The DNI report was more about slamming RT (Russia Today) propaganda than it was about proving the Russians hacked. The report doesn’t put much emphasis on Russians hacking elections, it focuses on Russians “influencing” them. What they ignore is the US media propaganda influencing elections.
As you read this, keep in mind that no intelligence report refutes the content of the email leaks. Also note that since the first leak, our media has sought to cover up, ignore, and denigrate the findings.
In these emails, you will find the American media operates as an arm of the Democrat Party. Wikileaks’ releases prove America’s trusted institutions and the media are lackeys of the left.
Nearly 400 Newsmakers Received 80 Sets of Clinton Talking Points
Email #5636 from donor-advisor Mary Pat Bonner to John Podesta shows the Hillary Clinton campaign worked with at least 372 news makers to shape an anti-Trump narrative across all mainstream media.
Bonner is the link between Team Clinton and CTR.
The pro-Hillary SuperPAC, Correct the Record (CTR) “has identified 372 surrogates including influential and frequent pundits on broadcast and cable news for Presidential 2016 politics and provided them around 80 sets of talking points.”
CTR Controlled the Media
CTR’s website explains their goal is to amplify Clinton’s “accomplishments”, smear Trump, and peddle phony narratives. One of those talking points was and is, “Russia is interfering in our elections to help Trump.”
Consider all of this as you look at the documentation showing hundreds of media members using pro-Hillary talking points obtained from CTR. Those documents can be accessed here.
Some of the findings:
- The collusion included media relations. There were 900 interviews to counter-punch Republicans and kill negative stories before publication. Team Clinton provided the nearly 400 media surrogates with 80 sets of talking points.
- CTR hosted 24 media training sessions across the country for 200 surrogates.
- Correct The Record also distributed media advisories to 960 members of the national media and 10,756 regional reporters in 28 states. Talking points and memos are also distributed regularly to 369 televisions producers and bookers.
Media Told Americans Not to Read Wikileaks Emails
The media desperately attempted to keep Americans from reading the emails by claiming it was illegal to read them, if not immoral.
Sound advice on @wikileaks, from the #FakeNews. I’d be interested to hear Chris Cuomo’s legal theory that he can see this info but we can’t. pic.twitter.com/VHEyjf8jC3
— Rep. Steven Smith (@RepStevenSmith) December 8, 2016
Ten Most Damning Emails of US Media
The free thought project listed 10 of the most damning emails proving the media is controlled and scripted:
- Clinton Staff hosts private “off-the-record cocktail party” with 38 “influential” reporters, journalists, editors, and anchors (from CNN, NBC, CBS, NYT, MSNBC, et al). The stated goal is “framing the race.”
- Donna Brazile (CNN analyst at the time) leaks CNN town hall questions to Hillary Clinton’s staff prior to the debate.
- Clinton campaign and the New York Times coordinating attack strategy against Trump.
- Glen Thrush, POLITICO’s chief political correspondent and senior staff writer for POLITICO Magazine, sends John Podesta an article for his approval. He writes: “Please don’t share or tell anyone I did this. Tell me if I fucked up anything.” Thrush calls himself a “hack” and was recently promoted to the New York Times.
- Huffington Post contributor Frank Islam writes to John Podesta in an email titled “My blogs in the Huffington Post”, “I am committed to make sure she is elected the next president.” “Please let me know if I can be of any service to you.”
- Clinton staffer writes an email titled, “Placing a story” with Politico / New York Times. It includes: “place a story with a friendly journalist”, “we have a very good relationship with Maggie Haberman of Politico”, and “we should shape likely leaks in the best light for HRC.”
- John Podesta receives drafts of New York Times articles before they’re published. Clinton staff “placed a story with a friendly at the AP (Matt Lee or Bradley Klapper).” More media collusion: NYT and AP “helpful” to Clinton campaign.
- Clinton staff colluded with New York Times and Wall Street Journal to paint Hillary’s economic policies in a “progressive” light.
- CNBC panelist colluding with John Podesta on what to ask Trump when he calls in for an interview.
- Clinton staff appearing to control the release times of Associated Press articles.
my thoughts as well; long on narrative, short on facts. the scary thing is that if you distill the report to bullet points they would mirror the left’s media talking points. perhaps the agency’s mole in russia is cnn’s moscow bureau chief…b
I read a NY Times article that attributed British Intelligence to some of the conclusions. For some reason this wasn’t mentioned in the Intelligence Report.
I have read other sites that state the all three agencies report “High Confidence” in the concluding “assessments”. Well, the report does NOT draw or state that conclusion. Instead the report states the FBI and CIA have “High” confidence in the conclusions. But, the NSA holds a different confidence, which holds only a “Moderate Confidence”. This is written on Page 11 of the report. As it states:
We also assess Putin and the Russian
Government aspired to help President-elect
Trump’s election chances when possible by
discrediting Secretary Clinton and publicly
contrasting her unfavorably to him. All three
agencies agree with this judgment. CIA and
FBI have high confidence in this judgment;
NSA has moderate confidence.
We do know that the NSA and British Intelligence work closely together. If the NY Times report is accurate then surely the NSA “should” have High Confidence in the conclusions. The Times suggest that the British had actually monitored the computer networks and traced the players. It is strange that none of this information made it into the Report.
Another Very strange bullet point in the report was Moscow’s preference in Trump because of the fight against (ISIL).
Moscow also saw the election of Presidentelect
Trump as a way to achieve an
international counterterrorism coalition against
the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).
Are we to believe that an international coalition fighting against Islamic terrorism is a “bad thing”. This is the perception that is inferred by this statement.
It is MY conclusion after reading the report that we are in serious trouble if the intelligence agencies develop assessments in this manner. They could have easily released a report, without endangering sources and methods, that actually had some semblance of bona fide proof of Russian interference in this matter. The most ludicrous assertion that accounted for the conclusion was the conversation that Russians were pleased in the outcome. No wonder, considering Hillary’s attacks were one step away from declaring all out war against them. None of us want another damn war.
One final note. There was much said about how Russia wanted to undermine our institutions. I will just say, no Russian propaganda is necessary for such undermining. The press and politicians are the ones who are doing a pretty good job at accomplishing that. It was Trump’s condemnation of the Politicians and the way Government works, or doesn’t work, that I even started considering Trump, and the Russians notwithstanding.