If the Russians had been hacking the 2016 presidential election to steal it from Hillary Clinton, as is being charged by the sore loser progressive left and their bush league mainstream media surrogates, no one would have known about it.
And you can bet the farm that the legendary intel of the Russians would never rely on motor mouth Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer for intelligence or anything else.
Unlike the U.S. Democrats and their screaming meemies in the progressive left-addicted Hollywood and Entertainment industry, Vladimir Putin and his team of Ruskies recognized from the start that Hillary Clinton’s was a leaky old boat going nowhere but down.
Intelligence is a serious matter to the Russians who have long counted on it to subdue their enemies by keeping them constantly on the run from the voracious Russian bear. The Russians can see straight through all the devious games played by the American Dems because they’re the ones who created the disinformation Obama, Clinton and company are now playing with.
It is all too obvious that the Democrats and their back-stabbing media pals are using Vladimir’s Russia as a cover for their humiliating, still stinging 2016 election defeat.
The dramas they’re out there kicking up in the dust should make the Democrats in the running for their very own Academy Awards night.
If the Russians had any advice for America wannabe spy catchers, it would come in four words:”You talk too much!”
But the chatter of Pelosi, Schumer and Company is the trajectory leading back to their easy to find lies.
It is a trajectory when followed that shows how the Democrats are trying to drag Americans into a digital civil war, one in which the security apparatus supposed to be loyal to and supporting the USA and the constitution—the FBI, CIA, NSA—are badly fractured.
It comes to an end of a road which proves that it wasn’t the people who weren’t there, like the President Donald Trump cabinet appointees who were giving America assets away to the Russians but the legislators who sit in Senate and Congress.
In the real world it was Hillary Clinton who gave 20 percent of America’s uranium to Russia.
Why ever would Russia want to dump that applecart?
Nor was it Russia who depleted American military forces. It was eight years of Obama hollowing out American military forces and it was the American president, seeking a third term in office through Clinton who refused to identify ISIS as Islamic terrorists, leaving America open for attack
Every scandal has a beginning and the one called ‘The Russians Stole The Election’ can be traced back to an adulterated, made-for-cyberspace fantasy.
“In March 2016, the personal Gmail account of John Podesta, a former White House chief of staff and the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, was compromised in a data breach, and a collection of his emails, many of which were work-related, were stolen.”(Wikipedia)
“Cybersecurity researchers as well as the United States government attributed responsibility for the breach, which was accomplished via a spear-phishing attack, to the hacking group Fancy Bear, affiliated with Russian intelligence services.”
The things that go on against the chairman of Clinton’s campaign with the CIA, FBI, NSA etc. looking the other way are downright deplorable.
‘Fancy Bear’ was wearing the right kind of made-in-Russia fancy pants and the rest of the story could now be made up as necessary
1. June 2016: FISA request. The Obama administration files a request with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA) to monitor communications involving Donald Trump and several advisers. The request, uncharacteristically, is denied.
2. July: Russia joke. Wikileaks releases emails from the Democratic National Committee that show an effort to prevent Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) from winning the presidential nomination. In a press conference, Donald Trump refers to Hillary Clinton’s own missing emails, joking: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 e-mails that are missing.” That remark becomes the basis for accusations by Clinton and the media that Trump invited further hacking.
3. October: Podesta emails. In October, Wikileaks releases the emails of Clinton campaign chair John Podesta, rolling out batches every day until the election, creating new mini-scandals. The Clinton campaign blames Trump and the Russians.
4. October: FISA request. The Obama administration submits a new, narrow request to the FISA court, now focused on a computer server in Trump Tower suspected of links to Russian banks. No evidence is found—but the wiretaps continue, ostensibly for national security reasons, Andrew McCarthy at National Review later notes. The Obama administration is now monitoring an opposing presidential campaign using the high-tech surveillance powers of the federal intelligence services.
5. January 2017: Buzzfeed/CNN dossier. Buzzfeed releases, and CNN reports, a supposed intelligence “dossier” compiled by a foreign former spy. It purports to show continuous contact between Russia and the Trump campaign, and says that the Russians have compromising information about Trump. None of the allegations can be verified and some are proven false. Several media outlets claim that they had been aware of the dossier for months and that it had been circulating in Washington.
- Admiral Michael Rogers had a visit with President Trump on Friday, November 11th.
- According to the Executive Order rule changes DNI James Clapper signed off on December 15th.
- On Friday November 18th The Washington Post reported on a recommendation in “October” that Mike Rogers be removed from his NSA position: The heads of the Pentagon and the nation’s intelligence community have recommended to President Obama that the director of the National Security Agency, Adm. Michael S. Rogers, be removed.
- [...] In a move apparently unprecedented for a military officer, Rogers, without notifying superiors, traveled to New York to meet with Trump on Thursday at Trump Tower. That caused consternation at senior levels of the administration, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal personnel matters. (link)
- General Michael Flynn spoke to the Russian Ambassador on December 29th
- Dec 29th 2016—Obama announces sanctions on Russia
6. January: Obama expands NSA sharing. As Michael Walsh later notes, and as the New York Times reports, the outgoing Obama administration “expanded the power of the National Security Agency to share globally intercepted personal communications with the government’s 16 other intelligence agencies before applying privacy protections.” The new powers, and reduced protections, could make it easier for intelligence on private citizens to be circulated improperly or leaked.
The new rules, which were issued in an unclassified document, entitled Procedures for the Availability or Dissemination of Raw Signals Intelligence Information by the National Security Agency (NSA), significantly relaxed longstanding limits on what the NSA may do with the information gathered by its most powerful surveillance operations.
These operations are largely unregulated by American wiretapping laws. Surveillances include collecting satellite transmissions, phone calls, and emails that cross network switches abroad, and messages between people abroad that cross domestic network switches.
The changes initiated by the Obama Administration in its waning days empowered far more agents and officials to search through raw intelligence data.
- Jan 3rd 2017—Loretta Lynch signs off on rule changes for phone taps.
- Jan 12th 2017—WaPo reports On Phone Calls Anonymous Intel Sources
- Jan 15th 2017—VP Pence appears on Face the nation.
- Jan 20th 2017—Inauguration
- Jan 23rd 2017—FBI reports nothing unlawful in content of Flynn call
- Jan 26th 2017—Sally Yates (acting DOJ) informs President Trump there might be a conflict between VP Pence’s stated TV version (was told by Flynn), and what Intel community communicate to Yates that Flynn actually expressed to Russia.
- Jan 27th 2017—White House counsel begins investigation to discrepancy.
7. January: Times report. The New York Times reports, on the eve of Inauguration Day, that several agencies—the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Treasury Department are monitoring several associates of the Trump campaign suspected of Russian ties.
Other news outlets also report the existence of a multi-agency working group to coordinate investigations across the government,” though it is unclear how they found out, since the investigations would have been secret and involved classified information.
8. February: Mike Flynn scandal. Reports emerge that the FBI intercepted a conversation in 2016 between future National Security Adviser Michael Flynn—then a private citizen—and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. The intercept supposedly was part of routine spying on the ambassador, not monitoring of the Trump campaign. The FBI transcripts reportedly show the two discussing Obama’s newly-imposed sanctions on Russia, though Flynn earlier denied discussing them.
Sally Yates, whom Trump would later fire as acting Attorney General for insubordination, is involved in the investigation. In the end, Flynn resigns over having misled Vice President Mike Pence (perhaps inadvertently) about the content of the conversation.
9. February: Times claims extensive Russian contacts. The New York Times cites “four current and former American officials” in reporting that the Trump campaign had “repeated contacts with senior Russian intelligence officials. The Trump campaign denies the claims—and the Times admits that there is “no evidence” of coordination between the campaign and the Russians. The White House and some congressional Republicans begin to raise questions about illegal intelligence leaks.
10. March: the Washington Post targets Jeff Sessions. The Washington Postreports that Attorney General Jeff Sessions had contact twice with the Russian ambassador during the campaign—once at a Heritage Foundation event and once at a meeting in Sessions’s Senate office.
The Post suggests that the two meetings contradict Sessions testimony at his confirmation hearings that he had no contacts with the Russians, though in context (not presented by the Post) it was clear he meant in his capacity as a campaign surrogate, and that he was responding to claims in the “dossier” of ongoing contacts.
The New York Times, in covering the story, adds that the Obama White House “rushed to preserve” intelligence related to alleged Russian links with the Trump campaign. By “preserve” it really means “disseminate”: officials spread evidence throughout other government agencies “to leave a clear trail of intelligence for government investigators” and perhaps the media as well.
In summary: the Obama administration sought, and eventually obtained, authorization to eavesdrop on the Trump campaign; continued monitoring the Trump team even when no evidence of wrongdoing was found; then relaxed the NSA rules to allow evidence to be shared widely within the government, virtually ensuring that the information, including the conversations of private citizens, would be leaked to the media.
In the ongoing ‘Russia Stole The Election Conspiracy Story’ the Russians are ‘Spies are Us’, the leaders of the Barack Obama Shadow Government operating up the street from the White House, ‘Lies Are Us’.
Election 2016 ended on November 8. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama lost. Donald Trump won.
It’s high time that Bug-off Barry met up with a whoop-# can of Raid.
Copyright © Canada Free Press
Judi McLeod is an award-winning journalist with 30 years’ experience in the print media. A former Toronto Sun columnist, she also worked for the Kingston Whig Standard. Her work has appeared on Rush Limbaugh, Newsmax.com, Drudge Report, Foxnews.com, and Glenn Beck.
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2017 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2017 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement