The sudden discovery by the NY Times and Washington Post that Russia stole the election for Trump has raised a few questions in my mind. Of course, I realize that marks me immediately as a traitor,etc because the "CIA has reached a consensus" on the matter. Whatever. I will admit to enjoying the irony of it all. They smugly told us over and over how they were the smartest people around and we Trumpers were ignorant rednecks who couldn't function in a modern technological society. Yet Hillary's campaign chief, the creepy Podesta, fell for a phishing ploy that my mother in law would have sniffed out. Then there is the matter of Hillary's email server. The official "consensus" of the intelligence community was that we just couldn't tell if it had been hacked or not, because these foreign state actors are just too sophisticated to leave footprints behind. Despite the fact that super secret intel had been carelessly put on it, we were told to move on because there was no "proof" that anything nefarious had occurred. Somehow the same state actors were incredibly careless however in leaving footprints when they hacked the DNC and Podesta. Uhhh, ok. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the CIA being politicized under Obama. The DNC and Podesta material was released in slow motion over a period of months. Not only was there not a word from anyone that it was an obvious Russian plot to steal the election, we were assured by no less than Emperor Obama himself that the election was unhackable and that it was all on the up and up. Hillary called out Trump for even suggesting the possibility of a rigged election, saying that he had threatened the very foundations of our democracy. When democrats demand the election be invalidated and Obama declare martial law, that is just filling in an oversight in the Constitution. Now, after they have crawled out from under the bedcovers after three weeks of hysterical crying, the media and democrat hacks have decided that the election was invalid. And by golly they have unnamed CIA sources to back them up. The fact that the FBI disagrees is dismissed. After all, they were more or less in on it themselves and have plenty to answer for. We are told that the election was "this close" and that something that appeared minor at the time clearly turned enough votes to swing the whole thing. Left unexamined is the effect of bogus claims of Trump abusing women, which all seemed to have vanished post-election, of millions of illegals voting with Obama's encouragement, of fraudulent voting machine results being turned up in major dem strongholds, etc. This is different we are told because it is a foreign government. I guess Mexico must be the 51st state or something, because they have been interfering brazenly and no one is the least bit upset. Another irony is the spectacle of the media being aghast at leaks. They didn't mind revealing top secret stuff when Bush was president, like the NY Times story that we were able to track terrorists' financial dealings. So what if it ended up getting hundreds of people killed? The public had a right to know, or something. Apparently the public did not have a right to know the DNC was filled with crooks, that its chairwoman, the smug Donna Brazile, had used her CNN gig to feed debate questions to Hillary, or that they looked with contempt on all sorts of americans including Catholics. Or that bigfoot journalists thought it was prudent to run stories by Podesta for approval before defending the First Amendment by publishing them. This is what they are talking about when they say Russia stole the election. Having their own dirty laundry aired out in public.
I believe the reports coming from our intelligence agencies, as does our government, including republicans. The only thing in question now is whether they were trying to help Drumpf or not.
Except when it's the FBI with evidence on Hillary, right? I'll believe proof, not someone saying something - no matter who it is. When that is available (assuming it ever is) please post it. I'd love to look through it.