January 19, 2017 --
Charles M. Blow, perhaps the leading Trump-hating columnist at The New York Times, declared the election of Donald J, Trump “tainted beyond redemption” in his January 9 column. For Mr. Blow, “Donald Trump is as much Russia’s appointment as our elected executive.” Curiously, Mr. Blow included a quote from the intelligence report “ Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections.” that seems, to LPR, to have an exculpatory tone. (LPR here will quote from the Intelligence report rather than from the Blow column.) “We did not make an assessment of the impact that Russian activities had on the outcome of the 2016 election. The US Intelligence Community is charged with monitoring and assessing the intentions, capabilities, and actions of foreign actors; it does not analyze US political processes or public opinion.”
If, indeed, the Intelligence Community did not look into “US political processes or public opinion, “ how then, can cite Intelligence Report to claim that the election of Donald Trump was “tainted beyond redemption.”
LPR would very much be interested in learning just how Russia tried “to influence the 2016 presidential election” as its “most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the US-led liberal democratic order.” The report asserted: “Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.” But by the report’s disclaimer, quoted above, it could make no determination of the impact, if any, of the alleged Russian aims on the American people.
LPR is not aware that the Intelligence Community has been asked if other foreign sources tried to intervene in the presidential election. Politico, for example, ran an article, January 12, “Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire.” What, if anything, has, say, Cuba or Iran done, this election, or past elections, to get their preferred candidate into the White House? Or is it impermissible to raise this question?
Le Carre’s first blockbuster novel, “The Spy Who Came in From the Cold,” told about how British intelligence used a British agent (without his knowledge) to frame the East German counterintelligence chief to protect its mole, a top East Germany security official.
The report about a damning dossier on Donald J, Trump, to support the claim that the president-elect is controlled by the Kremlin, cries out not for discussion by media agents for the left, but for examination by author Le Carre.
We are told that the dossier was commissioned by an anti-Trump Republican. Who is this Republican? Who put the dossier in the hands of the Clinton campaign? Why was the Democratic National Committee (DNC) vulnerable to hacking? Was the vulnerability intentional? Did the Clinton campaign intend for the DNC tp get hacked so that it could blame the Russians and link them to Truimp?
Has the media and the intelligence community conspired with the Democrats to frame Donald J. Trump to keep him from reaching the White House – or to be removed as soon as possible after January 20?
Is the establishment horrified at the thought that whatever secret files cannot be shredded, deleted, or vaporized might fall into Trump’s hands?
John Le Carre, please note.