About Me

My photo
Paul Hair is a national security expert and an author. He writes under his own name and as a ghostwriter. Connect with him at http://www.liberateliberty.com/. Contact him at paul@liberateliberty.com.

Friday, December 16, 2016

Did Obama Work with Putin to Discredit Trump’s Election?

President Obama at Fort Lee, Va. Photo by Terrance Bell.
Did President Obama work with Vladimir Putin to undermine Donald Trump’s presidential victory by allowing Russia to conduct cyberattacks against the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, and the government in general during the 2016 election cycle? Evidence suggests that it is a question worth exploring.

Understanding the Context

Understand the context in which I write this. Top government and political leaders are accusing Russia of winning the election for Trump and (in some cases) accusing Trump of being a willing part of it.

Since they have gone down this road it is important that we examine everything that is going on—including the actions and possible actions of the accusers.

Did Obama Use Russian Cyberattacks as Insurance against a Hillary Loss?

The media and Democratic Party, including the White House, have now all but accused Trump of working with a foreign power to win the presidential election. And they are doing so in order to discredit his victory. The goal of doing all this to both punish the American People for voting for Trump, and to send a message that unless the People vote for who the Democrats and media want for president, America will suffer.

The Beginning of the Accusations

Obama and the Democrats, along with the usual suspects of Republicans, have called for investigations into Russia and its interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As mentioned, Obama and the Democrats have gone so far as to all but say that Russia won the election for Trump.

They began this accusation based on a Dec. 9 Washington Post article. That article claimed U.S. government officials with access to classified CIA intelligence told Post reporters the CIA concluded in an official assessment that Russia interfered with the U.S. elections to help Trump win. The CIA has not confirmed this.

Why This Is a Problem

So all the hysteria about Russia helping Trump win the presidency is based on media reporting that government officials gave them unauthorized accounts of what supposedly the intelligence community (IC) is supposedly assessing. This fact should have killed the story. But it didn’t.

On top of this, focus should be on the Washington Post, which apparently worked with insider threats at the highest levels of government. If the Washington Post did indeed receive classified intelligence from government officials, American leaders should be demanding a massive counterintelligence investigation into the top levels of our government.

Yet they have failed to do so. This failure is appalling—particularly as these same leaders demand an investigation into if Trump won because of Russia.

Furthermore, this latest leak is part of a disturbing trend by the CIA in attacking Republican politicians. Leadership at the CIA apparently tried to undermine George W. Bush’s presidency in 2006. CIA leaders also apparently tried to undermine Republican President Ronald Reagan during the 1980s.

Nor is this the first time officials—apparently intelligence officials—have tried to undermine Trump. I wrote about leaking of classified intelligence against Trump in September.

Where are the calls for investigating this pattern of behavior?

And then there is the fact that such alleged leaks are coming out of the Obama regime and benefitting the Democratic Party. The Washington Post article with the first alleged leak, combined with subsequent ones in other media outlets, is one of the multiple pieces of evidence that should force serious people to examine Obama and what he is doing.

And that examination forces the question: Did Obama work with Putin to allow Russian cyberattacks against the U.S. as a strategy to undermine Trump should he defeat Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election?

Additional evidence makes this question even more valid.

Obama Ignored Years of Warnings to His Benefit

There has been one official, publicly released statement by the IC that is recent and specifically relates to Russia and its actions on the 2016 election. That was a joint statement by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in October of this year. Notice what it did say: “These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process.”

Notice what it didn’t say: anything about Russia wanting Hillary to win.

So we know Russia wanted to interfere with the election process. Everything else is conjecture and influence operations—perhaps disinformation operations. And what exactly is happening now with Obama, the Democrats, and the media promoting the idea that Russia won the election for Trump? A public that is losing faith in the election process.

So it’s possible to argue that even as there is no evidence that Russia wanted Trump to win, there is open evidence that Obama, the Democrats, and the media are helping with Russian strategy.

But there is more.

Obama knew since he was first inaugurated that foreign states interfere with U.S. elections. Here is an official statement from Obama in May of 2009 about such interference.

It’s no secret that my presidential campaign harnessed the Internet and technology to transform our politics. What isn’t widely known is that during the general election hackers managed to penetrate our computer systems. To all of you who donated to our campaign, I want you to all rest assured, our fundraising website was untouched. (Laughter.) So your confidential personal and financial information was protected. 
But between August and October, hackers gained access to emails and a range of campaign files, from policy position papers to travel plans. And we worked closely with the CIA – with the FBI and the Secret Service and hired security consultants to restore the security of our systems.

And Obama and the rest of the U.S. government knew since Obama was elected that foreign actors actively work to conduct cyberattacks on U.S. government and private systems. Every ODNI threat assessment from 2009 through 2016 (2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016) has emphasized this—and in many years the assessments have listed Russia and China as the number one threats.

Even Obama’s own national security strategy has said cyberattacks are a major problem.

Yet Obama refuses to do anything about this threat. One of the most famous instances of his refusal to act is how he did nothing when North Korea attacked Sony in 2014.

So why has Obama ignored this threat all those years? Why has he been content with foreign states conducting cyberattacks on the U.S. until the 2016 election? Is it possible he allowed those attacks on the U.S. to serve his own purposes?

Obama said the elections were safe prior to Hillary losing. He openly mocked Trump and told him to stop “whining” about rigged elections.

Yet that tune has now changed. This seems very odd—until you think about Obama and past elections.

Again, Obama has known since 2009 that foreign states, including Russia, are waging cyberwar on the U.S. But he had no complaints about them upon his first election in 2008 . . . or his second election in 2012.

Doesn’t it seem strange that Obama, the Democrats, and the media (and even IC leadership) were fine with cyberattacks on the U.S., including during elections, when their preferred candidates were “winning” elections?

Go back to 2008. What happened in that election season? A son of a Democratic politician hacked Sarah Palin’s emails and publicly posted them. This damaged Palin’s reputation and the McCain-Palin Republican ticket. Did this help Obama win? Possibly. Did the Russians play any part it? Likely not. But what about 2012?

In 2012, Anonymous is credited with hacking presidential candidate Ron Paul’s emails. Did Russia have any connection to that? What about another foreign state? Why no concern with this from Obama then?

Even worse, it has been publicly reported that foreign actors conducted cyberattacks on the 2012 presidential election, which Obama won. Why wasn’t Obama or the Democrat-Media Complex concerned with cyberattacks by foreign actors when Obama won? Why wasn’t the leadership of the IC concerned with it?

And what about 2016? It wasn’t just the Democrats who were hacked; it was at least some Republicans too. And, contrary to what the media is blaring, such hacked emails of Republicans were released—and the media lapped them up.

The New York Times was one of the many media outlets that wrote articles about hackers releasing Colin Powell’s emails in 2016. These hacked emails proved to include many damaging statements against Republicans. Why was there no outrage over these? Why is there no outrage over these now—especially since the Russians were behind this cyberattack?

Why do I say the Russians were behind the Powell cyberattack? Here is what the NYT article wrote about the hacked emails.

Mr. Powell’s emails appeared on a website called DCLeaks.com, which had previously posted documents that the site had obtained after hacks into the accounts of prominent Democrats and some Republicans, including Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, the former commander of NATO forces in Europe, and George Soros, a wealthy backer of liberal causes. It is unclear who operates DCLeaks.com.

And remember that joint ODNI/DHS statement from October on Russia and the election? Here is what it mentioned in its first paragraph.

The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts.

Why has this been overlooked by Obama, the Democrats, the media, the Republicans, pundits, and the IC leadership?

If everyone from Obama, government officials, politicians in the Democrats and Republicans, and pundits can speculate—and even openly accuse—the Russians of winning the election for Trump, then it is more than within the realm of “acceptable political discourse” to ask if Obama worked with the Russians to allow Russia to conduct cyberattacks on the U.S. election as a backup plan to undermine Trump in the unthinkable event that Hillary would lose.

(It’s also within the realm of “acceptable political discourse” to ask if the Russians or other foreign states helped Obama win in 2008 and 2012 with their cyberattacks.)

Hillary’s Private Email Server

There are three more notable things to point out even as they are somewhat tangential to the question of if Obama worked with Putin to influence the election for Hillary.

Recall how everyone is now saying that we should all be appalled at the thought of foreign interference in our politics and U.S. government. True. So why isn’t everyone more enraged than ever at Hillary Clinton and her private email server?

Remember the Hillary Clinton email scandal? CIA veteran Kent Clizbe and I wrote about an overlooked component to it—that she was running a shadow HUMINT operation. The FBI confirmed, as Kent and I assessed, that she was relying on foreign actors for that operation. In other words, foreign actors were influencing U.S. government and policies through the information they fed to Clinton.

Why have no leaders picked up on this to demand an investigation into this aspect of Clinton’s activities?

Media Legitimized Russian Cyberwar

There are two more notable things to point out.

First, as the media now insist that WikiLeaks is an agent of Russia, it’s important to remember that while people like me have always pointed out that WikiLeaks and its assets are national security threats, the media legitimized WikiLeaks. Indeed, the same media now decrying WikiLeaks as an agent of Russia has collaborated with WikiLeaks in the past (and in fact, still does) to undermine U.S. war efforts with the intelligence Bradley Manning leaked to it (which has resulted in countless American troops and legal troubles since then due to pressure for leaders to change rules of engagement and attack their own troops), undermine the U.S. intelligence effort (with Edward Snowden leaks), and to promote the subversion and destruction of the U.S. armed forces by elevating traitor Bradley Manning to hero status in the War on Reality.

So why is no one calling for investigations into the media?

DHS Failure

The second thing is the DHS. I wrote some time ago about how DHS apparently failed in preventing the North Korean cyberattack on Sony. (Contrary to what many people may believe, DHS, not the NSA or FBI, is the lead agency in protecting domestic infrastructure against cyberattacks. That’s one of the reasons it was a joint ODNI/DHS statement on Russian interference with the U.S. elections.)

And the DHS has failed again in the 2016 elections by failing to prevent Russian cyberattacks to whatever extent they succeeded. On top of this, there is the confirmation that the DHS (or someone within it, or someone spoofing it) conducted cyberattacks on the U.S. states of Georgia, Kentucky, and West Virginia during the elections.

Why aren’t there calls for investigation into this—and into if Obama authorized them in order to try to win the election for Hillary?


Ultimately, if the U.S. is going to give into the Obama, Democrat, and media accusation that Russia might have won the election for Trump and we now must have endless investigations into it, then there definitely should be investigations into if Obama worked with Vladimir Putin and Russia to allow Russia to conduct cyberattacks on the U.S. presidential election as a contingency plan to undermine a Trump presidency in the event of a Hillary loss.

There is enough evidence that certainly points in that direction.

No comments:

Post a Comment