I have learned to endure a lot of foolishness purported to be news, at least as far as news is classified by the editors of most MSM (Mainstream Media) outlets. More appropriate labels would be the disinformation paper, the 6:00 sensationalism report, etc. It’s gotten bad enough to make one think there’s a Ministry of Disinformation (MoD) somewhere, coordinating the flow of inept investigations, half-truths and outright lies served up as ‘factual reporting.’ The amount of garbage that’s put out as reliable information is truly astounding, and it seems to be getting worse. Provide an example, you say? How about the headline article (courtesy of the Associated Press) in yesterday’s edition of The Kansas City Star, entitled US Punishes Russia for hacking election.
There are so many inaccuracies in this ‘news’ article it’s hard to figure out where to start so, to make life a little less complicated, let’s just list some of the claims of the MoD and balance them with FACTS. I’m sure we all remember what facts are (I hope), but just in case we need a primer let’s review.
Trending: Get with the Nation, New York!
Facts are based in reality – not theories. Facts can be proven by evidence, and the more evidence available the more irrefutable those facts become. Facts can be verified multiple ways, by anyone, at any time. Conversely, allegations are not facts. Neither are unsupported claims. The same holds true for assumptions. Projections, while entertaining, are not facts either – they are guesses. They may be educated guesses, but they are guesses nonetheless.
Now that we have established the framework for what actual facts are, let’s continue with our comparisons;
- The very first sentence gets it wrong on multiple levels, stating that Russia hacked the US presidential campaign. Is that so? At no time has anyone, anywhere, been shown to have ‘hacked’ the US elections process. Even recent recounts in contested states have shown that premise to be humorously false, and the integrity of the electoral process was never in question.
- Repeating an error does not make the error factual, and although implied (over and over and over again), Russian government involvement has never been proven (see the next point, below). Stating that Russia ‘hacked the election’ is sloppy journalism at best (a hallmark of the MoD, BTW). It’s apparent the author simply restated what they personally believe to be true – irrespective of the truth. It reminds me of a mantra.
It’s obvious the writer didn’t; A. bother to gain knowledge of the facts (ignorance), B. ignored the real facts (subversion and/or suppression of the truth), C. has an ulterior motive (activism), D. is incompetent, or, E. any combination of the above. I tend to go with E.
- Neither the FBI nor the CIA has shown conclusively that the Russian government was a perpetrator. Even honest progressives acknowledge as much. Russians may have been involved, but that doesn’t mean the Russian government pulled the strings. Americans are involved in all kinds of illegal activities, but we don’t say the US government is behind it all. Well, at least not in most situations…
- The gist of the article (and in every other piece of MoD ‘news’ related to this story) is that the Russians have somehow changed the US election process. And when I refer to “change” I mean that they undid what was accomplished, altering it in some fashion. The reality is that the people of this country elected who they wanted, and they preferred Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.
Did the revelation of DNC favoritism of Clinton over Sanders have an impact? I’m sure it did.
How about those leaked emails from Clinton campaign leaders? Did they contribute to Clinton losing the election? More than likely.
Do we know conclusively who provided those leaks? No we don’t.
Could they have been supplied by whistle-blowers? Yes, they could have.
Is the revelation of the truth a bad thing? I would say not.
I think it’s in the best interests of the people that the truth comes out – regardless whether that is accomplished by Russian hackers, Julian Assange, internal whistle-blowers or anyone else.
- The article claims there are at least five federal agencies” which (the writer insinuates) support the same conclusion. Umm, no. Actually (as of this writing) there are only two, and since neither of them supply any evidence to substantiate their claims it’s a moot point (please review our definition of facts, above).
- A current total of 35 Russian diplomats and their families have been expelled from the US, ostensibly for espionage-related activities. The MoD even claims that, according to “the United States,” Russia had been harassing US diplomats all along. When was the MoD going to report THAT?
Hey guys, here’s a news flash. Russia (and every other nation on the planet – including the US and even our allies) have been involved in espionage-related activities towards each other. The world has been playing this game for decades, yet nothing was done by the US until now. More unsubstantiated claims by the MoD, nothing more.
As they say, “Timing is everything.”
- The MoD seamlessly integrates the DNC with the US government when they acknowledge the ‘victims’ were part of that organization. They almost, in one breath, link the two together, fused at the hip as it were.
I have to admit it, but that’s a pretty slick way to try and get people to associate the DNC with real government instead of – you know – those other people (the RNC). Just another MoD ongoing jab in the effort to delegitimize Republican elected officials, from Trump on down.
- Something that I have yet to see mentioned is this; what about the connection between the DNC hacking AND CLINTON’S PERSONAL EMAIL SERVERS? I don’t have a computer programming degree, but it seems odd to me that people are making such a fuss over the DNC and completely obfuscate (or intentionally ignore) Clinton’s vulnerable – yet classified – emails.
Why is that an issue? Well, for starters I would assume (dangerous, but I do it anyway) if the Russians were that interested in US government operations they would target current US officials. You know, people like the then-current SECRETARY OF STATE (that would have been Mrs. Clinton). You are intelligent, so I’m confident you can follow the rationale to its logical conclusion.
You can look at any article, commentary or report from the MSM and see the same bias. It is unavoidable and inescapable. If, however, you seek the truth, you can rest assured that you will find it. It may take a bit of time, but you will be amply rewarded for your efforts. Until then you will be bombarded by the same distortion and inaccuracy as shown in this one, single piece of drivel.
The Ministry of Disinformation is, indeed, alive and well.Tags: DNC
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author and are not not necessarily either shared or endorsed by iPatriot.com.