CIA Withholds Evidence of Russian Hacking

Two weeks ago, reports were going around that there is no evidence of Russian hacking of the presidential election. Today, we hear just the opposite. In the interim, political strategist Sean Spicer has challenged CNN reporters who claim that CIA and FBI insiders are giving them the inside scoop on a massive and exploding story regarding Russia’s having illegally influenced the election.

Spicer points out that Donald Trump was repeatedly warned and admonished that he should respect the results of the election, yet we face a defeated DNC and the entire mainstream media making spurious claims of cheating, Russian hacking, and more.

This comes just after the completion of the electoral recount during which electors were intimidated, wherein Jill Stein, who couldn’t raise enough money to fund her campaign, is now commanding millions of dollars in donations for the DNC. The most ironic thing about the recount is that, while it was expected to win electoral votes for Clinton, it actually did the opposite and increased the electoral landslide victory for Trump.

Despite all this, the Democrats want the nation to believe that the Russians are responsible. They tell us they have deep sources in the intelligence agencies, yet no intelligence officer is willing to stand in front of a news camera and confirm this claim, even in the most general of terms.

Spicer charges that the whole story is, at best, a massive exaggeration. He quotes the Washington Post saying, “The report fell short of a formal assessment because minor inefficiencies between the 17 intelligence agencies left many questions remaining. The CIA refused to comment.”

He goes on to quote the New York Times, “The Russians hacked the republican national committee’s computers,” and points out that was shown to have been false months ago during the election.

Based on what we know now, the intelligence reports of the various agencies conflict with each other, as the CIA and others admit. None of the 17 intelligence agencies’ reports came to any conclusions about Russians hacking the election results. Finally, the CIA refuses to go on record with any of their findings.

All of this is very suspicious. It is suspicious that CNN, the New York Times, and the Washington Post especially, is willing to say they have CIA insiders giving them information about the Russian’s hacking our election- yet they can deliver no details about it.

The mainstream media is telling us Vladimir Putin personally put his thumb on the scale of the presidential election, yet they deliver no convincing evidence except to claim they have been shown evidence by unnamed sources.

More recently, former CIA officer Steven L. Hall told the Washington Post that if his former employer were to release the information they have, it would cost American lives. His claim is that if what the CIA knows is revealed, the people who gathered that intel may be compromised and they may be killed.

But there are a number of problems with his claim. To begin, it’s only an ex-CIA officer that the Post is willing to quote, not any of the many current CIA operatives they claim are giving them this information. This is someone who is not involved in any current investigation into Russian hacking, which means if he believes there is evidence that Russia has affected our electoral process his belief is based solely on hearsay.

Second, when it suits the CIA to tell the public about the dirt they have dug up on America’s enemies, they have never been shy about it. The past 35 years has been a litany of intelligence agencies telling the public via the main stream media that foreign powers are secretly developing nuclear weapons, are gassing civilians, are committing human rights violations, are hacking elections and so on.

It’s only now when it seems obvious that it’s only a handful of bitter Clinton supporters within the CIA who are feeding the main stream media with these specious claims that they tell us their evidence is too hot to handle.

One might ask the question, how many religious cults were formed around a central figure who claimed to have access to divine testimony- but only he could read the tablets or hear the voices- yet the flock is expected to believe everything he says. That is what we have with today’s mainstream news media. They want us to believe what they say, but they refuse to show us the evidence.

Frankly, after the many massive failures of the mainstream media in 2016, they are going to have to do a lot better than that.

~ Conservative Zone


Most Popular

These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More



Most Popular
Sponsored Content

These content links are provided by Content.ad. Both Content.ad and the web site upon which the links are displayed may receive compensation when readers click on these links. Some of the content you are redirected to may be sponsored content. View our privacy policy here.

To learn how you can use Content.ad to drive visitors to your content or add this service to your site, please contact us at [email protected].

Family-Friendly Content

Website owners select the type of content that appears in our units. However, if you would like to ensure that Content.ad always displays family-friendly content on this device, regardless of what site you are on, check the option below. Learn More

Leave a Comment:

Your email address will not be published.