The CIA Says They Did NOT TELL The WASHINGTON POST That “Russia Hacked Election In Favor Of Trump”!

Share

world-news-daily-report-fake-news

by Pamela Williams
IWB

It looks like we have “fake” news mixed up with “real” news again.  The WASHINGTON POST did a story linking the Russian government to hacking the presidential election to help Donald Trump.  It has been promoted in mainstream media, and now President Obama has launched a full investigation by the United States Intelligence Services.

However, the FBI reported they did not find evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the Russian Government did such a thing.  The POST reported that a secret CIA report had been presented to lawmakers on Capitol Hill allegedly saying there was information linking Russia to the election hackings in favor of President-elect Trump.

Now, the CIA is saying the POST got it wrong…in fact, they allegedly lied.  At this point I think the whole thing is a mess, and I don’t see how the American people can decipher the “real” news from the “fake” news.  As far as the WASHINGTON POST goes, it seems to me they are a voice for the Democrats.  At this point, I think the Democratic Party has breached what should be acceptable in an post-election climate.  President-elect Donald Trump won the election, and America knows that.  WE THE PEOPLE spoke, but the Democratic Party does not want to accept that.  Why?

I think the whole Democratic Party is in violation of the Hatch Act!  They are interfering in the Inauguration phase of the election by violating the rights of the American people to a peaceful and free election and the acceptance of the outcome of an election.  The Clinton campaign has created such chaos for the American people with the email scandal, and now they along with other Democrats are trying to interfere in the Inauguration of President-elect Trump.  Americans are nervous wrecks and absolutely fed up.  Stop with the fighting and stop disputing the word of the American people.  We went, we voted, and HE WON.  Hillary Clinton should understand that. End of my commentary.

The Washington Post, in a front-page splash on Friday, fingered the CIA for allegedly confirming the wild rumors of Russian hacking that were concocted and spread by Democratic lawmakers for months preceding the election and the weeks since the GOP win. The Washington Post’s story, however, contained no CIA sources and in fact, no credible U.S. intelligence agency sources whatsoever. Instead, it hinged on what unnamed lawmakers had supposedly been told by unidentified, supposed CIA-linked sources in “secret” briefings: That the CIA had developed proof the Russian state waged an orchestrated campaign to destabilize the U.S. election to benefit GOP-candidate Trump.

“It’s an outright lie,” a CIA analyst divulged to True Pundit. “There’s nothing definitive like that. There are leads from activity originating in Finland, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Britain, France, China and Russia.”

Multiple CIA sources are now denouncing the Washington Post for knowingly reporting misleading national security intelligence. Intelligence insiders said no one in the Agency or in the FBI, who is running at least one parallel inquiry, has ruled out a possible internal leak within the Democratic National Committee from actor(s) inside the United States who funneled private DNC emails to WikiLeaks.

http://truepundit.com/cia-washington-post-report-linking-russian-government-to-trump-election-hacking-is-outright-lie/

 

Published on Dec 11, 2016
There is a cyber war being waged between:  Did the CIA say Russia hacked election in favor of Trump OR Did they not say that?  There are sites saying the CIA did say it, and there are sites saying they did not.  I trust Truepundit and John Bolton.  However, I want to back this post up with several more links:

1.  http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/white-house-denies-that-russia-hacked-election-for-donald-trump-win/article/2608215  LINK:

White House denies that Russia hacked election for Donald Trump win

http://usapoliticsnow.com/nsa-whistleblower-says-dnc-hack-not-done-russia-u-s-intelligence/  LINK:

NSA Whistleblower Says DNC Hack Was Not Done By Russia, But By U.S. Intelligence!

 

Former NSA staffer and famous whistleblower, William Binney, says the DNC hack was not done by Russia but by US Intelligence. Mainstream Media has not widely reported this. Binney has a stellar background and is considered to be a rock solid security analyst. He was the initial whistleblower, followed by Edward Snowden, and presently Julian Assange.

When Binney came out in 2012, he was not taken seriously until Edward Snowden came forward. Back in 2012 the American public was not ready to accept that their own government could betray them so badly. Now Binney’s word is considered to be flawless in its authenticity.

Binney was an originator of the NSA’s surveillance program. He became a whistleblower,resigning in October, 2001, after spending more than 30 years with the agency. He gave his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2011. He is definitely considered to be legitimate by the US Government.

In Clinton’s disregard for classified documents she risked lives of US Intelligence agents, and some of them were killed. Clinton had to know this might happen. Can you imagine having a President of the United States who would do something like that?.  

US government whistleblower William Binney threw his hat into the DNC hack ring by stating that the Democratic National Committee’s server was not hacked by Russia but by a disgruntled U.S. intelligence worker.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhYoxHuJ3cU

FROM VIDEO:  On the eve of the Democratic National Convention, WikiLeaks — the courageous international organization dedicated to governmental transparency — exposed hundreds of internal emails circulated among senior staff of the Democratic National Committee during the past 18 months.

At a time when Democratic Party officials were publicly professing neutrality during the party’s presidential primaries, the DNC’s internal emails showed a pattern of distinct bias toward the candidacy of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and a marked prejudice toward the candidacy of Sen. Bernie Sanders. Some of the emails were raw in their tone, and some could fairly be characterized as failing to respect Sanders’ Jewish heritage.

The revelation caused a public uproar during the weekend preceding the opening of the Democratic convention in Philadelphia last week, and it caused the DNC to ask its own chairwoman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, to resign. When she declined to do so, President Barack Obama personally intervened and implored her to leave.

She submitted to the president’s wishes, gave up her public role as chair of the convention and eventually resigned as chair of the DNC late last week.

In order to take everyone’s eyes off this intrusive and uncomfortable bouncing ball, the leadership of the DNC, in conjunction with officials of the Clinton campaign, blamed the release of the DNC emails on hackers employed by Russian intelligence agents. Many in the media picked up this juicy story and repeated it all last week.

Clinton promptly named Wasserman Schultz as a campaign consultant and complained that the Russians are trying to influence the presidential election. She did not complain about the unfairness manifested in the emails, complete with their religious prejudice; she only complained about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s helping Donald Trump.

But the Russians had nothing to do with it.

Last week, William Binney, a 30-year career official at the National Security Agency turned whistleblower, revealed the unthinkable. Binney, who devised the software that the NSA has used to capture the contents of emails and cellphone conversations of all in America but resigned from the NSA because of the unlawful and unconstitutional manner in which the software was used, told a Philadelphia radio audience that the DNC hacking was most likely done by NSA agents.

Why would the NSA hack into DNC computers, and why would the NSA leak what its agents saw?

Here is where the deep state meets the political world. The deep state consists of intelligence, military, law enforcement and administrative agency personnel who aggressively protect their own interests, which transcend elections. Stated differently, many of these folks remain in opaque positions of power, and the governmental departments and agencies for which they work continue to expand, no matter which party wins the White House or controls Congress.

The deep state stays in power by a variety of means, some of which are lawful and not the least of which was visited upon the DNC last week. Binney knows the inside workings of NSA computers because he designed them. He knows how easy it would have been for any of the NSA’s 60,000 agents, many of whom have great antipathy toward Clinton, to employ their skills to frustrate her drive toward the presidency.

The intelligence community’s antipathy toward Clinton has two general sources. One is her misuse of emails containing state secrets. Among the top-secret emails that the FBI discovered on Clinton’s non-secure private servers were some that revealed the names of U.S. intelligence agents operating undercover in the Middle East.

Because Clinton emailed secrets to others who the FBI found were hacked by hostile foreign intelligence services and because she used a non-secure mobile email device while inside the territories of hostile governments, her “extremely careless” use of her emails resulted in the termination of the undercover work of those whose cover she caused to be revealed.

Many in the intelligence community also suspect that in some cases, U.S. undercover agents lost their lives because Clinton failed to keep their identities secret.

The other source of intelligence community antipathy to Clinton stems from her secret war waged against the late Libyan strongman, Col. Moammar Gadhafi. When she waged that war — using intelligence, not military, personnel — with the approval of the president and a dozen members of Congress, she exercised her authority as secretary of state to grant exemptions to a U.N. arms embargo of Libya. She wanted Libyan militias to have heavy-duty, military-grade arms with which to topple the Libyan government

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.