“Russian Interference” in the US election has been a hot topic since the DNC and Podesta e-mails were released, partially leading to a Donald Trump presidency.
James Clapper, director of national intelligence: “the leaked e-mails are intended to interfere with the U.S. election process.”
Hillary Clinton: “We are facing a very serious concern. We’ve never had a foreign adversarial power be already involved in our electoral process.”
We’ve seen some counter-arguments made that the CIA and the USA have interfered in hundreds of elections.
What we haven’t seen is any expose on the foreign government sponsored pro-Hillary propaganda that reached ~40,000,000 Americans.
BBC ECHOES ‘RUSSIAN HACKING’ ACCUSATIONS
Despite there being limited evidence of Russian hacking (Fancy Bear, a security firm funded by Hillary donors Google says there’s a ‘medium level of confidence’) being the source of the DNC or Podesta leaks the BBC ran dozens of headlines in the months prior to the election carrying the allegations. Irregardless, the BBC has been interfering in US elections since it came to America!!
They’re skilled journalists so I’m sure they avoided relevant laws but what the BBC did is a ‘smear via association’. The BBC completely unironically ran this story accusing Assange for interfering in the US election. ‘Putin’s pawn?’, one sub-heading reads.
Many articles cited ‘officials’ or quoted DNC/CIA talking points directly.
Aren’t these kind of ‘loaded questions’ exactly what many people criticized Glenn Beck and Fox News for?
Her argument is very hypocritical and self-serving given the leaks exposed Hillary advocating for interfering in the Syrian and Palestinian elections. A nice Hillary quote: “In fact, it’s not just strange, it’s unprecedented — and it is deeply troubling because voters deserve to get full and complete facts.” Well in this case there are no facts, because there is no evidence of Russian hacking.
BBC’s REACH IN AMERICA
11% of the visitors to BBC.com come from America, according to Alexa. The website BBC claims 55 million visitors a week, which means 6,000,000 Americans have their opinions shaped every week by the BBC website. Of 200,000,000 Americans of voting age, 34-40 million of them get news from the BBC.
Therefore 17.5 – 20% of America’s voting age population were ‘influenced’ by #BBCBias.
Although many take the BBC as an unbiased source, they were anything but during their American election coverage.
During the election the BBC continually spewed out biased pro-Hillary articles; simply too many to list here. Check BBCBiased.org for a good compilation.
When Trump won, the BBC didn’t have a single pro-Trump commentator on the air and this drove the twitter hashtag #BBCBias to trending.
‘DON’T TRUST THE BIASED BBC’
Screaming “#fakenews” and “Russian hackers” isn’t the answer! Why is it only considered foreign interference in the Election when it goes against the Democrats or comes from Russia?
We consider the DNC hack to be the best journalism of 2016, up there with historic leakers Snowden, Manning and Assange. If Podesta and the DNC’s e-mails weren’t full of corrupt double-dealing, they wouldn’t have mattered at all. The Democrats should take the opportunity to clean up some of the corruption and reform their party instead of doubling down on shooting the messenger.