Hillary is Russia's Sucker • iPatriot Contributers •

The Clinton campaign has taken a curious tack for one wanting to elect the next President of the United States: Blame Russia for interfering with our national election claiming Russia would prefer to have an aggressive, unpredictable man for the United States President than a woman who has fumbled every diplomatic move she has ever made allowing Russia an advantage and path to return to world power status, single handedly! Of these two, Russia would clearly see Hillary’s election as an opportunity generating outcome. Be sure there are “Hillary” posters in the Kremlin.

In just one Hillary deal Russia gained control of 20% of all uranium produced in the US by making several million Dollar contributions through Canadian Uranium One, Inc. that sold out to the Russian Rostom SA after Uranium One, Inc. had control of 20% of all US uranium production. Mr. Trump has no uranium holdings in any nation.

Hillary’s contention Mr. Trump’s alleged deals and borrowings from Russian lenders makes Donald J. Trump a more attractive US President than she is do not add up. In Hillary they have a useful “Patsy.”

That this is the reason Trump hesitates to release his tax returns wanting to keep any Russian deals confidential may seem logical to those ignorant of corporation taxes, but anyone who ever owning a corporation knows well accountants and tax attorneys tell you not to release anything under audit as the numbers change during IRS examinations and if there are any problems you do not want them to be exposed by an aggressively negative press before your day in US IRS tax court, which is notoriously shy of press.

The Washington Post has published a claim Russia hacked the Democrat National Committee using the aliases “Guccifer,” the Romanian computer hacker Marcel Lazăr Lehel, and “D.C. Leaks” both known European sources for Wikileaks further compounding and making less possible confirmation as these could be copycat covers used by people seriously anonymous.

Hillary’s folks contend the fakers of the fakers, “…had learned to use the language of Americans frustrated with Washington, DC.” Where this seems “a long way round the horn,” isn’t more likely these are simply American hackers and not Russian imitators when the entire thesis is flawed where a known female fumbler would be preferable for Russian purposes than a man more likely to take actions they would not like or do them great harm?

That they are Russian hackers is claimed substantiated by Hillary’s statement “17 US intelligence agencies have confirmed Russia hacked the DNC,” when none have made any such claim and that we have 17 such agencies is likely an outing of several “black” operations the existence of which is a state secret. Chalk up another fumble, Hillary!

Associated Press reported October 2015 that “Hillary Clinton’s private email server maintained in her home while serving as Secretary of State was hacked by Russia-tied authorities on five separate occasions.” While we are not sure what “Russia-tied” reduces to and AP has long been an organization without a central authority, but an association; who is saying what? The AP idea is that member publishers put stories on line for all. From where did this statement come? Who is responsible? No associate claims authorship.

In her defense that did not happen it seems AP’s claim is predicated on their having detected “a Russian keyboard” in the programs left in said server for transmitting emails to Russian servers. Two things are wrong with this as “Russian keyboards” are not distinct as they only produce binary codes like western keyboards so they are not detectable and what they see of the planted program is written in a computer language the codes of which were written in Silicon Valley, CA or Redman, Washington.

Nonetheless, the real “Guccifer” told FOX News he hacked Hillary’s home server along with ten other hackers so Hillary’s contention it was never hacked is not only ridiculous on its’ face, but refuted by testimony from people who did it. The computer authorities of 170 nations would be able to see the traffic coming from our State Department and the first thing they would notice is this odd, unsecured address in upstate New York and be on it quicker than two possums on a June Bug. Hillary’s server was the cyber punch-board of the big boys. She had more digital readers than a New York Times “Best Seller!”

Finally and most significantly, it seems counter-intuitive that Hillary would dare offend the world’s leading military power by making such accusations when she clearly has no hard evidence. Even if she did is it still good form by the rules of diplomacy? Is she so bereft of diplomatic skills that she throws gasoline on the candelabra at her own dinner party? Could she not say, “Apparently we were hacked by someone and while we are working on it we will just have to hope it was an American and not a foreign power as that would have severe implications an consequences.” In other words, “Stay out of our business boys, or else…” In this case Hillary put bullets in both feet with her inartful ways of handling foreign policy.

Adrian Vance