While the White House and the liberal press have been touting Russia as the force behind trying to influence the 2016 election, I’ve been busy tracking the true culprit down. Now, the lamestream media is lying about a CIA report that allegedly proves that Russia tried to influence the election in Trump’s favor. But that is fake news because the CIA report shows no evidence and clearly admits that it’s report is not proven.
There is a huge difference between what the liberals are accusing Russia of doing and what I found to be the attempted interference by the true conspirators. If the liberals are right, what actually happened? The truth was revealed. No one is denying the truthfulness of the leaked emails. But the true influencers used lies and innuendo.
The interference by the press and the DNC began during the primaries in saving Hillary from Bernie Sanders. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the corrupt head of the DNC who ended up having to resign in shame set up the debates at times least likely to draw a crowd, which was a great help for Clinton inasmuch as she lost all of the debates badly with 80% of voters often stating that Bernie won them. CNN reporters leaked debate questions to fellow CNN Donna Brazile, who passed them on to Hillary Clinton. Ironically, the ethically challenged Brazile took over for the ethically challenged Schultz.
Once the DNC emails were released, it became apparent just how much aid the DNC was giving Hillary and Hillary ended up losing a sizable number of Bernie Backers. Most of them refused to vote for Trump but they either voted third party or stayed home altogether.
Moving on to the general election, we look at the disparity of the positive vs negative stories. Red State published this study:
In the twelve weeks since the party conventions concluded in late July, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has received significantly more broadcast network news coverage than his Democratic rival, Hillary Clinton, but nearly all of that coverage (91%) has been hostile, according to a new study by the Media Research Center (MRC).
In addition, the networks spent far more airtime focusing on the personal controversies involving Trump (440 minutes) than about similar controversies involving Clinton (185 minutes). Donald Trump’s treatment of women was given 102 minutes of evening news airtime, more than that allocated to discussing Clinton’s e-mail scandal (53 minutes) and the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play scandals (40 minutes) combined.
The polling data was skewed:
Polling Data
| Poll | Date | Sample | MoE |
Clinton (D)
|
Trump (R)
|
Johnson (L)
|
Stein (G)
|
Spread |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Final Results | — | — | — | 48.2 | 46.1 | 3.3 | 1.1 | Clinton +2.1 |
| RCP Average | 11/2 – 11/7 | — | — | 45.5 | 42.2 | 4.7 | 1.9 | Clinton +3.3 |
| Bloomberg | 11/4 – 11/6 | 799 LV | 3.5 | 44 | 41 | 4 | 2 | Clinton +3 |
| IBD/TIPP Tracking | 11/4 – 11/7 | 1026 LV | 3.1 | 43 | 45 | 8 | 2 | Trump +2 |
| Economist/YouGov | 11/4 – 11/7 | 3677 LV | — | 45 | 41 | 5 | 2 | Clinton +4 |
| ABC/Wash Post Tracking | 11/3 – 11/6 | 2220 LV | 2.5 | 47 | 43 | 4 | 1 | Clinton +4 |
| FOX News | 11/3 – 11/6 | 1295 LV | 2.5 | 48 | 44 | 3 | 2 | Clinton +4 |
| Monmouth | 11/3 – 11/6 | 748 LV | 3.6 | 50 | 44 | 4 | 1 | Clinton +6 |
| Gravis | 11/3 – 11/6 | 16639 RV | 1.0 | 47 | 43 | 3 | 2 | Clinton +4 |
| NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl | 11/3 – 11/5 | 1282 LV | 2.7 | 44 | 40 | 6 | 2 | Clinton +4 |
| Reuters/Ipsos | 11/2 – 11/6 | 2196 LV | 2.3 | 42 | 39 | 6 | 3 | Clinton +3 |
| Rasmussen Reports | 11/2 – 11/6 | 1500 LV | 2.5 | 45 | 43 | 4 | 2 | Clinton +2 |
| CBS News | 11/2 – 11/6 | 1426 LV | 3.0 | 45 | 41 | 5 | 2 | Clinton +4 |
All General Election: Trump vs. Clinton vs. Johnson vs. Stein Polling Data
The media tried to aid Clinton by saying the election was over and Donald Trump could not possibly win.
If congress wants to investigate whether Russia tried to unfairly influence the election, then they need to expand that investigation to include Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the 65 reporters who met with Hillary, the reporters who sent their stories to Hillary for editing, Donna Brazile, George Soros, the mainstream media and others. Let’s see how enthusiastic the liberals are then.
Other links:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2016/10/17/wikileaks-journalists-clinton-staff-homes-before-hillarys-campaign-launch/
http://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-dnc-emails-wikileaks-2016-7
http://dailycaller.com/2016/11/03/politico-reporter-gets-caught-again-sending-a-story-to-a-clinton-staffer-for-approval/