms. It went viral, and was even picked up by several large news outlets and publications such as CNN and USA Today. The problem there was the same with this Russia nonsense. No one vetted it, until after it had already gone viral across the country. Now, their calling the whole story into question, because it can’t be verified.
That story was given to the original publisher – the Knoxville Sentinel News – by a “friend-of-a-friend” source, on behalf of the man playing Santa. After it was revealed that the story could not be verified, the Sentinel News did the right thing. They wrote a disclaimer, stating they are “no longer standing by the veracity of Schmitt-Matzen’s account.”
The CIA story was given anonymously to the Washington Post and New York Times, who ran with it. It has since become a viral story. But no one’s vetted it. They should do exactly what the Sentinel News did and put a disclaimer on their articles, stating that they are “no longer standing by the veracity of these anonymously provided conclusions.”
By their own definition, the whole Trump-Russian hacker-WikiLeaks “connection” is all fake news.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com