Lying About Lying
By Judd Garrett
Our intelligence agencies told the American people that in 2016, theRussians spread disinformation on social media which changed theoutcome of the 2016 election. They claimed that President Donald Trumphad colluded with the Russians to pull off this disinformation campaign.This was such an outrageous offense and threat to our democracy, that itwas necessary to appoint a special counsel, spend over $40 million, andtwo and a half years investigating this crime. In the end, the investigationproved that Donald Trump had not colluded with the Russians, and theRussians influence on the 2016 election totaled the purchasing of fewhundred thousand dollars of political ads on social media whichamounted to a fraction of 1% of all of the political ads purchased on socialmedia that election cycle.
Let’s be honest the overwhelming majority of political advertisingwhether it’s on TV, the radio, in the newspaper or on social media, is aform misinformation or disinformation. There’s very little truth inadvertising when it comes to political ads. The candidate who bought thead presents himself as the next coming of Abraham Lincoln, and hisopponent is the next coming of Richard Nixon or even Adolf Hitler.Neither claim is anywhere near the truth. But we see these phony claimsagain and again, and it continually influences elections again and again.One of the most famous examples of such advertising was in the 2012Presidential election, when a progressive action group ran an ad literally showing Paul Ryan pushing a grandmother in a wheelchair off a cliff,and that ad immediately swung the polls in Barack Obama’s favor. That iswhy campaigns raise hundreds of millions of dollars every election cycleso they can run ads which distort their own or their opponents record andpositions. Make no mistake, that’s their right. They should want topresent themselves in the best possible light and show their opponent inthe worst possible light. That is what political campaigns are all about.So, even if they are not being completely truthful, there’s nothing we canor should do about it. The alternative is worse.
Likewise, it is not against the law for the Russians or other foreignentities to purchase ads on social media and present our candidates inwhatever light they want. They cannot contribute directly to politicalcampaigns, but they can try to influence our elections throughadvertising. This is what happens. It’s not as if the United States doesn’thave a history influencing other countries elections. How many foreignleaders have we overthrown and implanted a US-friendly President intothat country – Iran, Guatemala, Congo, Dominican Republic, South Vietnam, Brazil, Chile, Indonesia, Haiti, to name a few. Didn’t BarackObama go to Israel in 2015, and try to influence their Presidential election away from Netanyahu? This is what happens.
We can pass laws prohibiting foreign entities from buying advertisementsin our media space that could influence our elections, but that would bevery hypocritical because cities like New York, Chicago and San Francisco already allow foreign nationals to vote, and 162 Congressional Democrats voted this week to allow foreign nationals to vote in our elections. So, it would not make sense to allow foreignnationals to vote in American elections, but not buy advertisementswhich may influence that same election they are voting in.
The one thing that should be outlawed until the end of time, is ourintelligence agencies colluding with one political party to censor speechon our public forums. That is a direct violation of our First Amendmentrights to free speech and freedom of the press. They cannot argue that thesocial media platforms are private companies, and those companies cancensor whatever speech they want, because it is no longer a privatecompany decision when elected officials, government agents and politicalcampaigns use their power to collude with or coerce these privatecompanies to censor the speech they do not like. These private companiescan no longer hide behind the fact that they are private companies. As wehave discovered through the Twitter Files released by Elon Musk, thispractice was rampant throughout the 2020 Presidential campaign.
In October of 2020, 51 former and current intelligence officials all signeda letter claiming that the Hunter Biden laptop had all the earmarks of aRussian disinformation campaign. That letter was used by social mediacompanies to justify censoring the story on their sites, the websitePolitico wrote an article claiming that the laptop was Russiandisinformation, and Joe Biden used the letter during one of thePresidential debates to refute Donald Trump’s claims that Joe Biden hadbeen selling influence to our enemies. Former Director of NationalIntelligence, James Clapper, who never knew a lie that he didn’t tell, in2020 said, “To me, this [Hunter Biden’s laptop] is just classic textbook Soviet Russian tradecraft at work.” Polls show that 16% of Biden voters would have voted differently if the Hunter Biden laptop story had not been suppressed. More than enough to swing theelection.
Now that Hunter Biden’s laptop has been verified, many of those 51intelligence officials are trying to distance themselves from the letter theyall signed three years ago. Clapper told The Washington Post this week,“All we were doing was raising a yellow flag that this could be Russian disinformation. Politico deliberately distorted what we said.” If that were the truth, if they were really concerned that theAmerican people may be misled by a Russian disinformation campaign,then why didn’t they all stand up and proclaim that Politico wasmisleading the American people when it distorted what they had said inthe letter back in 2020? Why didn’t they write another clarifying letterafter Joe Biden used their letter to debunk Donald Trump’s accusationsagainst Biden of using his son to sell influence to our foreign enemies?Didn’t Joe Biden distort their letter as much as Politico did? Wasn’t JoeBiden using their letter to mislead the American people? Weren’t Bidenand Politico engaged in a disinformation campaign themselves?
Many of the 51 intelligence agents are now claiming that they were verycareful not to assert that it was definitely a Russian disinformationcampaign, but only that it could be, yet they never corrected the publicrecord when Biden and media outlets used their letter to state definitivelythat it was. So, now our intelligence agents are lying about the fact thatthey lied back in 2020 in order to influence the election in favor of Biden.Every single intelligence agent who signed the Hunter Biden letter shouldbe stripped of all of their security clearances and have their pensions andother benefits taken from them. The abuse of their office and the abuse ofthe credibility of their office has caused untold damage not just in the2020 election, but damage to the intelligence agencies in the eyes of theAmerican people for years to come. If that appears too harsh, understandthat signing that letter was a clear violation of their oath when theybecame a member of the intelligence community which states clearly, to“Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States.”Unlawfully interfering with our elections and denying American citizenstheir First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and freedom of thepress is a direct violation our Constitution.
But nothing will happen to any of them. This is the way it works. Thepeople in power break the law, manipulate the system to their ownadvantage, and there will be an investigation, there will be someembarrassment, but nothing will be done about it. They will get awaywith this scot-free. No different than the law clerk who leaked the Dobbsdecision which overturned Roe v. Wade. It was a clear violation of the law,the person who did it should be immediately disbarred. The SupremeCourt did a so-called investigation and concluded that they would neverbe able to find out who did it. The violator of our Constitution will getaway scot-free.
Remember, the Watergate scandal which took down a sitting Presidentconsisted of President Richard Nixon using CIA agents to break into theDemocrat National Headquarters in the Watergate Hotel to get insideinformation so he could use that to influence the outcome of the 1972election. In 2016, the Clinton campaign colluded with intelligenceagencies to spy on their opponent. In 2020, the Biden campaign colludedwith intelligent agencies to deny American citizens their first amendmentrights of freedom of speech and freedom of the press. All three have theexact same elements of wrongdoing, a Presidential candidate illegallyusing the intelligence agencies for political purposes to influence theoutcome of an election. Richard Nixon was forced to resign and is stillconsidered one of the most corrupt Presidents we’ve ever had because ofWatergate, but what Hillary Clinton did and what Joe Biden did in theirPresidential campaigns will only be shrugged off as business as usual.
Unfortunately, many many people give merit to these people. Why? Because they are present or ex intelligence officials. The FBI are kindergartners next to the intell community when it comes to targeting politicians they hold no favor of. Even after his security clearance was revoked John Brennan continued to pontificate. Clapper, who spied on Congress, still sallies forth to provide we plebeians with his wisdom. Though it would never happen, intell apparatchiks security clearances should be revoked when they leave their position. Further, it should be violation of government employment to discuss issues with these former apparatchiks.