Hacked Off!

column

.

By Phil Erwin

Democrats have now had several weeks to determine why their “inevitable” First Woman President lost – for the second time!

Sadly, the only “reason” they’re after is an excuse that sticks.

First they tried recounts. Big money; virtually no change. (Their ridiculous effort did provide proof of election “irregularities”: Some precincts in Hillary country reported more ballots than registered voters.)

Next they blamed FBI Director Comey. “Hillary was ahead until he wrote that letter!” (You mean, the one where he let her off the hook for her flagrant mishandling of national secrets the first time? Or the second?)

Then they tried “Fake News.” (Not smart, Dems – Did you forget that Hillary bragged about dodging phantom sniper fire in Bosnia? Or blamed losing Ambassador Stevens on a never-watched video? And how about those oft-quoted polls that insisted she couldn’t lose?)

Desperate for an excuse, the ancient Democrat leadership fell back on the one bugaboo that always riled the electorate back in their own heyday: The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!

The Russians hacked us, Democrats wail. They may have stolen the election!

Here’s ABCs co-host Martha Raddatz (who practically broke down on live TV when Trump’s victory was announced) pronouncing Doomsday due to Russian tomfoolery in a lead-in on ABCs This Week:

… A nightmare for American Democracy: The nation’s intelligence agencies, the White House, claiming the worst – That Russia not only hacked Campaign 2016, but tried to influence the outcome of the election; and that the hacks were directed from the heart of the Kremlin, the office of President Vladimir Putin himself!”

Yawn. Like the Russians never, ever tried to influence our internal affairs before. Apparently ABCs minions have forgotten the Emmy-winning series, The Americans – created by a former CIA officer – which dramatized the historical fact that Russians have parked sleeper agents inside the US to influence our internal affairs – for decades!

Not exactly news.

And if Democrats are so excoriated by the prospect of foreign influence in a Democratic election, where was their ire when President Obama sent $350,000 taxpayer dollars into Israel to support Prime Minister Netanyahu’s electoral defeat?

Where’s the Liberal outrage about that?

So: Did “hacking” alter our election results at all? Did it, in fact, change one single vote anywhere in the country?

All the fulminations on news programs only serve to confuse the truth about this. Frankly, nobody on the News really knows. But they’re desperate to convince you that somehow the Russians rigged our election, and that’s why Trump won!

Here is what is actually known:

  1. Somebody “hacked” the DNC. Maybe more than one “somebody.” Maybe Russians. Who may or may not have had Putin’s approval.

(As an IT professional, I am seriously skeptical that the identity of a hacker can be explicitly, incontrovertibly, remotely determined. The forensics guys look for known hacker “return addresses,” known malware “signatures,” known network exploits. When they see a familiar pattern, they conclude that it’s a known hacker. They’re guessing. It’s highly educated guesswork, to be sure; but guessing nonetheless. I checked sites that describe the forensic clues, and my skepticism was diminished. There were a lot of “tracks” that appeared to lead back to Russian actors. But there are people in the world with the expertise to mimic those “tracks” by laying down bogus hacker “footprints” – the electronic equivalent of creating Bigfoot tracks with an oversized foot mold. Finding tracks doesn’t really prove that Bigfoot was there.)

  1. Somebody used a “phishing” exploit to gain access to John Podesta’s e-mail account. Podesta was both a longtime leader of and strategist for the Democrat Party, and Hillary’s campaign chairman. This intrusion captured his conversations with members of the DNC and the national Media – conversations which demonstrated conclusively that Hillary’s campaign and the national Press were colluding to influence (“fix”) both the televised debates and the national political conversation, all to ensure Clinton’s election.
  2. Somebody gave Wikileaks thousands of e-mails collected from Podesta and the DNC. Maybe one hacker; maybe more. Or it may have been somebody with physical access to the e-mail, irrespective of any hacking. A former UK Ambassador has announcedthat he, in fact, was the conduit to Wikileaks from the actual source, someone who worked within the DNC.
  3. Both may be true: Russia may have hacked the DNC, and may even have obtained the e-mail, and yet the actual feed to Wikileaks may have been from an entirely different source. Wikileaks’ founder, Julian Assange, has stated categorically that the Russians were not his source of stolen e-mail.
  1. Those leaked e-mails yielded proof-positive that the DNC leaders were deliberately rigging the Primary against Bernie Sanders, in favor of Hillary Clinton. (That’s why they had to resign!) So those millions of Millennials who were rabid supporters of Sanders not only lost their bid to make him the Democrat Presidential nominee, but also discovered the DNC had cheated them of their choice. If they failed to support Hillary after that, it’s certainly not Putin’s fault.
  1. The leaked e-mails also demonstrated conclusively that the Clinton campaign and members of the “mainstream” Media were actively colluding to support Clinton’s candidacy, and to diminish and discredit both Bernie Sanders and Clinton’s potential Republican competitors – most especially, Donald Trump.

The DNC, Democrats and the Clinton Campaign all decried the fact that their e-mails were stolen. But not a single e-mail has been disavowed or proven fraudulent. Any conclusions reached based on the information contained therein was fair game for use by voters in deciding whom to trust, and how to evaluate Clinton and her campaign.

Whether they were “liberated” by the Russians, or not.

Russian-hacker

Phil Erwin is an author, IT administrator and registered Independent living in Newbury Park. He would like to support some Democrat ideals, but he has a visceral hatred for Lies and Damn Lies (and is highly suspicious of Statistics.) That pretty much eliminates supporting most Democrats, and a bunch of Republicans to boot.


Get Citizensjournal.us Headlines free  SUBSCRIPTION. Keep us publishing – DONATE

One Response to Hacked Off!

  1. Eileen M Tracy December 27, 2016 at 8:50 am

    Thank you, Mr. Erwin for this moment of logic and clarity. Didn’t you think that during the recount that Hill lost votes. Same with pressure on electors to change their votes. That showed how desperate people were to get Hill in the White House. Were they so concerned that they would not be able to enrich herself and Bill by ripping off US AID and other foreign funding?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *