The Electoral College is facing a crisis which many Electors determined has a direct impact on their upcoming vote on Dec. 19th. Since the CIA said Russia hacked the vote, 40 Electors signed an open letter indicating that they want clarification on whether Donald Trump accepted help from Russia.
Part of the letter said this:
According to reports in the Washington Post, New York Times, and other outlets, the United States intelligence community has now concluded definitively that the Russian interference was performed to help Donald Trump get elected, yet even today Mr. Trump is refusing to accept that finding.
The idea that “the United States Intelligence community has now concluded definitively that the Russian interference was performed” is up for debate. As reported on December 12th, there is a disagreement between the CIA and the FBI on what was actually conclusive.
According to the Washington Post, a senior FBI counterintelligence official indicated the CIA’s ” direct and bald and unqualified” assessment of a Russian hack job was actually “fuzzy” and “ambiguous”
The Electors do face the burden of voting for the person who should be our next President and cite Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist Paper #68-
[A] core purpose of the Electoral College was to prevent a “desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.”
However, if this truly were a bipartisan effort to ensure Russia did not hack the US Voting System, one might imagine more Republican support joining the open letter. To date, all signatures are from members representing Democratic-vote states, with the exception of Chris Suprun(R-TX). Suprun made his opinions about Donald Trump known in a op-ed Total Patriot reported here., so his signature on an open letter about determining a Russian hack job seems out of place and rather opportunistic.
Since the FBI, which deals with facts and law (compared to the CIA’s cloak and dagger intelligence), issued a statement that says there is no conclusive proof that the vote was hacked, this does seem politically motivated. John Bolton, former US ambassador to the United Nations, raised the point of the carelessness of this hack in relation to other hacks that the public has been made aware of. He asked the question, “[W]hy did the Russians run their smart intelligence service against Hillary’s server but their dumb intelligence services against the election?”
Bolton was referencing a flood of DNC emails leaked to Wikileaks back in July, the source of has not been determined, but believed to be Russian government hackers by intelligence officals. The line of thought was this- If that hack was indeed Russia, why were they so careful not to get caught stealing that information, which embarrassed Hillary, but so juvenile in their approach to the election itself, leaving fingerprints all over the place for the CIA to find.
Bolton indicated the CIA coming out and saying ‘Russia hacked our vote’ might be a false flag motivated by political gain. Veteran journalist Joseph Farah documented Obama’s CIA chief John Brennan’s background and why his political leanings would come through in his management style of the country’s spy house.