The effectiveness of the non-stop Russiagate hoax has shows up on the personal level, but it is maintained from the very top. It is engrained enough to be foundational for Saturday Night Live’s comics and for comic columnists. The multiple debunks are utterly ignored, and “the caravan moves on.”
Senator Schumer is still asserting much that has been debunked, but the debunking matters not, either to the promulgators or to the true believers.
And CNN, on April 11 had this: “While speaking to a crowd in New York, Hillary Clinton said that Julian Assange — whose organization, WikiLeaks, played a damaging role in her 2016 electoral defeat — needs to “answer for what he has done.”
Thus CNN’s editorial comment again assigns blame to Russian for her loss. In the accompanying CNN video, we hear the audience burst into applause when the host speaks of the arrest of Julian Assange.
And we read that two-thirds of the US electorate support prosecuting Assange.
Some papers did print the Assange denial that the email source was Russia. From the Belfast Telegraph of December 16, 2016:
Assange said: “We’re unhappy that we felt that we needed to even say that it wasn’t a state party. Normally, we say nothing at all.
“We have … a strong interest in protecting our sources, and so we never say anything about them, never ruling anyone in or anyone out.
“And so here, in order to prevent a distraction attack against our publications, we’ve had to come out and say ‘no, it’s not a state party. Stop trying to distract in that way and pay attention to the content of the publication,”
Ignored at the top, and ignored by the public.
This Facebook comment perhaps represents the view of “the man in the street:”
“For all the good Wikileaks has done, ending up being a Russia cut-out as a propaganda tool to oppose Hillary Rodham Clinton and help Trump, to steal the 2016 election, that action by Assange is a crime, not protected as press freedom!”
Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.
I find this parallel to Ukraine’s failure to prove at the court of the Hague, that there were Russian troops in Ukraine. They keep saying it, they have their reasons to keep saying it, ordinary people swallow it but in a court of law…!
Here is Georgy Tuka:
“We can not yet, despite all the efforts, legally prove the presence in the Donbass of the regular Russian army,” Tuka said, noting that the recent decision of the court in The Hague affirmed it.
And in the cornerstone of the Russiagate hoax, Background to “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent US Elections”: The Analytic Process and CyberIncident Attribution, we find, if we read all the way past the end, into appendix B, this remarkable admission:
Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that something is a fact.
“We can stitch a hundred embroideries a day on ourselves, but this is not the solution of the question, it’s absolutely purely emotional stuff, that can be allowed only by the deputies working for their own electorate, deceiving and manipulating them,” the deputy minister added, stressing that there are international terms and concepts that Ukraine must operate on to establish in the courts the facts of Russia’s invasion of Ukrainian territory.
Tuka is Deputy Minister for Temporary Occupied Territories and internally displaced persons.