It’s pretty funny how the left starts talking about “Fake News” and all of a sudden, that seems to be all we can find coming from the major news organizations. You all heard about the Politco Reporter who was fired for an offensive tweet about Donald Trump?
A statement from President-elect Donald Trump’s office quickly denied a CNN report that Trump’s daughter Ivanka would get an office currently being used by outgoing First Lady Michelle Obama.
But that denial came after CNN’s Wednesday rumor was shared via Tweet by a Politico reporter, who was quickly fired for her crude comments.
Mirando speculated that Ivanka was be awarded some sort of “title,” as well.
But The Hill later posted a story revealing that the Trump transition team was denying the claim. “This is false. No decisions regarding Ivanka’s involvement have been made,” Trump spokeswoman Hope Hicks said early Wednesday evening.
The Mirando rumor, though, wasn’t torpedoed by the transition office early enough to save a reporter from Politico from being fired over a Tweet which suggested the office assignment meant that Donald Trump was “f**king his daughter.”
In a December 14 Tweet, Politico reporter Julia Ioffe stated, “Either Trump is f**king his daughter or he’s shirking nepotism laws. Which is worse?”
She followed that up with another Tweet rehashing complimentary comments Trump made about Ivanka on ABC’s The View back in 2006.
Well, here is that tweet that started this little shindig.
Today CNN posted another article that is riddled with fake news with this headline:
What do you see there? CNN saying that Putin personally approved the alleged election hacking right?
Directly underneath that headline is this little gem.
What does that bottom bit say?
“Sources said there is CERTAINLY NO OBVIOUS INTELLIGENCE LINKING PUTIN, such as a signed order.”
So, which is it? Sources say that Putin was involved? Or Sources say that he wasn’t?
Let’s go over the whole article and see if they don’t contradict themselves in there.
It starts off by saying
A US official familiar with the US intelligence assessment of the Russia election-related hacking said the understanding is that the operation was carried out with sophisticated hacking tools, the equivalent of those used by the US National Security Agency.
The use of the advanced tools suggests Russian President Vladimir Putin was involved in the hacks, a person familiar with the matter said, adding that it was more than a US intelligence assumption at this point.
But neither of the sources said they knew of specific intelligence that directly ties Putin to the attack.
Wait a second, the very first paragraph says that a US official says that “something” was hacked with NSA style tools. NSA style tools can only be approved by Putin, (that is IF it was the Russians) BUT, none of the sources know if Putin was really involved or not.
Am I the only person confused already? The very first section contradicts the title! But I digress, lets continue:
“We don’t have Putin’s fingerprints on anything or a piece of paper that shows he signed the order, but the nature of the operation was such that this had to be approved by top levels of the Russian government,” a senior administration official with access to the intelligence on the hacking told CNN.
“The intelligence community has assessed that in order for this operation to have been executed, it could not have been done without the highest levels of the government, including the President himself.”
So they continue to assert that this “had to be from the Russians” but have yet to provide any proof to this rumor whatsoever. What else does it say?
The US official said there are two entities in Russia capable of doing this kind of work, but would not name either one. The tools the Russians used are understood by the US and have a unique “signature.”
The official said the sophistication of the tools used means that a higher-level Russian government authority would have been required to carry the prolonged effort to steal emails and data from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, among other targets.
There are two entities in Russia capable of doing it, but we won’t tell you who or what they are? Yea, sounds about right! Because nobody else in the world could have done it. Obviously! (Insert eye roll here)
The US believes Putin most likely gave his cyberexperts broad direction to attempt to hack US political institutions. The US believes once the hackers got into the DNC system, they would have instantly reported back to the Russian leader, who would weigh in on what to do with the data.
WikiLeaks, which distributed the hacked information, may well not even know it came from Russia. But under Russian command and control procedures that US intelligence understands, it would be expected that Putin would be the final authority to decide on giving it to WikiLeaks.
The sources did not say when the US came to this analysis of the cybertools used. CNN reported Wednesday that US intelligence believed Putin was involved when they issued their public statement in October.
I would like to point out the use of the words “Most Likely”, “Believes”, and “Did Not Say”. This seems to be a reoccurring problem for CNN lately. No hard facts? No proof? Just fantasy and make believe clickbait stories? Seems like it! Is this where it stops though? Nope! There’s MORE!
Multiple national security, intelligence and congressional sources told CNN that the US intelligence assessment continues to be based on the analysis of intelligence, not any evidence directly linking Putin to the effort.
ARE YOU KIDDING ME!?!?!
Analysis of the digital footprint and intelligence, including from human sources, has led to the thinking in the intelligence community to conclude that Russians carried out the cyberhack and that it would not have happened without Putin’s consent, according to intelligence, congressional and other administration sources.
More rumor and contradiction to the title?
That belief was alluded to in the October 7 statement from the Director of National Intelligence and Department of Homeland Security that stated “only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.”
Where’s the proof?
On Thursday, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest implied that statement was clear in identifying Russian leaders, including Putin, in US election meddling.
“Implied” and “Clear” should not be used in the same sentence! Especially considering that this is all thus far only a rumor with nothing backing it up whatsoever.
“At the risk of editorializing, when I read that statement for first time in early October, I didn’t think it was particularly subtle,” Earnest said. He emphasized he did not have an additional intelligence assessment to share naming Putin specifically as being behind the cyberattacks.
There it is again! “Didn’t have additional intelligence” to actually name Putin?! So it’s still nothing more than a rumor!
Intelligence exists that could be interpreted as Putin was aware of the hacks beyond just an assumption that the hacking operation could not happen without Putin’s approval, according to two of the sources.
“That could be interpreted” means that it most definitely not conclusive nor solid evidence whatsoever! Yet these fools continue to play and pretend like this whole story is fact!
But the sources said there is certainly no obvious intelligence linking Putin, such as a signed order.
There it is one more time! “No obvious intelligence linking Putin.” Is this the 3rd or 4th time we have brought this up? I am starting to lose count. What did the title of the article say again? Anyway,
One source explained that while the thinking in the US intel community is that Putin was aware of this effort, it doesn’t mean he knew all the details and was personally tracking the program. The source used the analogy that when a drone strike happens, President Barack Obama authorizes it but isn’t involved in every step.
What does this have to do with anything besides being an absolutely horrible analogy?
Since October, the CIA has refined its analysis based in part on new intelligence, but the government officials said that assessment continues to be based mostly on the reading of circumstantial evidence.
Indeed, a more forward-leaning assessment by the CIA was being produced before the election, but the agency purposely did not brief Congress at the time on that information in an attempt to not get stuck in the middle of politics during the campaign, as the FBI did, according to several of the sources.
“Circumstantial Evidence” Who edited this? Do they not know how stupid they sound at this point?!
That may have backfired, as President-elect Donald Trump is citing the fact that the information is coming out only after the election, timing seen by the Trump transition team as an effort to delegitimize his election victory.
Hey! Look there! An actual point was made! Trump using Common Sense!
According to an administration official familiar with the matter, the October 7 statement is still the operative bottom line. According to the source, when the Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said the senior most Russian officials had to have authorized the hacking, “who else would that be but Putin? This is an authoritarian regime.”
And we end the CNN article with some blah blah blah that has nothing to do with anything else.
I am proud to be the founder and owner of this site that has put out more REAL news in just a few months than CNN appears to have put out in the entire time they have been around! Don’t worry America! We will keep calling them out on their garbage as we find it!