No, 17 US Intelligence Agencies Did NOT Confirm Russian Involvement in the Wikileaks Emails

Every time the mainstream media claims that they are doing a fact check on Hillary Clinton saying that Russia has been proven responsible for John Podesta’s emails being leaked, they are lying for the sake of the Clinton campaign. Hillary Clinton said during the third presidential debate, that 17 US intelligence agencies have confirmed that the Russians are hacking her campaign chairman’s email account. There are only two intelligence agencies that have spoken on the matter at all. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) gave a joint statement on the matter. This is what they had to say:

The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia’s senior-most officials could have authorized these activities.

Saying that the methods used to obtain the Podesta emails were consistent with Russian hacking methods, and that the USIC is confident that it was Russia, is nowhere near proof that it was Russian hackers who provided Wikileaks with Podesta’s emails. Jumping to conclusions without evidence has lead the United States down paths of war before.

Fred Fleitz, senior vice president for policy and programs with the Center for Security Policy, explains that intelligence agencies are not to be seen as impartial in politics, and not just under the Obama administration.

For an election full of “fact checking” news outlets should at least be bothered to read the official statements given by the intelligence agencies in question, rather than force a narrative that could lead us to World War III.