The absolutely incredible claim from the Central Intelligence Agency that Russian hackers somehow put Donald Trump over the top in the election is falling apart.
Both the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), which oversees all the U.S. intelligence agencies, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reject the CIA’s analysis.
And now Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) just said on Fox News Channel a few minutes ago that the Central Intelligence Agency is refusing to hand over whatever evidence it may have about Russian wrongdoing.


The CIA has a long track record both for lying and breathtaking incompetence

“It’s almost as if people in the intelligence community are carrying out a disinformation campaign against the president-elect of the United States. It’s absolutely disgraceful.”
King, by the way, is a member of the Homeland Security Committee and chairman of the Sub-Committee on (Counterterrorism and Intelligence). He also serves on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
Could it be the CIA — which employs more than a few Trump haters — doesn’t actually have any evidence? If they have proof they should cough it up. But they refuse.


Instead, CIA officials keep leaking to the media.
This talk of a Russian conspiracy to hack U.S. computer networks to put Trump in the White House has always been difficult to believe.

No publicly available evidence whatsoever

President-elect Trump dismisses the allegations as “ridiculous,” accusing the Democrats of fabricating the claim to rationalize away the shellacking their party received in Nov. 8 elections. “I don’t believe it,” he said days ago. “I think it’s just another excuse.”
So there is still no publicly available evidence whatsoever that Russians engaged in cyberwarfare specifically in an effort to have an impact on the U.S. election.
All we have so far are unproven assertions reportedly made by figures in the U.S. intelligence community.

It’s not enough.






House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes issued the following statement after Intelligence Community agencies declined a request to brief the House Intelligence Committee tomorrow on cyber-attacks during the presidential campaign:  
“It is unacceptable that the Intelligence Community directors would not fulfill the House Intelligence Committee’s request to be briefed tomorrow on the cyber-attacks that occurred during the presidential campaign. The legislative branch is constitutionally vested with oversight responsibility of executive branch agencies, which are obligated to comply with our requests. The Committee is vigorously looking into reports of cyber-attacks during the election campaign, and in particular we want to clarify press reports that the CIA has a new assessment that it has not shared with us. The Committee is deeply concerned that intransigence in sharing intelligence with Congress can enable the manipulation of intelligence for political purposes. The Committee will continue its efforts and will insist that we receive all the necessary cooperation from the relevant leaders of the Intelligence Community.”







In telephone conversations with Donald Trump, FBI Director James Comey assured the president-elect there was no credible evidence that Russia influenced the outcome of the recent U.S. presidential election by hacking the Democratic National Committee and the emails of John Podesta, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.

The only member of the U.S. intelligence community who was ready to assert that the Russians sanctioned the hacking was John Brennan, the director of the CIA, according to sources who were briefed on Comey’s conversations with Trump.

"And Brennan takes his marching orders from President Obama," the sources quoted Comey as saying.









 And now the total hoax of the left-wing delusional conspiracy theory begins to unravel. After days of witnessing the left-wing media hyperventilate over completely fabricated claims that “the Russians” hacked the DNC emails and turned them over to Wikileaks, it turns out the emails were actually leaked by a DNC insider who was angry about the orchestrated elimination of Bernie Sanders by Clinton operatives.

The UK Daily Mail is now reporting that Craig Murray, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, personally met the email leaker who handed him the emails files later released by Wikileaks. The email leaker, a Bernie Sanders insider, was reportedly motivated by “disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders,” reports the Daily Mail.

Murray insisted that the DNC and Podesta emails published by Wikileaks did not come from the Russians, and were given to the whistleblowing group by Americans who had authorized access to the information.

“Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,”  Murray said. “The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.”









Just as the CIA/Democrat/Mainstream Media narrative of Russia's involvement in the election jumps the shark with fact-less accusations of Putin's personal involvement, The Daily Mail blows the entire 'hack' meme out of the water. As an evoy for Wikileaks, former UK ambassador Craig Murray claims he flew to Washington for a clandestine handoff with one source, who "had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks... Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians."


Murray, who blasted The CIA's "blatant lies" in a recent op-ed, has now come forward with more details on how he knows they are lying... (as The Daily Mail reports)

His account contradicts directly the version of how thousands of Democratic emails were published before the election being advanced by U.S. intelligence.



Murray insisted that the DNC and Podesta emails published by Wikileaks did not come from the Russians, and were given to the whistleblowing group by Americans who had authorized access to the information.

'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,'  Murray said. 'The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.'

He said the leakers were motivated by 'disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.'

Murray said he retrieved the package from a source during a clandestine meeting in a wooded area near American University, in northwest D.C. He said the individual he met with was not the original person who obtained the information, but an intermediary.