Welcome to the New Cold War: A Massive Distraction From How You’re Being Screwed
Photo courtesy of Getty
Friday night, The Washington Post released a bombshell report: “Secret CIA assessment says Russia was trying to help Trump win White House.”
That’s right, according to WaPo’s unnamed sources inside the CIA, Russia hacked the DNC and Clinton campaign emails in order to help President-elect Donald J. Trump defeat Hillary Clinton. Twenty-five minutes later, the Post followed up with a piece titled “The CIA concluded Russia worked to elect Trump. Republicans now face an impossible choice.”
Scandal! A foreign nation actively worked to help one candidate in a presidential election—the move is “unprecedented.”
Instantly the story caught fire with The Hill, USA Today, Reuters, The Boston Globe, The New York Times, and others reporting on it. “Secret CIA” and “Russia” began to trend on Twitter, and that was that: one of the biggest stories of the year.
And what a story it was. A sinister plot; an administration unsure how best to balance diplomacy with the protection of our American system of democracy; and of course, do not forget the intrepid reporting that brought it all to light.
Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.
But something odd stood out.
For a report this important, one would think that surely WaPo would lay the damning evidence out for its readers in plain English. After all, the disastrous Iraq War was sold to the American people with the assistance of a complicit media which ultimately failed to give due diligence to the Bush administration’s claims that Saddam Hussein was producing “weapons of mass destruction” (WMDs).
Confoundingly, the evidence backing the CIA’s central claim that Russia interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Donald Trump, is decidedly missing, as some on Twitter were quick to call out:
Exactly. Think twice & be more careful before you share something like this, & be skeptical of claims from those who accept it uncritically. https://t.co/VpTEWmRRPe
— Ben Spielberg (@BenSpielberg) December 10, 2016