When news broke yesterday that an intelligence community official, Shelby Pierson, briefed the House Intelligence Committee on Russia’s alleged attempt to influence the 2020 election in President Trump’s favor, the “Russia Hoax” was reborn. “This is it,” editors and producers in newsrooms across the nation thought. “This is how we get him.”
After over two years of trying and failing to connect 2016 election interference between Russia and the Trump campaign, Democrats and mainstream media were shell-shocked by the Mueller Report and Robert Mueller’s subsequent testimony before Congress. They had trumpeted the same talking points and claimed the walls were closing in on the President. Some were bold enough to say President Trump would be gone before the midterm elections. Others expected the list of people going to jail to be in the dozens if not hundreds. With such failure, we almost can’t blame them for latching onto this new story so quickly. Almost.
Mainstream media and, predictably, House Democrats are accepting this speculation as facts above reproach. They aren’t questioning any of it from the same intelligence community that told us they weren’t spying on Americans until Edward Snowden showed they were. It’s the same people who hacked into the Senate Select Intelligence Committee’s computers and Senators’ emails during the last administration. It’s the same intelligence community that swore there were WMDs in Iraq.
Surely they’re right this time! After all, we have the most sophisticated intelligence apparatus in the world. What are the chances that they’ve been duped once again? Unfortunately, the odds are high for one reason and one reason only: They WANT to believe whatever the Russians are feeding them.
Let’s take a closer look at what’s being claimed. When trying to determine the validity of intelligence, experts will ask two basic questions about a data set. First, they’ll ask what’s possible. Then, they’ll assess what’s possible and determine the probability of the various hypotheses on the table.
The intelligence community has compiled evidence they believe points to Russia’s intention to influence the 2020 presidential election in favor of President Trump. Based on what we know, there are three possibilities. The first is that it must be taken at face value and seen as accurate. The second is that the data itself is inaccurate. The third is that the data is accurate, but it’s being misinterpreted.
Given the intelligence community’s recent track record, I’d put options one and two at 15% each and option three at 70%. Why? Because the first two options don’t make much sense and the third option, misinterpreted data, is the one that jibes best with the information we have available.
Let’s start with why option two, inaccurate data, is unlikely. The intelligence community knows much more than they’ve told us about 2016 election interference. They can’t tell us everything because they need to be able to use what they know to identify and stop future election interference. Based on the patterns they’ve uncovered, they were confident enough in the data to present it to Congress. Therefore, the data itself is likely accurate, though not necessarily sincere.
Option one, helping President Trump, makes very little sense prima facie. President Trump has been much harder on Russia than his predecessor. Moreover, the frontrunners among Democrats are all more favorable to Russia’s short- and long-term agendas than President Trump. Bernie Sanders has always been sympathetic to Russia—he took his honeymoon in Moscow—and his leanings towards socialism would greatly empower Russia on the world stage. Mike Bloomberg is friend of both Russia and China. He represents the capitalist partner the two nations would want because they’ve dealt with him in the past. Moreover, he’s against sanctions and tariffs. Then there’s Joe Biden; he’s practically family to the oligarchs.
As for President Trump, Russia has watched policies and foreign affairs victories they definitely do not like.
Trump has been tougher on Russia than any President since Reagan
Denounced annexation of Crimea
Strengthened NATO, isolating Russia
Ukrainian forces armed against Putin's wishes
Trump is tough on Russia, unlike Obama who colluded!
— Charlie Kirk (@charliekirk11) February 21, 2020
The left conflates the President’s respect for a strong Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, as some form of puppet-to-puppetmaster relationship. They refuse to look at clear evidence that the President’s politeness towards Russia’s leader does not and has never translated into actual benefits for Russia. Unlike the Democrats who made a sweetheart deal for Russia’s Middle East ally, Iran, President Trump has crippled them to the point they’re no longer an actual asset to Russia.
Based on the options available to Russia, President Trump is far less conducive to their agenda than any of his Democratic opponents. This is why the claims by the intelligence community have a high probability of being based on disinformation intentionally fed to them so they would come to the conclusion they desire. The fact that it’s likely the wrong conclusion is secondary because the Deep State has an agenda of its own, and it doesn’t include President Trump winning a second term.
Our latest episode of the NOQ Report Podcast...
Russia is very clever. Unlike the Chinese, North Koreans, and Iranians, Russia has decades of high-level experience that allows them to manipulate any intelligence community, including our own, that refuses to see what they’re doing based on bias. Considering the data was enough for the intelligence community to brief Congress about it, we must assume a high probability that it was intended to mislead.
Unlike most American endeavors that are quick and intended to deliver short-term results, Russia is willing to take its time. They’ve been seeding discontent and division in America for decades. By merely giving off the impression through leaked intelligence that they’re going to try to help President Trump win in November, they are splitting us apart even further. They really don’t have to do much other than let Democrats and mainstream media deliver false interpretations of the data. If their goal is to polarize the nation, this is exactly how they’d do it.
If Democrats, mainstream media, and the intelligence community would take off their Trump Derangement Syndrome blinders for a while, they’d see they’re getting played like fiddles by Russia. But they won’t. They like the false intelligence they’re being fed.