NYT: “Absence Of Concrete Evidence” Of Russian Meddling In U.S. Election

Andrew Higgins, Moscow bureau chief for the venerable New York Times, the “newspaper of record,” snuck in two glaring admissions about the recently-released intelligence report concerning Russian “hacking”:

But the absence of any concrete evidence in the report of meddling by the Kremlin [emphasis added] was met with a storm of mockery on Saturday by Russian politicians and commentators, who took to social media to ridicule the report as a potpourri of baseless conjecture.

Now, surely Higgins didn’t intentionally (and so casually) cite the report’s lack of evidence as if it were fact. Or did he? He continues:

The report provides no new evidence [emphasis added] to support assertions that Moscow meddled covertly through hacking and other actions to boost the electoral chances of Donald J. Trump and undermine his rival, Hillary Clinton, but rests instead on what it describes as Moscow’s long record of trying to influence America’s political system.

Amazingly, Higgins doubled down on the lack of evidence in the intelligence findings. (Should he be dusting off his resume?) The National Review’s Andrew C. McCarthy further explains the report — one that doesn’t even mention John Podesta’s name.

The three intelligence agencies’ report pointedly declines to tell us what specific information gives them such “high confidence” that they know the operation of Vladimir Putin’s mind. They plead that the nature of their work does not allow for that: To tell us how they know what they purport to know would compromise intelligence methods and sources. Fair enough. The problem, though, is that if you’re essentially going to say, ‘Trust us,’ you have to have proven yourself trustworthy over time.

Doesn’t the left remember WMDs? Maryland website designer

The Russian “Hacking” Narrative Destroyed In Just 12 Tweets

H/T to Twitchy, for compiling Iowahawk’s complete and total takedown of the Democrats’ and the mainstream media’s myth that the Russians “hacked” the 2016 Presidential Election.

It took him just 12 tweets:


Even The Left Sees Through The Clintons’ New McCarthyism

H/T to Democracy NOW!, via Glenn Greenwald:

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald says Democrats have adopted a “Cold War McCarthyite kind of rhetoric” by accusing many its critics of having ties to Russia. “It’s sort of this constant rhetorical tactic to try and insinuate that anyone opposing the Clintons are somehow Russian agents, when it’s the Clintons who actually have a lot of ties to Russia, as well,” Greenwald said. “I mean, the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton helped Russian companies take over uranium industries in various parts of the world. He received lots of Russian money for speeches.”

Read the whole thing here.

Give Him An “A” For Honesty

H/T to BizPacReview, for exposing the worst-kept secret in this year’s 2016 presidential election: the mainstream media, particularly CNN, is totally in the bag for Hillary Clinton:

Witness CNN’s Chris Cuomo, the man who called Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort a liar and debated Rudy Giuliani for 32 break-less minutes on the ridiculous liberal interpretation of Trump’s Second Amendment statement, wax eloquent during a 2014 segment during which he and another host were discussing Clinton’s potential entry into the race.

“It’s a problem because she’s doing what they call in politics “freezing pockets,” because the donors are giving her money thinking she’s going to run, that means they’re not going to have available money for other candidates if she doesn’t.” Cuomo said. “And I don’t think she’s going to give it to them. We couldn’t help her any more than we have, she’s got just a free ride so far from the media, we’re the biggest ones promoting her campaign, so it had better happen.”


Wikileaks Now Viewed Favorably by Majority of Americans

A fun tweet today from Wikileaks, who now boasts a net positive favorable approval rating within the U.S. The whistleblower group has pounded on Hillary Clinton and the DNC in recent weeks, much to the delight of Republicans, and evidently, to a majority of Americans.

The interesting question, though, is whether or not the Wikileaks poll “knows” something the mainstream polls don’t. Either way, this doesn’t appear to bode well for HRC.