Russophobia Remains Alive

I went out to lunch yesterday with a friend. This is a friend, now retired, who I have written of before. He considers himself a progressive, but he believes that Russia stole the election from Hillary, and people who fervently supported Bernie played a role in spreading Russian disinformation. He read and recommends Russian Roulette by Michael Isikoff and David Corn.

Usually I politely joust with him and ask how is that Russia can be blamed for doing something -- "dividing us" -- that is the very basis of our two-party political system. But yesterday I found myself unable to control my anger. I told him to read Ray McGovern, who in December noted that Michael Isikoff had to walk back Russian Roulette's credulous acceptance of the Steele Dossier. I told him the critical thing to factor in regarding the purported Russian hack of the DNC (which revealed that the DNC was conspiring against Bernie Sanders in the 2016 primaries) is that it was not a hack but a leak on a thumb drive.

Ray McGovern confronted former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper at a promotional event for Clapper's book:

JC: Well, I have talked with NSA a lot, and I also know what we briefed to then-President Elect Trump on the 6th of January. And in my mind, uh, I spent a lot of time in the SIGINT [signals intelligence] business, the forensic evidence was overwhelming about what the Russians had done. There’s absolutely no doubt in my mind whatsoever. The Intelligence Community Assessment that we rendered that day, that was asked, tasked to us by President Obama – and uh – in early December, made no call whatsoever on whether, to what extent the Russians influenced the outcome of the election. Uh, the administration, uh, the team then, the President-Elect’s team, wanted to say that – that we said that the Russian interference had no impact whatsoever on the election. And I attempted, we all did, to try to correct that misapprehension as they were writing a press release before we left the room.

However, as a private citizen, understanding the magnitude of what the Russians did and the number of citizens in our country they reached and the different mechanisms that, by which they reached them, to me it stretches credulity to think they didn’t have a profound impact on election on the outcome of the election.

RM: That’s what the New York Times says. But let me say this: we have two former Technical Directors from NSA in our movement here, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity; we also have forensics, okay?

Now the President himself, your President, President Obama said two days before he left town: The conclusions of the intelligence community – this is ten days after you briefed him – with respect to how WikiLeaks got the DNC emails are “inconclusive” end quote. Now why would he say that if you had said it was conclusive?

JC: I can’t explain what he said or why. But I can tell you we’re, we’re pretty sure we know, or knew at the time, how WikiLeaks got those emails. I’m not going to go into the technical details about why we believe that.

RM: We are too [pretty sure we know]; and it was a leak onto a thumb drive – gotten to Julian Assange – really simple. If you knew it, and the NSA has that information, you have a duty, you have a duty to confess to that, as well as to [Iraq].

JC: Confess to what?

RM: Confess to the fact that you’ve been distorting the evidence.

JC: I don’t confess to that.

RM: The Intelligence Community Assessment was without evidence.

JC: I do not confess to that. I simply do not agree with your conclusions.

There is little doubt that we'll see "Russians aiding Sanders" stories appear as we get closer to 2020. One thing that terrifies the neoliberals is the following from Sydney Ember's write-up of Bernie's announcement of his presidential candidacy:

Mr. Sanders will start with several advantages, including the foundation of a 50-state organization; a massive lead among low-dollar donors that is roughly equivalent to the donor base of all the other Democratic hopefuls combined; and a cache of fervent, unwavering supporters who spent the day exulting in his decision to run. A coveted speaker, he can still electrify crowds in a way few politicians can. He enjoys wide name recognition, and several early polls had him running second behind former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

The strength of that donor list was quickly apparent: In the 12 hours after Mr. Sanders formally joined the race, his campaign said it had pulled in more than $4 million.