NYT Bashes Trump for Debunking Fabricated Claims About Russian US Election Hacking

by Stephen Lendman

Not a shred of evidence suggests Russian hacking of America's 2016 election, or any other one. DHS/DNI and CIA claims otherwise were fabricated for political reasons.

On the one hand, it's part of longstanding Russia bashing. On the other, it's to pressure Trump against normalizing ties and cooperating with Vladimir Putin in combating terrorism.

If the hacking claim was credible, evidence would have been presented to support it. There is none because Russia doesn't interfere with the election process in any foreign country.

America does it worldwide, wanting subservient regimes in power serving its interests, targeting independent ones for regime change by color revolutions, old-fashioned coups or aggressive wars.

On December 10, The NYT disgracefully accused Trump of "(a)n extraordinary breach (with) the national security establishment…mocking American intelligence assessments that Russia interfered in the election on his behalf…"

Fact: He did the right thing debunking obvious Big Lies, deserving credit for refusing to believe them. Nor should anyone.

Fact: Producing "fake news" is part of what America's intelligence community is charged with doing, benefiting the nation's imperial agenda, waging war on humanity for unchallenged global dominance.

The Times: "One (unnamed) intelligence official said there were indications in early October that the Russians had shifted focus to harm Mrs. Clinton."

Fact: Utter rubbish, The Times citing someone it won't name, spreading lies it won't refute, standard editorial practice.

Former CIA/NSA head Michael Hayden is part of the problem, not the remedy, unsurprisingly saying:

"To have the president-elect of the United States simply reject the fact-based narrative that the intelligence community puts together because it conflicts with his a priori assumptions - wow."

Fact: Responsible leadership demands rejecting blatant lies, a US intelligence community specialty.

The Times "reported that Russia had broken into Republican National Committee computer networks just as they had broken into Democratic ones, but had released documents only on the Democrats."

Fact: The Times long ago lost credibility, publishing managed news misinformation and Big Lies all the time on issues mattering most. Claims about Russia hacking the RNC and DNC don't pass the smell test.

And yet The Times admitted "no evidence (exists proving nonexistent) Russian meddling affected the outcome of the election or the legitimacy of the vote…"

So why is it beating a dead horse? Why does it claim "Russian meddling" when no evidence exists indicating it?

Why does it bash Trump for debunking what everyone should refuse to believe?

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. 

His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com. 

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.