Time for Trump to turn on Russian flunky Julian Assange

On Dec. 16, 2016, it was reported that FBI Director James B. Comey and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr., the heavy hitters in the United States intelligence community, are unified in the “strong consensus … on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” CIA Director John Brennan wrote in a statement to his own agency.

To be clear, “there was not the kind of tampering with the voting process that was of concern … the votes that were cast were counted, they were counted appropriately, we have not seen evidence of machines being tampered with,” President Obama assured the nation in his year-end press conference.

{mosads}But, nevertheless, the uniform opinion of the U.S. intelligence community is that Russia committed a cyber attack on the Democratic National Committee.

By contrast, the Russian government — who has invaded European countries, assaulted U.S. diplomats, facilitated genocide in Syria, and operated alleged spy rings in the U.S. – assure us that they had nothing to do with the cyber attack. In lockstep, Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, who previously published classified U.S. secrets and was subsequently under criminal investigation by the U.S. government, likewise reassured us in an interview with Sean Hannity that Russia did not provide him with the DNC’s emails.

From the outset, Americans are left with a choice: Accept the assessment of the U.S. intelligence community or that of the autocratic Russian government and its Russian “sycophant” Julian Assange, as House Speaker Paul Ryan has dubbed him.

In the absence of further information to the contrary, I accept the former over the latter.

Now, this is not to say that President-elect Donald Trump is incorrect in pushing the intelligence community to prove their conclusions. For his part, Trump claims to know “things that other people don’t know” regarding the alleged-Russian hacks. He says:

“I just want them (the intelligence community) to be sure, because it’s a pretty serious charge. … And if you look at the weapons of mass destruction, that was a disaster, and they were wrong.”

And Trump is absolutely correct. Not only was the intelligence community wrong on weapons of mass destruction, which led to the Iraq war, they were likewise wrong in concluding that Iran halted their nuclear program in 2003, leading Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to accuse the National Intelligence Estimate of “blur(ring) the line between estimates and conjecture.”

Perhaps most nefarious of all was the August 2016 revelation by a congressional panel that the United States Central Command altered and falsified intelligence reports to provide “a more positive depiction” of the war against ISIS “than was warranted by facts on the ground.”

In short, the intelligence community has been wrong, sometimes by accidents and at least one time by choice. As such, President-elect Trump is completely within his right to demand fact-based, grounded, and specific conclusions with respect to the Russian hacking.

Besides, one can hardly blame the president-elect for demanding facts, especially amid the Left’s incessant effort to use the Russian hacking to try to delegitimize the incoming president.

Despite the hacking not altering a single vote in the assessment of President Obama, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, demanded that the electors be briefed before finalizing the election of Donald Trump.

This was of course another failed attempt by Democrats to change the election results, but it should come as no surprise. History indicates that the Left only cares about Russian aggression and cyber hacking when it affects their access to power.

Democrats were noticeably quiet and largely unconcerned when Chinese hackers hacked the Office of Personnel Management. Where was the outrage then?

Likewise, Obama did not retaliate against Russia when it annexed Crimea, invaded Ukraine, or facilitated genocide in Syria. Nor did Obama immediately redress Russia’s cyber attack on the DNC when he learned about Russia’s involvement in the heat of the campaign. CNN’s Evan Perez reports:

“Administration officials were sure Trump would lose in November and they were worried about giving him any reason to question the election results.”

But upon Clinton losing, Democrats were suddenly apoplectic over Russian aggression — politically convenient indeed.

With all of these considerations, at least two principles should survive the muddied politicization of Russian hacking.

First, regardless of partisan affiliation, an attack on one is an attack on all united under one flag. An attack on the DNC might as well be an attack on RNC. We are Americans before partisans, and once Russian hacking is confirmed and verified, it ought to be addressed.

But second, when it comes to the results of the 2016 election, the revelations of the DNC email hacking merely exposed the truth about Democrats. It exposed the bias of the DNC in crowning Clinton as Democratic nominee and smearing Bernie Sanders, and it exposed the elitist ways of the Clintons in elevating self-interest over public service.

The WikiLeaks revelations might have changed minds, but they did not change votes. Donald Trump is president of the United States of America after a free and fair election. Now, it is time to lead, which means being tough on Russia when the facts demand it.

Kayleigh McEnany is a political commentator who recently received her Juris Doctor from Harvard Law School. She graduated from Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service and also studied politics at Oxford University.

The views of Contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.