Washington Post Fake News and CIA Spin Dec 11, 2016, “sources for the story are people not from the CIA”, “does not, as Hillary claimed in October, represent the views of the 17 Intelligence agencies. “
Washington Post Fake News and CIA Spin Dec 11, 2016, “sources for the story are people not from the CIA”, “does not, as Hillary claimed in October, represent the views of the 17 Intelligence agencies. ”
The following article can no longer be found at No Quarter. Some of their Archives can only be found on the Wayback Machine.
Since it was scrubbed it is presented in it’s entirety.
From No Quarter December 11, 2016.
“Washington Post Fake News and CIA Spin
At first glance, the Washington Post piece “reporting” that, “the CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency,” sounds very compelling and authoritative, especially to average civilian who has never served in an intelligence agency or written an assessment. So let me show you the smoke and mirrors going on here.
First, if you read the Washington Post article carefully it is quite clear that the sources for the story are people not from the CIA, who are providing a second hand account of a briefing to members of Congress.
Second, Donald Trump and his National Security Advisor, have been getting the Presidential Daily Brief, which is done by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (aka DNI) using CIA officers detailed to the DNI. So, either the CIA is withholding intelligence from the President elect or the Trump has been given this information and is lying or the so-called “CIA Assessment” is not being accurately portrayed in the Post article. I suspect it is the later.
Third, the CIA has no technical capability to trace or analyze who hacked the DNC and Podesta emails. That falls to the NSA and the FBI. NSA has limited power and authority to carry out any analysis of U.S. domestic activity and would have to rely on the FBI, who has law enforcement investigatory powers. Given these facts, any CIA Assessment would be reporting on the proprietary information from other agencies. I will tell you what will not appear in such an assessment–the results of an FBI investigation.
The FBI is not an intelligence organization. FBI agents cannot simply gather up information at will for possible use later. Their information is primarily to build a case that can subsequently be prosecuted. If they start sharing that information with the CIA or the NSA then it becomes tainted and will be unusable in the event that a prosecution was pursued. Take the Guccifer case (you know, the Romanian who hacked Sid Blumenthal). FBI kept their info away from the intel community.
Finally, the assessment in question is a CIA product and does not, as Hillary claimed in October, represent the views of the 17 Intelligence agencies. The Post reports:
The CIA presentation to senators about Russia’s intentions fell short of a formal U.S. assessment produced by all 17 intelligence agencies.
The Post also buries the real fact about the assessment:
intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin “directing” the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks, a second senior U.S. official said. Those actors, according to the official, were “one step” removed from the Russian government, rather than government employees.
Let me make this simple. All the CIA has is guilt by association. There are other possible, plausible explanations. But rather than focus on the ambiguity, the Washington Post boldly declared, without any nuance or caveat, that Russia, by implication the Government of Putin, intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency.
Donald Trump and his team are well within the realm of logic and reason to dismiss the Post and NY Times reporting as propaganda masquerading as reporting. This reporting, as I noted in my previous piece (Unraveling the Russian Hack Conspiracy Propaganda–DOUBLE UPDATE), in my opinion is a political hit job designed to discredit the Presidency of Trump.
Why would the CIA do such a thing? Why would prominent Senators like Lindsay Graham and John McCain appear to support such an effort? Very simple. Syria. The Obama Administration has a very clear policy of supporting and arming radical Islamists in Syria. Yes, Islamists directly linked to Al Qaeda. McCain and Graham support this policy in the name of going after Iran. And what country has played a critical role in thwarting the U.S. effort to take out Syria’s Bashar Al Assad? Yep, Russia.
There is a strong, bipartisan cabal in Washington that is eager to restart the cold war and adamant about confronting Vladimir Putin. The mere fact that I have written the previous sentence means I am likely to be labeled as a “stooge” of the Kremlin or a “water carrier” for Putin. But this Washington cabal is willing to support a policy of arming Islamic terrorists because they believe that getting rid of Assad and eliminating Russian and Iranian influence in Syria is more important.
In other words boys and girls, there are lots of hidden agendas at work. One of those agendas was behind the Post story pushing the propaganda that Russia stole the election for Trump.
UPDATE–I wrote this piece before I saw the latest news from the Washington Post. The FBI is not onboard with the CIA . Hmmmm? Who saw that coming:
Sitting before the House Intelligence Committee was a senior FBI counterintelligence official. The question the Republicans and Democrats in attendance wanted answered was whether the bureau concurred with the conclusions the CIA had just shared with senators that Russia “quite” clearly intended to help Republican Donald Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton and clinch the White House.
For the Democrats in the room, the FBI’s response was frustrating — even shocking.
During a similar Senate Intelligence Committee briefing held the previous week, the CIA’s statements, as reflected in the letter the lawmakers now held in their hands, were “direct and bald and unqualified” about Russia’s intentions to help Trump, according to one of the officials who attended the House briefing.
The FBI official’s remarks to the lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee were, in comparison, “fuzzy” and “ambiguous,” suggesting to those in the room that the bureau and the agency weren’t on the same page, the official said.
FBI info on this is far stronger than anything the CIA has because the FBI actually has in-house cyber experts and the means to investigate allegations that the Russian Government intervened in the election to help Trump. But you know the coming Clinton spin, the FBI’s Jim Comey also is a stooge of Putin and was doing the Kremlin’s business to stop Hillary. Right?”
More cover-up questions by Admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. March 1, 2018, Seth Rich murder and DNC leak, ” Julian Assange … implied that Mr. Rich was killed because he was the Wikileaks source of the DNC emails.”
More cover-up questions by Admiral James A. Lyons, Jr. March 1, 2018, Seth Rich murderRead More
Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy Martin October 21, 2008, “Michelle Obama making disparaging comments about white folks”, “None of my three main sources….have backed off.”
Whitey Tape, API, Phil Berg, and Andy Martin October 21, 2008, “Michelle Obama making disparagingRead More