The Shaky Case That Russia Manipulated Social Media to Tip the 2016 Election

It has been 14 months since Patrick Lawrence, citing VIPS findings based on independent forensic investigation, put the lie to what all NY Times readers already “knew” — namely, that Russia hacked into the DNC.
Now Gareth Porter exposes NYT malpractice on Russia’s “social media threat.”

The word on the street is that Robert Mueller is about to indict 12 known Russian arsonists for the forest fires in the West; and 12 known Russian oceanographers for stirring up hurricanes in the East.  In the current political climate, Mueller has found such an approach actually easier than indicting the proverbial ham sandwich. Since, unlike the ham sandwich, the indicted Russians are not expected to appear, there will be no “discovery” and thus no exposure of the legerdemain.

Morever, Mueller, it is said, has “handpicked” the same “handpicked” intelligence analysts, who wrote the evidence-free January 6, 2017 “Intelligence Community Assessment,” indicting Russia and Putin personally for election meddling.  This time, these crackerjack analysts have reportedly been enlisted to “assess” how to connect the fire and storm disasters to Russian “meddling” in the 2016 election avec Trump campaign collusion.  “Handpicked” once again to come up the desired result, they can be expected to deliver — just as surely as the NYT’s Shane and Mazzetti can be depended up to regurgitate their drivel.
The above “word on the street” is imagined but, sadly, not far off the mark, given the penchant on the part of so many to believe , still, what is in the NY Times.  Gullibility is not limited to Americans, of course.  Here’s an observation from Leo Tolstoy:
The most complicated issue can be explained to the most slow-witted man IF he has not formed any idea of the issue already.  But the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man, if he is firmly persuaded that he already knows, without a shadow of a doubt, what has already been laid before him.
THIS is a key part of the challenge before us.

A Must-Read on Mueller

Lee Smith provides a must-read for those who have been let to believe in Robert Mueller’s sainthood and who continue to pray that he will finally bring home the bacon. See:
VIPS’ resident attorney, former FBI Division Counsel Coleen Rowley, who worked under Mueller, confirms much of what Smith writes.  Rowley notes that Mueller’s overzealousness and/or incompetence in fingering the wrong man — Steven Hatfill — to blame for the Anthrax attacks is just the tip of the iceberg.  “It’s been Peter Principle on steroids for some time,” says Coleen, “and Mueller is the cover-up expert.”

Ray Interviewed by Rob Kall: PART 2
September 7 (56 minutes)

Among the issues discussed:

— Rob asks about CIA, as an institution, missing the fall of the Soviet Union: It was the result of ideological blinders, rank ambition, and naked careerism. (No one was held responsible, so the same malleable managers concocted fraudulent “intelligence” for war on Iraq.)

— Coup in Kiev (“most blatant coup in history,” advertised on YouTube two and a half weeks before); predictable reaction by Moscow catalyzes plummet in Russia-U.S. relations.

— How Putin handled Crimea, contrasted with the “ukaz”-approach of Khrushchev 60 years earlier.

— Donald Trump clearly not his own man. Best evidence of that is letting John Bolton (one of the well known Washington “crazies”) be foisted opon him; we are talking about the criminally insane.

The President’s Daily Brief: how it was with Reagan, compared with Nixon and Ford.  And how even that (formerly sacrosanctity honest) briefing came to be corrupted — especially under George Tenet and Mikey Morell.

— After the fraudulent intelligence “justifying” war on Iraq, honest leaders and analysts played a huge role in preventing an even more disastrous war with Iran.  Camelot for intelligence analysis.

— Freudian slip: Ray says CIA instead of NY Times; recovers and refers (correctly) to the NYT as a “CIA Annex.”  Did the NYT help GW Bush win a second term in 2004 by hiding — for 15 months — what James Risen had unearthed months before the election about gross violations of the 4th Amendment order by Bush and Cheney?  Jill Abramson having the temerity to actually brag about what the Times did reflects the conviction that the American people should leave it to the hoi aristoi of the NYT to decide what to tell them — what should be withheld and what may be “fit to print.”

— “You are a ‘conspiracy theorist’” = the perfect squelch. Used effectively by Allen Dulles, for example, to marginalize those objecting to having him (one of the prime suspects of involvement in the assassination of John Kennedy) pretty much run the Warren Commission.

— CIA “Vault 7” cyber-tools revealed in March 2017 via a leak from a CIA whistleblower. One tool, Marble Framework can — inadvertently or ‘advertently’ — leave behind Cyrillic writing to “obfuscate” who hacked into a computer or server.  This tool was used in 2016.  Might this have anything to do with hacking blamed on Russia?

Reluctant to connect any such dots, the NYT has avoided Marble Framework like the plague. Fortunately, Ellen Nakashima of the Washington Post did not “get the memo” in time. Those interested can dig out her write-up of Marble Framework at:

WikiLeaks described the Vault 7 disclosures as “the largest ever publication of confidential documents on the agency.”  Retaliation was swift in coming. Less than two weeks after the Marble Framework disclosure, Trump administration heavyweight, then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo, labeled Assange “and his ilk …  demons” running “a non-state hostile intelligence service.” Giving hypocrisy a bad name, Pompeo added that Assange is “a coward hiding behind a screen.”

Pompeo’s speech was, pure and simple, meretricious demagoguery, even allowing for the fact that Pompeo may sincerely believe in demons. No recent invective quite as bad comes immediately to mind.  In Pompeo we have corporeal proof that you can get all “A’s” at West Point and still flunk life — not to mention Duty, Honor, Country and the U.S. Constitution.

It took Pompeo a year, but he has been able to persuade the Ecuadorian government to hold Assange in virtual solitary confinement in its embassy in London, where he has been held incommunicado since late March 2018.  The odds are probably no better than even that Assange would rather be in Kansas, if Pompeo represents the kind of folks Kansans celebrate.