WASHINGTON, December 12, 2016 — The FBI, which has been a part of the intelligence community since the 9/11 attacks toppled the Watergate-era wall separating them from the CIA, was “a voracious surveillance machine that hounded innocent people and tried to destroy their reputations,” said the New York Times.
In addition, the Obama administration’s reasoning for launching the NSA’s Prism program authorizing the mass surveillance of American citizens, said the Times, represented “wordplay, fear-mongering and a highly selective reading of the law [the Patriot Act]. Americans deserve better from the White House – and from President Obama, who has seemingly forgotten the constitutional law he once taught.”
Worse still, the CIA’s water-boarding interrogators at Cuba’s Guantanamo Bay prison camp gave homesick and delicate jihadist warriors “persistent mental health problems,” with some emerging from their savage captivity “with the same symptoms as American prisoners of war who were brutalized decades earlier by some of the world’s cruelest regimes,” the Times lectured.
Then, against all odds – and after decades printing Hillary Clinton puff pieces and months relentlessly attacking Donald J. Trump – the GOP presidential candidate wins an upset victory in what is a humiliating defeat for the Gray Lady and her overpaid pollsters – not to mention Mrs. Clinton.
Suddenly, the Times has seen the light. Now they, and the Washington Post, trust an unnamed intelligence source or sources claiming — with “high confidence” no less — that the Russians plotted “to undermine American faith in the electoral system” and “hurt Mrs. Clinton’s chances” to win the presidency.
President-Elect Donald J. Trump told Fox News, “I think the Democrats are putting it [Russian election tampering] out [there] because they suffered one of the greatest defeats in the history of politics in this country… it’s ridiculous.”
We should remember that the intelligence “community,” like the mindless, paper-shuffling thralls in the departments of agriculture and education “communities,” consists of protected government bureaucrats with a pronounced tendency to support those politicians that favor large, freedom-threatening and intrusive government.
In 2002, the administration of George W. Bush asked the CIA to investigate whether Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was attempting to purchase yellowcake uranium from Niger in Africa.
It later came out that CIA seat-warmer Valerie Plame recommended to her superiors that her husband Joseph Wilson – a Democratic political hack, whose previous diplomatic experience at the U.S. embassy in Niger was “keeping the power on and the cars running,” according to the Washington Post – was just the man to find the truth.
Bush’s query was actually of the utmost importance in light of the fact that after the first Gulf War concluded, weapons inspectors discovered Saddam Hussein’s government had embarked on a secret nuclear weapons program and was in the process of producing weapons-grade uranium.
The inspectors had also recovered records showing the Iraqi regime had purchased yellowcake uranium from Niger in 1981. Today, their uranium-enriching calutrons sit in the Iraqi desert where U.S. spy satellites can easily observe their damaged and rusting hulks.
Getting back to Plame, when conservative columnist Robert Novak revealed that the CIA sanctioned an un-serious, taxpayer-funded junket to Africa for the husband of one of its glorified analysts, some wondered how seriously the CIA took its commitment to defend the nation just one short year after the devastating attacks of 9/11.
But the mainstream media didn’t quite see it that way.
An editorial appearing in the Los Angeles Times said Novak “destroyed an agent’s effectiveness and risked the lives of all those with whom she worked.” Sen. Harry Reid, then the Democratic Senate Minority leader, told reporters the leak to Novak, “Rises above politics and is about our national security.” Liberal columnist Clarence Page began hyperventilating, claiming the leak of Plame’s “identity by a government official could violate federal law, besides jeopardizing her job and life.”
CIA nepotism and a bungled investigation into Saddam Hussein’s attempt at purchasing nuclear materials were lost in the media’s hamfisted attempt to portray a useless federal bureaucrat as a swashbuckling female 007.
Yet the same media that fabricated the Wilson-Plame fable now claims an unnamed source confirmed Russian intelligence hacked into Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign computers to “hurt Mrs. Clinton’s chances.”
Notice, however, that the media has not refuted what the aforementioned hacks revealed: namely, that Democratic National Committee officials rigged their party’s primary process against Bernie Sanders and in favor of his rival Hillary Clinton; or that purloined and leaked internal campaign communications confirm that the mass deletion of classified emails on Mrs. Clinton’s illegal home server began in earnest shortly after an East European hacker named “Guccifer” revealed the server’s existence.
Meanwhile, the press shows no hint of embarrassment that its so-called “investigative reporters” were scooped by a hacker’s clearinghouse called WikiLeaks.
Instead, we are now supposed to believe an unsubstantiated charge, by an unnamed source, that Russian skullduggery swayed the presidential election of 2016.
Just in passing:
On April 13, 2015, Valery Plame and husband Joe co-authored an op-ed appearing in USA Today, informing readers,
“We have known Hillary Clinton both professionally and personally for close to 20 years… As Secretary of State, Hillary’s tireless diplomacy helped repair our nation’s international reputation after the damage caused by the disastrous policies of the Bush administration. But she did far more than help restore American prestige. Among her many achievements was forging the coalition (for the U.S.-Iran nuclear deal), which included both Russia and China.”
The op-ed failed to help “Mrs. Clinton’s chances.”
President Donald Trump will likely clean house at a politicized CIA, while simultaneously stifling Russian client state Iran’s nuclear ambitions as George W. Bush once did for Russian client Saddam Hussein.