In the 'Russia' Investigation, Democrats, Spooks and Media Have Most to Fear
The notion that Russia "hacked" the American election -- to the extent that it changed the outcome -- never made any sense. A fever dream cooked up by Sore Loser Hillary and her malignant consigliere, John Podesta, it began its demonic life as a way to explain Mrs. Clinton's astonishment and anger at losing an election all her media buddies told her was in the bag, and for which she felt sure the fix was in. It wasn't until the day of the vote, when the New York Times and Nate Silver got the spanking of their lives, that the roof finally conked her on the noggin.
Those of us who habitually smell rats knew right off that there was nothing to it. But from that night forward, the Clintons, the Leftist media and the Democrats have been pounding the notion that, somehow, the Russians affected the election and that Trump is corrupt, morally unfit, an imbecile and an embarrassment to America. Take a good look at their reaction, ladies and gentlemen, for not since Linda Blair rotated 360 and spewed puke on a priest have we seen such deracinated contempt.
Further, much of the "proof" stank to high heaven as well, including the infamous dossier cooked up by "British intelligence" that was laughably amateurish -- it is either the product of the disinformation campaign that the Deep State and the American and European media have been waging against the administration since its inception, or a back-door Trojan Horse designed by the Russians themselves. If "British intelligence" doesn't trust the American intelligence community any more, nobody in his right mind trusts MI5 and MI6 much these days, either. After all, they can't even keep "known wolves" out of their country, or from killing tween girls in Manchester. Meanwhile, the Russians do this sort of thing just to keep in shape:
The Orbis report spins the tale of Putin insiders, spurred on by Putin himself, engaging in a five-year courtship of Donald Trump in which they offer him lucrative real estate deals that he rejects but leaves himself open to blackmail as a result of sexual escapades with prostitutes in St. Petersburg and Moscow (the famous “golden shower” incident). Despite his reluctance to enter into lucrative business deals, Trump “and his inner circle have accepted regular intelligence from the Kremlin, including on his Democratic and other political rivals,” according to the Orbis report.
This story makes no sense. In 2011, when the courtship purportedly begins, Trump was a TV personality and beauty pageant impresario. Neither in the U.S. or Russia would anyone of authority anticipate that Trump would one day become the presidential candidate of a major U.S. political party, making him the target of Russian intelligence.
I have picked out just a few excerpts from the Orbis report. It was written, in my opinion, not by an ex British intelligence officer but by a Russian trained in the KGB tradition. It is full of names, dates, meetings, quarrels, and events that are hearsay (one an overheard conversation). It is a collection of “this important person” said this to “another important person.” There is no record; no informant is identified by name or by more than a generic title. The report appears to fail the veracity test in the one instance of a purported meeting in which names, dates, and location are provided. Some of the stories are so bizarre (the Rosneft bribe) that they fail the laugh test. Yet, there appears to be a desire on the part of some media and Trump opponents on both sides of the aisle to picture the Orbis report as genuine but unverifiable.