Chronology: The ’Blame Russia’ Operation
for Election Interference Is a British Fraud
Dec. 12, 2016 (EIRNS)—The current hysteria to blame Russia for hacking and interfering in U.S. elections is no civic vigilence, but a classic British fraud operation, for the Queen to protect her Obama and avert the dumping of his failed London/Wall Street policies. It should be seen in the widest international context, of the collapse of the U.S. economic and political system, as well as the potential break-away from this collapse by populations around the world, from the Philippines, to Italy, to Bulgaria, to Moldova, to the U.S., to the Brexit voters, and more.
The chronology below shows the beginnings of the fraud, with the July 2016 Clinton campaign charges against Russia, made after leaks showed that the Democratic National Committee was secretly acting in Hillary’s favor against Bernie Sanders, her principal Democratic opponent. Next, the Obama Administration itself jumped in to make accusations against Russia, as voters started lining up against Clinton. Then, after the electorate went for Trump, Obama formally called for an investigation of Russian involvement. Now there are calls for delaying the Electoral College vote altogether, and even for a re-election, plus denunciations of Russian President Vladimir Putin for hijacking the election.
JUNE. The Democratic National Committee said that two hacker groups had invaded its IT systems. The assertion was then later made by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Obama Administration that the hacking, and subsequent release of emails, was "consistent with" Russian tactics, while not denying the illegal activity that had been exposed by the release.
Julian Assange, head of Wikileaks.
JULY. Before the Democratic Party Convention began, WikiLeaks posted some 20,000 emails from the DNC showing it was favoring Hillary Clinton, and prejudiced against her primary opponent Bernie Sanders, a breach of their own rules of impartiality. The DNC Chairman, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was forced to resign just before the convention due to the exposure. Julian Assange, head of Wikileaks, denied that Wiki had hacked the emails, but said that they came from a leaker.
OCT. 7. The Obama Administration formally accused Russia of conducting cyber attacks aimed at the elections. A statement was issued by James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, and Jeh Johnson, Department of Homeland Security, saying that, "We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities." Such "belief," and never evidence or proof, has remained the basis of all charges. The activities referred to were hacking attempts against state election systems. Clapper and Johnson, while not blaming the Russian government specifically, asserted that the patterns of "scanning and probing" could be traced in many cases to servers operated by a Russian company.
A careful review of the Clapper-Johnson statement, however, made clear that there was no unanimous consensus among the U.S. intelligence agencies that there was adequate proof to accuse the Russians of being behind the alleged hacking. In fact, by October, according to a Dec. 12, 2016, Washington Post account, quoting FBI officials, the Bureau had greatly scaled back its five-month long probe of Russian interference and ties to the Trump campaign, due to lack of sufficient evidence.
OCT. 8. The Russian Foreign Ministry responded that the hacking accusations lacked any proof, and were intended for the purpose of inciting, "unprecedented anti-Russian hysteria." Dep. Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, on the Ministry website, denounced the U.S. statements as "dirty tricks."
NOVEMBER. During October through Nov. 6, Wikileaks released several batches from a trove of over 50,000 emails, from the private email account of Clinton’s campaign manager, John Podesta. Again, Wikileaks spokesmen stated that they did not receive the documents from hackers, but obtained them from whistleblowers inside the United States.
DEC. 9. The Washington Post and New York Times reported that the CIA knew that Russia was behind hacking during the elections. Naming no sources, nor facts, the Post wrote, "The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency...according to officials briefed on the matter."
The London Guardian reports the same line full-blast. However, the Guardian itself quoted an expert debunking this. ZeroHedge reproduced a Guardian article which has since disappeared from Guardian homepage, featuring a British diplomat (friend of Assange) who has met and knows the leaker of the DNC emails. Those who know the leaker know, says the diplomat, that the emails were leaked, not hacked, and the leaker is not Russian but American.
From the Guardian piece: "Assange has previously said the DNC leaks were not linked to Russia. A second senior official cited by the Washington Post conceded that intelligence agencies did not have specific proof that the Kremlin was directing the hackers, who were said to be one step removed from the Russian government.
"Craig Murray, the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, who is a close associate of Assange, called the CIA claims ’bullshit,’ adding: ‘They are absolutely making it up.
"‘I know who leaked them,’ Murray said. ’I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian, and it’s an insider. Its a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.
"‘If what the CIA are saying is true, and the CIA’s statement refers to people who are known to be linked to the Russian state, they would have arrested someone if it was someone inside the United States.
"‘America has not been shy about arresting whistleblowers and it’s not been shy about extraditing hackers. They plainly have no knowledge whatsoever,’ said Murray."
DEC. 9. Obama ordered a review of Russia’s involvement in hacking to rig elections, going back to 2008.
DEC. 9. Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader, issued a statement, saying, "Any Administration should be deeply troubled by Russia’s attempt to tamper with our elections."
DEC. 9. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), to CNN, "I’m going after Russia in every way we can go after Russia....they’re one of the most destabilizing influences on the world stage. I think they did interfere with our election, and I want Putin to personally pay a price."
DEC. 10. Sen. Lindsey Graham issued a stream of tweets that Russia "is trying to break the backs of democracies—and democratic movements—all over the world." He wrote, "Don’t have to be Sherlock Holmes to figure out what Russia is up to—they’re trying to undermine democracies all over the world."
DEC. 10. Reporter Glenn Greenwald, on Intercept: "There is still no evidence for any of these [CIA] claims. What we have instead are assertions, disseminated by anonymous people, completely unaccompanied by any evidence, let alone proof.... Anonymous claims leaked to the newspapers about what the CIA believes do not constitute proof, and certainly do not constitute reliable evidence that substitutes for actual evidence that can be received. Have we not learned this lesson yet?"
DEC. 11. Four Senators issued a joint statement calling for an investigation of Russia’s involvement in election interference. Democrats Charles Schumer (NY) and Jack Reed (RI); and Republicans John McCain (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC).
DEC. 12. Ten electors in the Electoral College (from six states and the District of Columbia) released an open letter to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, asking for confirmation of whether Russia interfered in the 2016 elections, as a condition for the electors to formally cast ballots in the Electoral College when it meets Dec. 19 in respective states. This initiative is endorsed by the Hillary Clinton campaign. The electors’ letter says they, "require to know from the intelligence community whether there are ongoing investigations into ties between Donald Trump, his campaign or associates, and Russian government interference in the election, the scope of those investigations, how far those investigations may have reached, and who was involved in those investigations." A leader of this ploy is Christine Pelosi, daughter of Nancy Pelosi.
DEC. 12. John Podesta, on behalf of defeated and conceded candidate Hillary Clinton’s "campaign," of which he was manager, requested that the CIA or "intelligence community" give a briefing to the Electors at the Electoral College meeting, before they cast their votes. Clearly aimed to have an official executive agency intervene to tamper with the Electors’ votes.
"In his statement released on Monday [Dec. 12], Podesta said ‘The bipartisan electors’ letter raises very grave issues involving our national security,’ and added that electors have a solemn responsibility under the Constitution and we support their efforts to have their questions addressed....’
"The statement describes how ‘we’ continually protested that the Russians were doing it, indicating Podesta is speaking here for Clinton’s campaign. ‘We now know that the CIA has determined Russia’s interference in our elections was for the purpose of electing Donald Trump. This should distress every American.’"
The "bipartisan electors" refers to the 10 led by Nancy Pelosi’s daughter.
If done, this would be the most serious such executive interference in elections since Andrew Johnson requested that the Army help him convene a Congressional session including southern slaveowner "Congressmen" whose entry Congress had rejected.