Another quick rant, this one about people who think the US intelligence community is hiding evidence of Russia stealing the election. Before tonight, I didn't know this was a semi-mainstream theory. Let's ask first "what's their motivation?" 1/n
Every gov employee in the intelligence community has sworn an oath to the constitution. Sure, maybe some of them don't care about that oath or have lost sight of it. We have examples of this. But certainly this can't be all of them. 2/n
Concealing the fact that Russia stole the election seems inconsistent with upholding the constitution. So under what circumstances would those two things be consistent? I can't think of a situation, but please tell me if you know of one. 3/n
Half the country didn't vote for the president. The president is criticizing the work of the IC. I can't imagine that someone wouldn't leak evidence if it existed. For context, I spent most of my adult life in the IC. I'm positive SOMEONE would leak. 4/n
So what if the problem is that the IC doesn't have any evidence? That doesn't make sense either. The IC is extremely good at what they do. We regularly hear gloom and doom theories about the IC overstepping their bounds and "spying on Americans." 5/n
But this too is inconsistent. Either the IC is competent and has the evidence of Russia changing votes or they are incompetent and you have nothing to worry about with them spying on Americans. It's incongruous to hold both beliefs simultaneously. 6/n
Let's assume the worst though - the IC has evidence of Russia changing votes but is hiding it from the American public. Leaving the question of "Why has nobody leaked this" aside, imagine how many people must be involved in the conspiracy to hide this VERY IMPORTANT info. 7/n
TL;DR this theory just doesn't pass the sniff test. I'm left to conclude that the IC doesn't have evidence Russia changed votes. I know they're competent, so I'm left to wonder why they don't have it. 8/n
I see three possibilities:
1. They lack visibility to see it
2. They lack a legal authorities to see it
3. It doesn't exist
Occam's Razor says that it's likely number 3. Feel free to argue the point, but offer plausible explanations for why the other two don't work. 9/9
1. They lack visibility to see it
2. They lack a legal authorities to see it
3. It doesn't exist
Occam's Razor says that it's likely number 3. Feel free to argue the point, but offer plausible explanations for why the other two don't work. 9/9
