A Fox News analyst cited evidence that Obama rigged Intel claiming that Russia interfered with the election.

Fred Fleitz from Fox News may help to #StopTheHoaxNow by pointing to evidence that Obama rigged Intel to frame the Russians for interfering in our election.

Fleitz called attention to “a far more important story that surfaced this week that no one is talking about: a mysterious hand-picked group of analysts chosen to write a damning intelligence assessment that found Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win.” 

Fleitz’s assessment-edited and broken down into bullet points:
  • January 6, 2017- the U.S. Intelligence Community issued an “Intelligence Community Assessment” (ICA) that found Russia deliberately interfered in the 2016 presidential election to benefit Trump’s candidacy.
  • The news media and Trump critics have claimed this assessment ended the debate on this issue because  it was (supposedly)the unanimous and objective conclusion of “all 17” U.S. Intelligence Agencies.
  • There are compelling reasons to believe this ICA was actually a politicized analysis that violated normal rules for crafting intelligence assessments to ensure this one reached the bottom line conclusion that the Obama administration was looking for.
  • Fleitz believes this even more strongly after former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s Senate testimony this week.
  • In his May 8 testimony Clapper confirmed that the ICA reflected the views of only three intelligence agencies — CIA, NSA and FBI – NOT all 17.
  • This is unusual because an ICA is supposed to reflect the collected judgment of all U.S. intelligence agencies, or at least include all agencies with relevant expertise.
  • Clapper did not explain why the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Department of Homeland Security and the State Department’s intelligence bureau did not participate.
  • The January 6 ICA was suspicious because it reached unusually clear judgments on a politically explosive issue with no dissenting views.
  • Fleitz previously thought the ICA’s unambiguous, dissent-free judgments were the result of limiting the number of intelligence agencies which could participate.  But based on Clapper’s testimony, it appears that politicization of this assessment was much more serious.
  • Clapper explained that two dozen or so “seasoned experts” were “handpicked” from the contributing agencies” and drafted the ICA.
  • While Clapper claimed these analysts were given “complete independence” to reach their findings, he added that their conclusions “were thoroughly vetted and then approved by the directors of the three agencies and me.”
  • This process drastically differed from the Intelligence Community’s normal procedures.
  • Hand-picking a handful of analysts from just three intelligence agencies to write such a controversial assessment went against standing rules throughout the Intelligence Community within its existing structure.
  • Using  hand-picked intelligence analysts selected through some unknown process to write an assessment on such a politically sensitive topic carries a strong stench of politicization.
  • FBI Director James Comey said in testimony to the House Intelligence Committee the conclusion that Russia tried to affect the outcome of the election to help Trump win was based on logic, not evidence.
  • So we now know this was a subjective judgment made by a hand-picked group of intelligence analysts.
  • One has to ask how these hand-picked analysts were picked.  Who picked them?  Who was excluded?  Fleitz is also concerned that the conclusions of these hand-picked intelligence analysts were later vetted and approved by Clapper and three other intelligence agency heads.
  • A major problem with this process is that it gave John Brennan, CIA’s hyper-partisan former director, enormous influence over the drafting of the ICA.
  • Given Brennan’s scathing criticism of Mr. Trump before and after the election, he should have had no role whatsoever in the drafting of this assessment.
  • Brennan probably selected the CIA analysts who worked on the ICA and reviewed and approved their conclusions.
  • The unusual way that the January 6, 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment was drafted raises major questions as to whether it was rigged by the Obama administration to produce conclusions that would discredit the election outcome and Mr. Trump’s presidency.
  • The House and Senate Intelligence Committees therefore should add investigations of whether this ICA was politicized to their investigations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

This is a major game-changer.

If it’s proven that Obama rigged Intel to frame Russia it  will be another crowning jewel in Obama’s “legacy.”  He will be forever known as the most evil and corrupt President in US history.

The more the Dems dig, the more they uproot their own skeletons and fossilized cowplop.

It’s another case of Dem backfire!

The Globalist Dems should have gone back to work. They should have been more intent on learning their lessons from the crushing defeat of their career criminal candidate.  It would have been wise to map out a strategy in order to win future elections. But the usual patience of waiting 4 years hasn’t applied this time around. They’re Hell-bent on discrediting our fairly elected President.

Ironically, if it weren’t for their sore loser efforts, we may have remained blissfully unaware of the depths of their corruption and criminal acts.

We owe them our undying gratitude. Let’s thank them! How ’bout we  treat them to some free room and board, a daily dose of sunlight-and lots of prison sex.

Do you think they’ll investigate this ICA? Comment below!