Evidence of Russian interference in US presidential election ‘just not there’
A White House statement confirming the result of the presidential election reflects the will of the American public.
The statement comes after calls from President-elect Donald Trump's opponents to recount votes in several states on fears Russia could have somehow influenced the process.
Articles with a similar anti-Russian tune are still being published in the mass media.
Obama administration: The election results "accurately reflect the will of the American people" https://t.co/LmmQASHE3e— The New York Times (@nytimes) November 26, 2016
RT: Why do you think the mass media hasn't changed its tune toward Russia and its interference in the US elections, even after the White House admitted the elections reflect the will of American people?
Ray McGovern: The Green Party is simply trying to establish exactly what happened in those three key states. And I applaud that. The insidious part comes with the innuendo that Russia tried to affect this election. And the New York Times indicates very clearly that it did not affect the election. And the evidence that it “tried” to affect the election is ambiguous and very elusive at best. The Times and the Washington Post have had it in for Russia ever since Hillary Clinton needed a way to divert attention away from the fact that she stole the nomination from Bernie Sanders. That is what the WikiLeaks leaks - not hacking - but someone gave those things to Julian Assange. We believe it was someone from the NSA or someone from the Democratic National Committee who were aghast that the election and the nomination could be stolen from Bernie Sanders. That it gave legs and diverted attention from that fact and Hillary won the nomination. But now that it is all over, there is still this residual business where it is accepted as flat fact that Russia tried to interfere. And the evidence is just not there. Would we have the evidence? My former NSA colleagues tell me of course, we would. There is something called a trace mechanism where you can trace back emails as far as you need to find out the origin. And none of those trace mechanisms were revealed as proving that Russia was interfering with the US election.
RT: Is there a real possibility that a foreign country can have such a huge impact on the US elections?
RM: No, and the joint statement from the director of National Intelligence and the Director of Homeland Security said that. They said that it is extremely unlikely that this could ever happen because of the way the electoral system is set up in the US. The language here was: “it would be extremely difficult for someone, anyone to alter the ballot counts on election results by cyber-attack or intrusion.” They point out, for example that many of these voting machines are not connected at all to the internet. So, they’ve ruled that out and yet Russia is the choice of people who would like to blame all manner of things on Russia. A friend of mine was late for work on Friday, and he just blamed Russia, and everybody accepted that.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.