The Big Media “progressives” failed, despite months of never-ending, vicious attacks, to stop Donald Trump on Election Day, November 8. So they doubled down in a desperate attempt to stop him on Electoral College Voting Day, December 19. Days before the Electoral College was due to perform its constitutional duty of formally electing the next president of the United States, the New York Times, Washington Post, Huffington Post, CNN, MSNBC, and the rest of the pro-Clinton/anti-Trump establishment media choir ramped up a campaign to delegitimize President-elect Donald Trump. Headlines and stories were rife with sensational claims that an unprecedented defection campaign could see as many as 37 electors switching from Trump to Clinton. Featuring largely in this effort were unsubstantiated claims that U.S. intelligence experts were in agreement that Russian interference in the election tilted the result in Trump's favor.
But this turns out to be simply more hopeless wishing by an adamantly anti-Trump camp that refuses to accept the results of the election. The electors on December 19 weren't buying it any more than the voters did on November 8, and they refused to cave in, despite incredible intimidation, threats, and bribes. In fact, the Dump Trump effort appears to have backfired, with twice as many electors defecting from Clinton (4) as defected from Trump (2). And that does not include another 4 electors who attempted to defect from voting for Clinton, but were prevented from doing so by state law.
Is there a “consensus in the intelligence community” that Russian cyberattacks on our presidential election were aimed at stopping Hillary Clinton and helping elect Donald Trump? Have we, the American people, or our elected representatives, been presented with any proof of Russia’s alleged hacking, or even any evidence that there is “consensus in the intelligence community” that this occurred? Not yet. And even if it were true that: a) Russia hacked the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the Republican National Committee (RNC); and b) there is a “consensus in the intelligence community” that Russia (Vladimir Putin) wanted to help Trump, where’s the evidence that anything the Russians allegedly did actually accomplished that? Where’s the evidence to justify the unprecedented, incredible efforts to overturn the election? So far, the hyperventilating usual suspects in the Democratic Party and their media allies have provided none.
Representative Peter King (R-N.Y.) has blasted the anonymous CIA “leaks” trumpeted in the media as fabrications that look more like a coup attempt than any legitimate intelligence concern. King is chairman of the Homeland Security Committee’s Sub-Committee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. He also serves on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. In several interviews, he has vigorously chastised the media for promoting the fake news that our intelligence agencies agree that Putin’s minions hacked our elections to help Trump. He pointed out that the congressional committees on which he serves have the legal authority and responsibility for oversight of the CIA and other intelligence agencies, and those agencies are required to report to the congressional committees. However, they have provided no evidence and have made no charges to substantiate the media stories. In fact, they refused requests by the House Intelligence Committee for a briefing on the Russian hacking, while at the same time leaking supposed intelligence on the same matters to pro-Clinton media organizations.
Appearing on Fox News’ The Kelly File on December 14, Representative King denounced what is obvious political use of “disinformation” by "factions within the Intelligence Community” as “absolutely disgraceful” and illegal. "All we’ve heard from the intelligence community over the last several months is that they could not say that there was any attempt to undermine Hillary Clinton [or] to help Donald Trump," King told Fox News' Megyn Kelly. "The consensus was that there was an attempt by the Russians to put a cloud over the election, to create disunity. Well, that’s what’s happening right now, but it’s the intelligence community that’s doing it."
King appeared on the program shortly after the Intelligence Committee was forced to abruptly cancel a CIA briefing scheduled for the following day because the CIA had refused to provide a briefer. In other words, CIA Director John Brennan (an Obama appointee) doesn’t have the time for, or is unwilling to cooperate with, the constitutionally appropriate authorities, but does have time to have his staff provide anonymous, unsourced material to the New York Times and Washington Post as grist for anti-Trump stories.
"Somebody has the time to leak it to the Washington Post and the New York Times, but they don’t have the time to come to Congress," said King, a member of the committee. "It’s their job to come. They don’t have any choice. They have to come in, especially when they have created this."
According to King, Congress has not received any assessment from the CIA that Russia interfered to help Trump win the presidency over Hillary Clinton, despite media reports to the contrary. "There was nothing at all, ever told to us, in fact they said they couldn’t prove it, that there was an attempt to favor one candidate over the other. [James] Clapper, the director of national intelligence, said that publicly on November 17," King told Kelly. "This violates all protocols and it’s almost as if people in the intelligence community are carrying out a disinformation campaign against the president-elect of the United States," he added.
The refusal of the CIA’s John Brennan and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper (another Obama appointee) to cooperate with congressional committees, while engaging in purely political disinformation is cause for great alarm. Clapper, it should be noted, has been exposed repeatedly as a serial liar, who could be (and should be) prosecuted for brazenly lying in sworn testimony before Congress.
Is there reason to believe that Clapper would violate the law, deceive, and play politics with intelligence? Obviously; he already has proven that. The December 16 congressional intelligence briefing that the agencies stiffed, had been scheduled by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-Calif.), who sent a letter to Clapper on December 12 outlining the committee’s concerns on the issue. Copies of the letter were also sent to Brennan, FBI Director James Comey, and Defense Intelligence Agency Director Vincent Stewart.
“Media articles published over the last several days have highlighted supposed analytic disagreements within the Intelligence Community (IC) over alleged Russian cyber activities relating to the recent U.S. Presidential election,” Chairman Nunes wrote. “Such articles have stated, among other claims, that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) have developed conflicting intelligence assessments and delivered to Congress ‘divergent messages’ regarding the Russian government’s alleged cyber attacks connected to the election. The claims in these articles also appear to conflict with recent IC statements to the public and to this Committee characterizing alleged Russian activities.”
The letter of Chairman Nunes continued:
Over the past several months, the Committee has received multiple briefings and assessments from the IC on the alleged Russian activities and cyber threats. On November 17, 2016, you told the Committee during an open hearing that the IC lacked strong evidence connecting Russian government cyber-attacks and WikiLeaks disclosures, testifying that “as far as the WikiLeaks connection, the evidence there is not as strong, and we don’t have good insight into the sequencing of the releases or when the data may have been provided.” According to new press reports, this is no longer the CIA's position.
In light of the Committee's robust oversight efforts on these issues, I was dismayed that we did not learn earlier, from you directly, about the reported conflicting assessments and the CIA's reported revision of information previously conveyed to this Committee. The Committee therefore has an urgent need to accurately understand the current IC assessment of alleged Russian cyber activities relating to the election, and any disagreements among IC components.
In addition to other concerns, Chairman Nunes wrote that he is “deeply concerned that these press reports may contain unauthorized disclosures of both classified IC information and the contents of closed intelligence committee proceedings.”
Nevertheless, Clapper, Brennan, Comey, and Stewart pointedly ignored the congressional summons, which they are obliged to accept, and (one or more of them) engaged instead in a political disinformation campaign through the media. The campaign was coordinated, apparently, to boost the “faithless electors” campaign, a leading exponent of which was Christine Pelosi, daughter of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Christine received generous, friendly face time from all the MSM media to promote the DNC-directed effort to derail the Trump presidency — far more coverage than that given to Chairman King, Chairman Nunes, and other experts familiar with the actual intelligence available thus far.
"It is unacceptable that the Intelligence Community directors would not fulfill the House Intelligence Committee’s request to be briefed tomorrow on the cyber-attacks that occurred during the presidential campaign," Nunes said on December 15. "The Committee is deeply concerned that intransigence in sharing intelligence with Congress can enable the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes."
Manipulation of intelligence for political purposes is precisely what is happening. The controlled media echo chamber is attempting to create a popular false perception that our “Intelligence Community” has unanimously and unambiguously “proven” that Donald Trump was elected president of the United States due to interference by Russian intelligence.
Hence, we have network television commentators such as ABC’s Joy Behar of The View making the absurd demand that Trump “step down” as president-elect, because these supposed revelations prove he is unacceptable. Former actress Whoopi Goldberg, another of The View's five vociferous members of the Hillary choir, chimed in with the claim, “It’s 17 agencies saying it’s an issue. It’s not one or two, it’s 17 of them.” This “17 intelligence agencies” myth, which the Clinton campaign has been circulating for months, with the aid of friendly media, has now become unquestioned dogma for many “progressives,” as well as for many otherwise unsuspecting, uninformed “news” consumers. However, as we have reported above, there is no "intelligence consensus,” let alone any 17-agency unanimity to support the media narrative that Russian hacking helped Trump and hurt Clinton. It’s pure fabrication, i.e., Fake News. The real story is that these desperate Fake News stories from the thoroughly discredited “mainstream” media present a far greater threat of subversion and disruption of our constitutional process of governance than any alleged Russian interference.
However, even though Hillary Clinton lost on Novermber 8 and lost again on December 19, the Never Trump diehards refuse to concede defeat. They continue with their demonstrations and media attacks, and some are vowing to escalate their street protests for Inauguration Day, January 20, and make the country "ungovernable." That sounds like plans for more violence, riots, and insurrection. Undoubtedly, the anti-Trump globalist media choir will continue to give a sympathetic ear (and voice) to their seditious efforts — and provide us with a continuous stream of fake news to justify it.