Mainstream Media outlets all print unsourced "50 former intel" report claiming Russian disinformation

With just two weeks to go, the Deep State is ramping up its efforts to help Cackles and the Democrat partei (sic) win.  Latest example:  The Mainstream Media is rolling out a story that "50 U.S. intel agents claim a video falsely portraying VP candidate Tim Walz in an unflattering way is 'Russian disinformation.'"

But tellingly, not one of the stories has either attribution or a link.  It's all anonymous, which strongly suggests that no one wants to have their name on this utter bullshit.

This is how the Deep State / CIA works: Bombshell claims with no attribution.  And if you see any similarity to "51 former U.S. intel agents say Hunty bribem laptop story is Russian disinformation," you're paranoid.

Here's the NY Times at 5pm Tuesday, the 22nd: 

U.S. Fears Russia Might Be Planning Post-Election Chaos

(The Google summary of this Times piece is more pointed: "Russian disinformation efforts, including faked Walz video, could continue")

Sub-head: "Foreign powers including Russia and Iran could move quickly right after the vote to undermine the democratic process, intelligence agencies warn."

Translation: If anyone objects to massive, obvious, brazen election fraud, they're really Russian OR IRANIAN agents!  Implicit takeaway: "So since they're Russian agents trying to steal ouah precious vote-fraud, unlimited use of force is, like, totally warranted, eh?"
  And notice how the lying rat-bastards have added a new enemy to the list, in case Russia and China weren't enough to scare stupid, gullible voters into voting for Cackles: Iran.

Article begins:

Russia is considering actions to stoke protests and even violence over the U.S. election results, intelligence officials said on Tuesday, as foreign powers appear to be moving aggressively to undermine the democratic process during what is already expected to be a contentious vote count.

 WOW!  So "Foreign powers appear to be moving aggressively to undermine ouah precious democracy," y'say?  
  News flash: YOU HAVE ZERO EVIDENCE OF THAT.  It's a total lie.
  For the naive: If you're Russia or China or fucking IRAN, who would you rather have as president of the U.S, Cackles or Trump?  It's a no-brainer: any foreign power would far prefer Cackles because a) she's a moron; b) she's totally corrupt; c) she supports the Paleswinians over Israel.
   Seriously, if you'd actually had evidence you would have told us, so more voters would have believed you.  But you didn't, because your claim is a total lie.

Russia, along with Iran and China, has *already sought to influence the election through myriad efforts to spread disinformation.* The officials said new intelligence showed that Moscow had created and spread a staged video falsely accusing Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, of sexual misconduct.

The video, which was quickly debunked, is the latest in a series of false narratives that Russian operatives have fabricated this year.

Again: who do you think Russia (and the other alleged foreign powers) would rather see as president of the U.S.: Cackles or Trump?  The answer is obvious, in which case the entire notion that Russia would intervene to HELP elect Trump is beyond absurd.
   But Deep State operatives know most voters don't even begin to analyze their propaganda in any depth.  The average voter sees "Russia" or "China" or now "Iran" and reads "enemy."  So when the Deep State claims an "enemy" is doing something to elect Trump, that's all the average voter needs to know.

With the election two weeks away, the Director of National Intelligence, the FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, raised new warnings about the post-election period, arguing that Russia and Iran were considering stoking and amplifying domestic unrest.

WOW, the Times claims not just one but *three* regime agencies are "raising warnings," eh?  If it's that fucking dire you'd think at least ONE fucking source would be willing to go on the record for the Times' breathless propaganda piece, eh?  Nah, bro, ya gotta jus' trust dat duh Leftist, Democrat-fellating shitheads at the Times always tell duh troof, right?

The intelligence agencies said they expected “foreign actors to continue to conduct influence operations through inauguration, denigrating U.S. democracy, including by calling into question the results of the election.”

AGAIN the pre-emptive strike: "Anyone who claims there was massive, brazen election fraud is a tool of 'foreign actors.'"

Intel officials first raised concerns about the post-election period in a classified document prepared earlier this month. The Director of National Propaganda (st) Intelligence, Avril Haines, declassified it last week (wow, how convenient, eh?) and released a partially redacted version today.

Since the assessment was completed, new intelligence has highlighted Russia’s intentions to encourage protests and violence, especially if former President Trump loses, officials said.

Again, who would Russia logically favor as U.S. president? 

In an election security update, Ms. Haines’s office said that some of the Russian influence efforts “are aimed at inciting violence and calling into question the validity of democracy...”

Wait..."calling into question the validity of democracy..."?  No, assholes: calling into question the honesty of corrupt Dem vote-counters.  And we have video evidence of their brazen dishonesty, as workers tasked with certifying matching signatures on mail-in ballots were videoed approving sigs that didn't remotely match.

Intelligence officials said they did NOT believe it likely that Russia or another country would be able to...change vote totals to affect the outcome...

Translation: when the Dems win, yew deplorables canNOT blame fraud, cuz we jus' tol' ya Russia couldn't do it!  So whatever total is reported will be perfectly accurate, the real vote.  So you are NOT allowed to dispute it.  And if you do, you must be a Russian agent!

...but predicted disruptions were likely to occur across the U.S. on election day and that Russia, Iran and China would seize on the opportunity to portray the country as chaotic and unreliable.

"predicted disruptions," y'say?  Like...um...a "broken water main" in a major counting center that officials use as a pretext to claim to stop counting and to force poll watchers out?  Hmmm...

Malicious actors conducting ransomware attacks and other hackers could target local election offices but would have a very difficult time interfering with voting systems, which are not connected to the internet.

Ohhh, this is good!  It takes a minute to figure out the purpose of the 'graf above: Ah, they mention "ransomware attacks!"  All Americans know what those are, right?  So that makes the warning seem realistic: "Ah, we know 'bout dat!"  But then "could target," and "would have a very difficult time interfering..."  So a nothing, eh?

Nope, the purpose is at the end, claiming ballot-scanning machines are NOT connected to the internet.  Really?  Bullshit.  Total lie.  It's true that they're not SUPPOSED TO BE connected to  the Net, but in 2020 there were scores of eyewitness reports of Ethernet cables between ballot scanners and wall sockets.  "Not connected to the internet"?

People with WiFi frequency scanners reported communication between ballot scanners and outside URLs that couldn't be identified.  But the Times liars assure you that "intel officials" claim nothing is connected to the internet.  Right.

According to intelligence officials, the period after the election, as officials are certifying the vote, could be especially fraught.

Once again warning about unspecified dangers as votes are tallied.  So who would you suspect (blame) if anything happens as votes are "counted," eh?

Intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia has sought to bolster the re-election effort of Mr. Trump and would act aggressively if Ms. Harris wins.

Again the same bullshit claim that Russia prefers Trump.  It's totally illogical: The Russians would far rather face the moronic, incompetent Cackles than Trump, and everyone knows it.  But the Times--and NPR and the Washington Post and the Dem-fellating Associated Press--think you're too dumb to figure that out.

The intelligence report noted that Russian influence campaigns had pivoted their efforts to disparage President Biden to (disparaging) Ms. Harris after biden announced he would not run, pushing “conspiracy theories about her elevation to the top of the ticket.”

ALL Americans realized that the fix was in when the Dems forced the ailing biden to renounce the nomination, which the Dems then gifted to Harris.  When Russian media reported the obvious (which was ignored by U.S. media), the leftists at the Times and all other Mainstream outlets cunningly use that to claim Russia supports Trump.  Not at all.  They were just reporting what our Mainstream Media refused to report: that the fix was in to give Harris the nomination.

Security and intelligence officials concluded that Russia was behind the fabricated narratives about Mr. Walz.  The person shown in one video was real but not who he was claimed to be. It also showed evidence of having been manipulated, the officials said.

Ahh, finally the Times gets around to explaining the video referred to early in the piece.  You remember, right?

"Officials said new intelligence showed that Moscow had created and spread a staged video falsely accusing Gov. Tim Walz of Minnesota, the Democratic vice-presidential nominee, of sexual misconduct."

So, any details, Times liars?  No?  No details at all?   Okay, let me help:

Turns out someone made a video of a named former student at Walz's high school claiming Walz had made a gay pass at him.  But the student--who, again, was named and pictured in the video--claims he never met Walz, easily discrediting the claim, right?

The obvious conclusion--so obvious--is that the video was created by a Trump supporter to damage Walz, eh?

But think about it:  If you're gonna create a video of a fake accusation, why would you name the accuser if he's still alive, and thus would be expected to expose the fraud?  Not only wouldn't you name him, you wouldn't show his face.  You might even alter his voice, to "protect him."

The fact that whoever made the video not only named the accuser but also showed his face--making it easy to debunk-- suggests this was a "false flag" operation, done by the Dems to make it appear that Trump supporters were doing the dirty tricks the Democrats do.

Source: the New York Times 

Source 2: Associated Press 

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/22/us/politics/election-warning-russia-iran.html

https://www.startribune.com/russia-is-behind-viral-disinformation-targeting-walz-intelligence-official-says/601166238