WikiLeaks guru Julian Assange sat down for a talk with FNC’s Sean Hannity and AGAIN confirmed the leaked DNC/Podesta emails were not hacked and given by the Russians…
— Asa J 🇺🇸 (@asamjulian) January 3, 2017
The democrats and LMSM cannot let this false premise/blatant lie go because that would mean they would then have to face reality and admit the only person/people they have to blame for the 2016 loss are Hillary Clinton, the DNC (who really did try to steal the election, first stealing the primary from Bernie Sanders), the shitty Obama administration and fucked-up policies, and the media…
Sharyl Attkisson: Eight Facts on the “Russian Hacks”
1. The claim that the “election was hacked” is a bit of a misnomer. There’s no standing allegation by U.S. officials that the Russians (or anyone else) “hacked” into our elections system or altered vote counts. Instead, U.S. officials allege hackers connected to the government of Russian President Vladimir Putin, under his direction, stole internal emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary campaign chairman John Podesta and provided them to WikiLeaks. (However, the U.S. joint report issued Thursday doesn’t mention the DNC, Podesta or WikiLeaks by name.)
When you put 'password' in the password field and it works pic.twitter.com/xuxeDHnALo
— R O A R K (@ROARK88) December 31, 2016
Charlie Martin: Making Sense of the Russian Hacking Saga
Here, at last, we wrap around to the little parallel-universe story that started this piece. We know that a number of emails, ranging from embarrassing to really really embarrassing and possibly criminal, were exposed by WikiLeaks, and after that Clinton lost the election.
This isn’t the first time documents have been released — whether by “hacking” or old-fashioned leaking. Think back to the Pentagon Papers, which were leaked to the New York Times, and published. I don’t recall anyone at the time suggesting this was a threat to democracy, and even if it was, we seem to have survived. Certainly, repeated leakings of FBI investigations during Watergate were noble moments of journalistic perfection, not threats to democracy.
Now, we have leaked files that exposed real corruption in the DNC and real conspiracies against private citizens. We’re told this is an attack on our democracy. At the same time, there was an ongoing effort to lobby, coerce, even threaten electors to get them to change their votes in the Electoral College.
So you tell me what the bigger threat to democracy is: Revealing actual facts about the DNC and the Clinton campaign? Or trying to suborn the electors and change the election results?
But see, the democrats and MSM had a YUGE blowjob— er, snowjob to do on the weak-of-mind American people, especially the democrats, and they intentionally wrongly have been labeling this as “Russians hacked the election!” knowing these dorks would swallow it whole, and they have, it seems…
… Needless to say, no one in any position of authority has claimed that Russia changed the vote totals. Obama specifically denied that that happened, in fact, when he was asked about it on “The Daily Show” a few weeks ago: “We were frankly more concerned in the run-up to the election to the possibilities of vote tampering, which we did not see evidence of and we’re confident we can guard against.” But throw a million headlines at low-information voters about Russian hacking related to the election and go figure that some will jump to the wrong conclusion, especially if they dislike Trump and want to believe the worst.
And you thought mind control manipulation from the media was just limited to baiting you into spending your money on shit you don’t really want or need, eh?
@KatiePavlich "US Officials" said that the Benghazi massacre was due to a YouTube video. I rest my case.
— SNARK-enfreude (@Fritzz2009) January 3, 2017
Glenn Reynolds @ USAToday/Instapundit: Russians! Under my bed! John Podesta fell for a phishing scam. Let’s not start another Cold War over that.
Now of course, Democrats are up in arms about the Russians, sounding like madcap John Birchers from the 1960s. As Twitter wag IowaHawk noted, they didn’t get upset when Russia invaded Crimea, they didn’t throw down when Russia shot down a civilian airliner over Ukraine, but stealing John Podesta’s password via a phishing scam is apparently grounds for restarting the Cold War. Well, only one of these crimes constitutes a threat to Democrats’ political power.
It’s easy to mock the Democrats’ hysteria over all this, which seems mostly like an inability to accept that they lost an election they thought was in the bag. Instead, they blame a password-phishing scam that John Podesta fell for like somebody’s technologically-challenged grandmother. (Another IowaHawk tweet: “Breaking: State Dept expels 20 Nigerian diplomats after John Podesta fails to receive $1 million wire transfer from nephew of General Okezi.”) And, partly to cover for Hillary and to delegitimize Trump, much of the press has talked about “election hacking” in a way that suggests — entirely falsely — that the Russians were changing votes instead of (maybe) being the ones who copied embarrassing emails from John Podesta and gave them to Wikileaks. (I say “maybe” because some people, like Ars Technica’s security editor Dan Goodin, don’t think that the Obama Administration has made the case that the Russians were behind it.)
But there’s more to the story, and some of it is worth more than mockery…
What the administration, democrats, and media fail to realize and/or acknowledge is if the Russians or another foreign entity did hack the DNC and Podesta emails it is a very, very stark and telling reality of just how horrible these last 8 years of this administration’s cyber security, and in particular Hillary Clinton’s while at the State Department head, have been. A truckload of unseemly and political manipulation-loaded emails from a smug political party running wild during an election year are really pale in comparison to these cold hard facts…
Whoever stole John Podesta’s emails (and if I were a betting man, I’d bet it was the Russians) was able to do so because of basic failures in email security. Those failures have been a hallmark of this administration — we’ve had several really major hacks by foreign intelligence services including one characterized by experts as a cyber Pearl Harbor and yet none created the hysteria that Podesta’s emails have. Hillary’s private, illegal email server was almost certainly compromised by foreign intelligence services, and if so, had she been elected president she may have been open to blackmail and manipulation.
So let’s look ahead: In the next administration, we need to pay a lot more attention to cyber security…
And just last week the WaPo and the rest of the LMSM thought they had a smoking gun, of sorts, that would put put backbone to their narrative of “Russia hacked the US 2016 election … Working with/for Trump to get elected … Stole it from Hillary” bullshit. They ran with the allegation that Russia had hacked one of the nation’s power companies…
Kalev Leetaru @ Forbes: How The Washington Post’s Defense Of Its Russian Hacking Story Unraveled Through Web Archiving
As the Washington Post’s story of Russian hackers burrowed deep within the US electrical grid, ready to plunge the nation into darkness at the flip of a switch unraveled into the story of a single non-grid-connected laptop with a piece of malware on it, the Post has faced fierce criticism over how it fact checked and verified the details of its story. It turns out that the Post not only did not fact check the story until after it was published live on its website, but in its defense of the story, the Post made a number of false statements about what was written when, which the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine reveals.
When I wrote yesterday about the Washington Post story, Kris Coratti, Vice President of Communications and Events for the Washington Post had offered just a single emailed response and had not responded to any of my remaining questions regarding the Post’s fact checking and construction of the article in question. Last night, just over 20 hours later, she finally did respond to two of my questions.
As I noted yesterday, it seemed odd that Burlington Electric issued a formal response refuting the Post’s claims just an hour and a half after the Post’s publication. This would suggest that the Post would have gotten a response from Burlington if only it had just contacted the utility prior to publication, as is required by standard journalistic practice.
In fact, when I asked the Post why it had not contacted the utilities prior to publication, in her emailed response to me, Ms. Coratti asserted that the Post had indeed contacted both utilities for comment prior to publication and had not received a reply from either and so proceeded with publication. In fact, she went as far as to state “we had contacted the state’s two major power suppliers, as these sentences from the first version of the story attest: ‘It is unclear which utility reported the incident. Officials from two major Vermont utilities, Green Mountain Power and Burlington Electric, could not be immediately reached for comment Friday.’”
If this statement was present in the very first version of the story published at 7:55PM, that would mean that the Post had reached out to the companies for comment prior to publication and received no response.
Which, by the way, is the American MSM’s adopted SOP these last few decades, more so the last nearly twenty years … And especially these past 8-9 years. Read the whole article for more depth on this serious problem plaguing the American media.
Once upon a time, the Left loved him. Julian Assange and WikiLeaks were the cat’s meow during Bush’s administration and Iraq War. Now the Left runs away from Julian Assange. Assange tells Hannity that Russia was not responsible for leaks. [Mis. Hum.]
Other than that, we stand by every word of our previous article claiming exactly the oppositehttps://t.co/i8rNgSqmJH
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) January 3, 2017
So, why blow so hard and slobbery-sloppy the very ill chill will lying narrative?
Don Surber: Teaching journalism to the Washington Post
Anyhow, WikiLeaks is not finished, as a recent tweet on Twitter indicates:
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) January 2, 2017
Whose heady-headz will the next WikiLeaks drips fall?