Once one develops an eye for information operations (IO), one sees them all around, and they are either all important, not very important at all, or somewhere in between. For example, I recall when ISIS was beheading people who were dressed in orange, and each article featured that same picture, which your correspondent deeply wished editors would stop using. However, it was a great picture, so editors couldn’t help themselves — it was a great info op for ISIS.
Let us just review what IO is in play right now. First, the Democrats want to discredit the impending Trump presidency, and since they lost the election as well as their majority in Congress, all they have is IO. Democrats are blaming the Russians for Trumps win, which is somewhat problematic for several reasons. First, Putin has significant problems with Hillary and Obama because they tried to influence Russia’s election in 2011, and they killed Russia’s ally Qaddafi as well. Second, Hillary actually profited handsomely by guiding the sale of American uranium to Russia, which nobody seems interested in discussing and which is far more significant a relationship than anything in Trump’s history. Third, there is the sticky matter of Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta‘s emails that were released on a daily basis for maximum damage by Wikileaks during the days preceding the US presidential election in November. There was such damaging information in those emails, especially concerning the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), pay-to-play, and other petty evils that the Democrats clearly are doing what they can to blunt their impact.
Several actions have been undertaken by the Democrats to distract from Podesta’s emails. First, Obama has expelled Russian diplomats and moved tanks to the border. Irritatingly, Putin yawned and tweeted a picture of a lame duck. Second, one of the Democrats’ most loyal mainstream media organizations, the Washington Post, has published a series of provocatively titled articles that have been revealed by the Guardian‘s Glenn Greenwald embarrassingly short on facts and data, not that anybody cared or that the lack of commonly accepted content, research, or journalistic honesty impacted their success. There were also Congressional hearings today by intelligence professionals who also happened to be Obama appointees that sidestepped initial allegations that Russian intelligence agencies tried to impact America’s election and instead asserted that Russian media agencies did so, without much effect.
To conclude, Greenwald’s piece includes a defense that he is a crypto-conservative, which is a fairly questionable proposition considering that: (a) he’s in a relationship with another man, (b) he works for the Guardian, and (c) he broke the Ed Snowden story. But such facts, history, and logic don’t matter when there’s a narrative to be put forward and somebody has attacked the MSM organization leading the charge. That Greenwald’s commitment to honesty, logic, and research results in charges that he’s a conservative provides evidence for two conclusions: (1) that honesty, logic, and facts are associated with the conserve project, and (b) that honesty, logic, and facts are not associated with the DNC as it works 24/7 to CYA.