The DNC Hack - Part II

It would be impossible to argue that Salon is anything but a Left-wing publication and website, and yet, like their compatriots at The Nation, they have had the courage to question the DNC "hack" story. In a follow-up article, entitled "What if the DNC Russian “hack” was really a leak after all? A new report raises questions Democrats and their trained hamsters in the media would rather ignore", Danielle Ryan writes:

Last week the respected left-liberal magazine The Nation published an explosive article that details in great depth the findings of a new report — authored in large part by former U.S. intelligence officers — which claims to present forensic evidence that the Democratic National Committee was not hacked by the Russians in July 2016. Instead, the report alleges, the DNC suffered an insider leak, conducted in the Eastern time zone of the United States by someone with physical access to a DNC computer.

This report also claims there is no apparent evidence that the hacker known as Guccifer 2.0 — supposedly based in Romania — hacked the DNC on behalf of the Russian government. There is also no evidence, the report’s authors say, that Guccifer handed documents over to WikiLeaks. Instead, the report says that the evidence and timeline of events suggests that Guccifer may have been conjured up in an attempt to deflect from the embarrassing information about Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign that was released just before the Democratic National Convention. The investigators found that some of the “Guccifer” files had been deliberately altered by copying and pasting the text into a “Russianified” word-processing document with Russian-language settings.

If all this is true, these findings would constitute a massive embarrassment for not only the DNC itself but the media, which has breathlessly pushed the Russian hacking narrative for an entire year, almost without question but with little solid evidence to back it up.

You could easily be forgiven for not having heard about this latest development — because, perhaps to avoid potential embarrassment, the media has completely ignored it. Instead, to this point only a few right-wing sites have seen fit to publish follow-ups.

Excuse me for for being cynical, but in the 24-7 news cycle, you'd think that outlets like CNN or WaPo, the NYT and the alphabet networks would spend a little time looking into this. After all, they've elevated the Russian collusion fantasy to the major story of 2017, so it would seem reasonable to conclude ... Nah ... not gonna happen.

Ryan comments:

Instead of subjecting the various accounts of what happened last summer to rigorous scrutiny, the media instantly accepted the narrative promoted by the Clinton campaign and U.S. intelligence agencies. It has continued to do so ever since. Now, as new information comes to light, the media has largely acted as if it did not exist.

For the media and mainstream liberals to dismiss the information presented in Lawrence’s article as lacking in evidence would be breathtakingly ironic, given how little evidence they required to build a narrative to suit themselves and absolve Clinton of any responsibility for losing the election.

The fact that two prominent Left-wing media sources are questioning the prevailing DNC-hack narrative is something to note. Is it possible that this represents the first cracks in the wall of disinformation and lies that has been erected over the past year? Maybe ... but don't hold your breath.