Sean Hannity pushes conspiracy theory that CIA hacked Democrats, framed Russia

Another nut job:

Sean Hannity embraces WikiLeaks conspiracy CIA faked DNC email hack - Business Insider

Amazing

 

It's hard to say how pleased and gratified I am that the entire Politics forum is merging with my "Favorite Conspiracy Theory" thread. Excuse me while I run out and buy another copy of Catcher in the Rye.

 

Did Hannity actually say that the CIA was responsible for the hack, or only that they could have been?

The recent Wikileaks revelations suggest that the CIA does have the ability to hack computers and leave bread-crumbs behind that divert suspicions elsewhere and suggest that third parties were responsible. Of course, I don't know what would motivate the CIA to hack the Democrats. I think that idea has a low likelihood, even if it is possible. A non-zero probability exists that it might have been the Chinese or some of the Europeans doing it while leaving hints it was the Russians. Or even non-state actors like a Silicon Valley tech firm.

I haven't really seen any convincing evidence that it was the Russians that was behind the release of information about the DNC. (Which is ironic, given all the demands for hard evidence directed at Trump's belief that his phones were tapped.) It's just assertions in the usual-suspect media ('Washington Post', 'Guardian' etc.) that the "United States Intelligence Community" has concluded that it was the Russians. (These media outlets will never name their "sources" so the information's provenance can never be assessed.) Supposedly some favored congresspeople were briefed as well. The details of the investigation, who conducted it and what justified its conclusions remains secret and obscure, as do the exact nature of the conclusions.

So ultimately, it's just "Have Faith! Trust Us!" Well, the agnostic in me suggests that to do so might be exceedingly foolish. (I don't believe in God, so I sure as hell don't believe every supposed truth that mere humans try to feed me.)

The Russians may indeed (it's still unproven) have hacked the Democrats. They may have hacked the Republicans as well. They probably hacked Hillary's amateurish personal server (a hugely tempting target) and anything else that they could worm into into that might provide them some interesting information. But that doesn't mean that they handed the files to Wikileaks. That connection still needs to be made. (I'm sure that the US intrudes into everyone and everything that they might find interesting too. The Snowden revelations document that.)

Frankly, my personal suspicion is that the Russians had nothing to do with this information finding its way to Wikileaks and that the information came from a pro-Bernie staffer inside the DNC that didn't like the way the Democratic establishment had their thumb on the scale in favor of Hillary and decided to slip Wikileaks the files ahead of the Democratic convention. (Wikileaks published the files on July 22, 2016, three days before the Democratic National Convention began on July 25. It looks to me like the timing wasn't coincidental and that the intent was probably to influence the convention.)

What any of that has to do with Trump remains obscure. The only connection to Trump seems to be that if the information even indirectly embarrassed Hillary, then it might help Trump. It's true that Trump indicated that he would like to improve American relations with Russia and would like to work with them where our interests coincide. (Hillary and Obama said the same thing in 2008-9, remember Hillary's famous "reset" button?)

But to leap from Trump wanting better relations with Russia to the conclusion that Trump is a Russian agent is a huge non-sequitur. Yet the mainstream media published headlines blaring that Trump is the target of a big counterespionage investigation that includes communications intercepts and examination of the financial records of Trump and his staffers.

There are lots of games being played, by lots of different players with lots of different agendas. By the DNC against Bernie as was documented in the Wikileaks files. By the mainstream media against Trump. By Trump against the enemies that want to destroy him and undo the election. By Russia in search of useful information and (arguably) against Hillary. By Hillary to protect her secret e-mails and all the foreign donors to the Clinton Foundation. And by a disloyal cabal of "deep state" government officials who apparently want to protect their long-entrenched power and influence to covertly steer the US government and the entire world.

I think that deep skepticism is the most intelligent policy for the educated public in this kind of (frankly very scary) situation.

I fear that the United States is closer to what might qualify as a quiet coup than it has ever been in its history. Trump promised to "drain the swamp" and the swamp most emphatically doesn't want to be drained. You don't take on big deeply entrenched power-players like these without putting yourself in a very dangerous situation.