THE HACKING GETS MURKY
“What do we know about foreign hacking into the U.S. election? Quite a lot, actually, even if we don’t have a parking pass at CIA headquarters. But there is also a lot of confusion. Call it the ‘fog of cyberwar.’ The fog comes from several sources,” writes Charles Lipson, a University of Chicago political science professor and contributor to Real Clear Politics.
“Only snippets of information have been disclosed. No public investigations have been held, though some certainly will be. The CIA and FBI seem to have reached different conclusions, and the director of national intelligence has not adjudicated them. Donald Trump has rejected the idea that Russia was trying to help him get elected,” Mr. Lipson continues. “And Democrats, seeking to blame anyone but themselves for their losses, have stressed Russia’s role. Some dead-enders have even said Russian interference invalidates the election results. It’s time to clarify what we know so we can figure out what to do next.”
Should there be a “deep dive,” as President Obama suggested to ferret out the truth?
“A serious investigation should not be an excuse for denying the outcome of the 2016 election or for saying it was rigged by a foreign power. The election is over, and Hillary Clinton’s loss cannot be attributed to Russian interference,” says Mr. Lipson, who recommends that Congress be left out the effort because their work is typically “shallow, backward-looking, and filled with partisan grandstanding” and a full agenda dealing with health care, tax reform, a Supreme Court nominee and other pressing matters.
The professor is more partial to a low-key bipartisan investigation modeled after the 9/11 Commission, with subpoena power and input from the intelligence community.
“Its mission should be more than pinning the tail on the Russian bear. It should be highlighting areas of vulnerability at the heart of our democracy: the right to free, fair elections,” advises Mr. Lipson.