WhatFinger


We're going back and forth trying to parse details no one understands or can verify. The media are in way over their heads on this one.

This Russia nonsense is exactly why intelligence agents shouldn't be talking to the press



Does it seem unusual to you that the press is now trying to determine what's true and what's false in intelligence dossiers, originated by foreign operatives, for which no one can be sure of the identities of the original sources, let alone their credibility? That's not because no such dossiers existed before Donald Trump came along. Far from it. Intelligence operatives - whether state-sponsored of independent and working on behalf of political players (or others) - have been compiling such dossiers on public figures since such things were possible. Anyone who has ever covered politics - myself included - has probably been approached at some point by some character claiming to have the explosive goods on this, that or the other guy.
The vast majority of the time - as in, virtually all the time - reporters don't bite because whoever is peddling the information can offer no trustworthy source to verify the allegations. If the target is a person you'd really like to see taken down, you might attempt to do some of your own reporting to verify it. But your credibility is on the line too, and if you come out with something that's self-evidently ridiculous, you're the one who's going to look like a fool, not the fringe figure who made your phone ring or met you in an alley. That's because most of this stuff is nonsense. It was made up by people who have an axe to grind, and just because someone says it doesn't mean it's true. Intelligence mercenaries who are digging for dirt will say anything. But professional intelligence operatives, especially those who work for the U.S. government, understand the nature of these things and typically refrain from repeating such nonsense publicly precisely because of the likelihood that the political press won't recognize the difference between credible information and unverified heresay. All those rules now appear to have gone out the window because of Donald Trump. Because of the narrative that Trump is some sort of bizarre lunatic, intelligence operatives now apparently feel free to share information about the contents of dossiers - and what's being done with them - with reporters. That has resulted in predictable public confusion about what the hell is going on behind the scenes. You've got CNN insisting that the Russians have compromising information on Trump, which has the intelligence community scrambling for a way to deal with the situation. Meanwhile, NBC says the intelligence community knows the dossier is nonsense, and the only reason they shared it with Trump at all is to help him understand how easily nonsense can circulate among operatives.

Support Canada Free Press


So did they show Trump the information or merely tell him about it? This seems to be a hugely important distinction for some reason. Obama intelligence chief James Clapper insists that both Trump and Obama were shown the document, and that the guy who put it together is considered credible. Even Joe Biden has weighed in, confirming that Obama was briefed extensively. Meanwhile, there is the question of who put this together and what their track record might be. Kim Strassel of the Wall Street Journal has done the work on that, and it hardly paints a picture of a trustworthy source anyone should believe. Yet others insist they've got an excellent track record. What should anyone believe? Black Lives Matter leader hit with restraining order after threatening LA police official The fact that the question is so impossible to answer is the very reason it's irresponsible for the intelligence community to be talking to the press in the first place - especially when they do so under the cloak of anonymity, and don't have to be held accountable for the things they've revealed. There is a difference between "stuff people are saying" and news. When you work in intelligence, you hear all kinds of talk, and the vast majority of it is either obviously untrue or impossible to verify. That's why it hasn't typically been their practice to leak stuff they're hearing to the press.

So why the change in their behavior? It seems pretty clear it's driven by the hysterical reaction the political class has had to Trump's election. They seem to consider it a crucial imperative to stop Trump from taking power at all costs - or at the very least make it impossible for him to govern - and they were extremely disappointed in the voters, the electors and anyone else you can name for failing to make this happen. So now they're doing what they've never done before, and leaking unverifiable nonsense to the news media, which they can trust to treat the nonsense in the most irresponsible way possible. You see the result. It's not pretty. The media are left to endlessly go back and forth, trying to understand who said what to whom - or didn't say anything at all - behind the scenes, and whether Party A actually believed what was shared with Party B, or whether they only shared it as an example of what should never be believed or shared. And since no one knows for sure, no one can tell us with any confidence or clarity. It's a mess. This kind of information is not intended for public viewing, and the news media have no known protocols for how to handle it. So they just speculate, and cite others who are speculating. Trump shared an anecdote in his Thursday presser about having gone to an intelligence briefing without telling anyone on his staff it was happening. He did this for a reason. He wanted to see if the details of the briefing ended up in the press, because if they did, he would know it was the intelligence operatives who leaked it. It had to be. No one else knew about it. And this sort of thing has to stop. For all the heat Trump has taken for doubting the intelligence community on the Russia hacking thing, he is about to become their boss, and they're recklessly breaking both the rules and the law in an attempt to undermine him. Consequently, we're wasting all kinds of time trying to judge the veracity of things that under normal circumstances would never see the light of day, because they're typical of the nonsense that gets passed around by everyone but taken seriously by no one. It's a different kind of presidency, to be sure, but you can't blame Trump for the intelligence community violating every existing standard of professional responsibility and leaking information that - for very good reasons - is never supposed to be leaked. I expect Mike Pompeo to put a stop to this when he becomes CIA director. He'd better. and if he can't, then the spooks who have decided to pick a fight with Trump are going to come out the losers.
Dan's new novel, BACKSTOP, is a story of spiritual warfare and baseball. Download it from Amazon here


View Comments

Dan Calabrese -- Bio and Archives

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.


Sponsored