Election 2020

In the 'Russia' Investigation, Democrats, Spooks and Media Have Most to Fear

In the 'Russia' Investigation, Democrats, Spooks and Media Have Most to Fear
(Alexei Druzhinin/Sputnik via AP)

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.


Let’s get a few things straight: Of course the Russians tried to meddle in our election; so do other countries, and so do we in theirs, sometimes openly, sometimes covertly. Of course members of the incoming administration met with and spoke with Russians; that’s their job. Further, Russia is no longer an enemy of the United States, in the sense that the Soviet Union was (I was there when it died); rather, it’s an adversary with many shared interests with the U.S., as well as areas of competition and concern. To spin this into a “Trump/Flynn/Whoever was open to Russian blackmail” is a lie that only a useful idiot would believe.

Far more likely is that it’s Democrats — who, prior to last November, never met a communist they didn’t like or a Russian they didn’t want to embrace — who have overplayed their hand (notice how the tribal elders are even now walking back “impeachment” talk) and who are most at risk. They’re so fully invested in this fairy tale that when it blows up in their faces, and another underlying reason for its concoction becomes clear, years of lamentation and wandering in the electoral wilderness should follow.

The real danger to them, torch-carriers for the Obama administration that they are, is that the “muh Russia” meme serves as squid ink to obscure the attack of the Deep State on the American electoral system, including Obama’s out-the-door order expanding greatly the dissemination of NSA raw intel, the misuse of the FISA courts to spy on Americans, and the monitoring of the Trump campaign and transition. In short, it’s the modern, body-snatched Democrats, along with their lickspittles and disinformation artists in the media and rogue members of the IC, who will be heading for the tall grass as the FBI hightails it after them.


In the Wall Street Journal, Holman Jenkins, Jr., starts to assemble the pieces. Be sure to read the whole thing:

The other shoe was dropped by the Washington Post. Finally we have details of an alleged email exchange showing influential liberals trusting in then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch to corral an inquiry into Hillary Clinton’s email practices. According to the Post, this email appears not to exist. It was cited in a secret Russian intelligence document that inspired FBI chief James Comey to usurp the attorney general’s role and publicly clear Mrs. Clinton of intelligence mishandling. Allegedly, he feared the real email (which didn’t exist) would surface and discredit any Justice Department announcement clearing Mrs. Clinton.

Are you now thinking of the Trump dossier circulated by former British agent Christopher Steele, which also felt like a Russian plant? While the political circus in Washington has focused on purloined Democratic emails and fake news spread during the election by Russian bots, the more effective part of Moscow’s effort may have been planting fake leads to prod U.S. enforcement and intelligence agencies to intervene disruptively in the campaign.

This also should shed new light on today’s anti-Trump leakers in the intelligence agencies: They may be the real unwitting agents of Russian influence.

Here comes the oh-oh:

Let’s remember that ex-FBI chief Robert Mueller’s mission is to investigate Russian influence in the election, not the narrow matter of Trump collusion. Whether Russia suborned or tried to suborn people like Paul Manafort, Carter Page and Michael Caputo is a necessary question. Whether Russia exploited Facebook to proliferate fake anti-Hillary news is a necessary question. But so is the provenance of the Steele document and the fake email purporting a Democratic coverup of Hillary Clinton’s server activity. If the FBI’s Mr. Comey allowed himself to be manipulated by Russian intelligence into intervening in the race, that’s something we need to know about. And we need to know about the leaks.

It’s times like this we are reminded how personally stupid are many people who make up the media. These leaks need to be investigated—and by Mr. Mueller specifically to the extent that the leaks, as seems more and more likely, indirectly or partly have their origins in Russian manipulation of our own intelligence and law enforcement agencies.

Democrats wanted an independent counsel investigation of Russia’s election meddling. They believed it would lead to evidence of, or at least keep alive the story of, Trump collusion. They may be unpleasantly surprised where it really leads.


Which is why the best the Democrats — even as they busily try to turn bit players like Carter Page into Watergate figure Donald Segretti, when in fact he’s either Rosencrantz or Guildenstern —  can now hope for is some sort of Scooter Libby process crime. That will let them beat their chests, quickly climb down off the high branch and otherwise pretend that they were right all along.

Mueller shouldn’t take the bait. Instead, he needs to follow the trail right where it heads: into the National Security Agency, the CIA, the newsrooms of the New York Times and the Washington Post, and even the Obama White House itself. Then let’s see who the real threat to our democracy is.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member