For the last several months, the narrative on Russia hacking the election has been slowly exposed as a massive farce. However, this week, that slow crawl toward death turned into a full on sprint as CNN, not once, but twice admitted that they've been pushing fake Russian news with no proof — for ratings. Now, joining in the magnificent fall from the fake news pedestal, the New York Times quietly admitted their 'bombshell' backbone to the entire Russian narrative was simply not true.
"Seventeen intelligence agencies" — if you've come across any of the Russian hysteria over the bogus hacking claims over the past 8 months, you've likely heard that little snippet repeated ad nauseam. It was the lynchpin to the case against Russia which was all started by Hillary Clinton back in back in October.
While most free thinking individuals saw it for the ridiculous assertion that it was, the mainstream media picked it up and parrotted it out over and over again to push their fake narrative.
As WikiLeaks comically pointed out last October, these intelligence agencies include domestic groups like the Coast Guard, DEA, and the Department of Energy — none of whom ever threw their hat into the 'we support the fake Russian narrative' ring.
As Caitlin Johnstone eloquently points out in a post on Medium, despite the sheer insanity of these claims, many high-profile pro-establishment outlets like Politifact and USA Todayfound Clinton’s claims to be 100 percent true on the grounds that James Clapper, then-Director of National Intelligence and notorious Russophobic racist, “speaks on behalf of” all 17 intelligence agencies. To this day Politifact stands by its false claim on the basis of that same spurious assertion.
WikiLeaks went further last month and pointed out that the "17 intelligence agencies" fake talking point had been used thousands of times in multiple different publications — all as 'proof' Russia hacked the election. However, that real number was only three. And, even those three were made up of a loose cherry-picked handful of individuals.
In spite of this massive web of lies that 17 intelligence agencies all came to the same conclusion over Russian hacking being exposed as a massive farce, the media pressed on. Even Hillary Clinton herself took to her pulpit at the 2017 code conference last month to shove it in our faces once more:
“Seventeen agencies, all in agreement, which I know from my experience as a Senator and Secretary of State, is hard to get. They concluded with high confidence that the Russians ran an extensive information war campaign against my campaign, to influence voters in the election. They did it through paid advertising we think; they did it through false news sites; they did it through these thousand agents; they did it through machine learning, which you know, kept spewing out this stuff over and over again. The algorithms that they developed. So that was the conclusion.”
Recommended for You
After the glorious admission by CNN that their coverage of Russia is mostly "bullshit," the NY Times apparently felt the heat and didn't want to face the same embarrassing fate. So, yesterday afternoon, on a four-day-old article, all the way at the bottom, in a single paragraph, the NY Times quietly admitted that it's all a scam.
Correction: June 29, 2017
A White House Memo article on Monday about President Trump’s deflections and denials about Russia referred incorrectly to the source of an intelligence assessment that said Russia orchestrated hacking attacks during last year’s presidential election. The assessment was made by four intelligence agencies — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency. The assessment was not approved by all 17 organizations in the American intelligence community.
As the Free Thought Project has continuously reported, there has yet to be a single shred of concrete evidence proving interference in the 2016 election by Russia. In spite of the mainstream media putting out stories of anonymous sources confirming Russian hacking, other than documents claiming it happened, the public has seen nothing.
This complete lack of evidence was backed up earlier this month during fired FBI Director James Comey's Senate testimony, during which he admitted he's never seen any evidence of Russian interference in the election.
It's a lie and a dangerous one at that.
Aside from the mountain of admissions, exposed falsehoods, and half-truths swarming the steaming pile of horse manure that is 'Russiagate', even the president has proven he's no fan of Russia. If Donald Trump was somehow put into power by Russia, why on Earth is he trying to start World War 3 with them by attacking the Assad regime in Syria? Also, why is the Pentagon, under his direction, forging a budget of $700 billion to amass troops and weapons in Eastern Europe to deal with the non-existent Russian threat?
The short answer to those questions is that Donald Trump benefits from this hysteria. It makes him look like the victim of a witch hunt while he gets to continue the foreign policy of his predecessors, Barack Obama and George Bush. As Vladimir Putin previously pointed out, Trump is merely a puppet and it matters not which puppet is in power — the machine marches on.
The establishment deals in a very addictive drug called distraction — and American citizens are junkies for it. While the divide and conquer tactics keep the citizens fighting over superficial and irrelevant issues, the status quo marches on, laying waste to everything it touches — including entire countries and their citizens, men, women, and children.