Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

It seems almost paradoxical that the same Democrats that condemned the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) Intel on weapons of mass destruction, “Remember G. W. Bush and the Iraq War,” now emphatically can consign the cyber-attacks of the DNC and John Podesta, solely on Russian espionage.


There are countless articles regarding this matter written in the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc., etc., that state that a “CIA unnamed source” has indicated that Putin and Russia were behind Donald J. Trump’s victory over Hillary Rodham Clinton without a shred of hard evidence to substantiate their claims. The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s counter-intelligence does not come to the same forgone conclusion, quite the contrary…

Notwithstanding, there are multiple articles relating to the current administration politicizing the intelligence community. I tend to agree with the precept of Occam’s razor. The simplest answer, no matter how simple, is generally the “truth.”

The FBI disagrees with the CIA assessment. The FBI briefers think in terms of criminal standards — can we prove this in court,” the Washington Post reported one of the officials saying. “The CIA briefer’s weigh the preponderance of intelligence and then make judgment calls to help policymakers make informed decisions. High confidence for them means ‘we’re pretty d*** sure.’ It doesn’t mean they can prove it in court.”


One must ask themselves what Putin has to gain by manipulating a democratic election. First, let us review a little history. On March 6, 2009, the Obama Administration sent Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, to Geneva in an attempt to improve the relationship between the United States and Russia. Remember the “red button with the English word RESET?”


Next, March 2012… President Barack Obama on a hot microphone told Dmitry Medvedev, “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.” Mr. Medvedev replies: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…” Mr. Obama’s response, “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” Mr. Medvedev finishes the conversation with this last statement: “I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”


A little more than two weeks after that hot microphone gaffe between President(s) Obama and Medvedev, Mitt Romney said, “The United States stopped plans to build a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe “as a gift to Russia.” – Mitt Romney on Sunday, March 23, 2014 in comments on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” During that same exchange, Mitt Romney concluded that Russia is “our number one geopolitical foe.”


Fast forward to April 23, 2015, and the New York Times Article of “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation amid Russian Uranium Deal,” which exposes a quid pro quo for a speech Mr. Clinton gave to Moscow in which a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin promoted and Clinton received a $500,000.00 payment.


December 11, 2016: The Huffington Post reported via Ed Mazza, “John Bolton Implies Obama Administration Could be Behind {False Flag} Election Hack.” Wading through the weeds of lies, deceit, intelligence, counter-intelligence, will get a person lost trying to decide what is true and what is false. History clearly shows that the Obama Administration has a clear record of appeasement when it comes to Vladimir Putin and Russia.


Once you get past the hyperbole and now the calls that “The Russian Story is not about Hillary Clinton,” Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post, and for the record Jennifer, when is anything not about Hillary? This is just my cynicism sneaking in about HRC…The Dems want/need you to think that this story is much bigger than just Hillary Clinton and her failed campaign. “The Russians are challenging the very fabric of our democracy,” really…


Is it much easier to believe that the CIA, like the IRS and EPA, became the weapon in order to delegitimize the 2016 election? According to Breitbart, “Julian Assange Claims Russia Wasn’t Involved in DNC Hack,” and claims, it is a “leak.” One can understand why the White House and the Dems are pushing this narrative of a Russian hack. It adequately explains their resounding defeat in the 2016 elections. Why internalize when you can project your loss on your “enemy” Russia?


With this mindset, I like what Kimberly Guilfoyle, “The Five,” said on Monday, December 12, 2016. “Russia was not pulling the lever.” Americans voted, and the Democrats lost. Did Wiki Leaks influence the 2016 election? Did Russia provide Wiki Leaks the DNC and John Podesta emails? I fall back on the same old counter-argument; that John Podesta and the DNC do not deny the authenticity of the emails. On the antithesis, their entire argument is that they were “hacked,” and thus, the stolen information should not be relevant in considering the President of the United States.


Does it bother me that Russia may or may have not influenced the vote? No. It bothers me more that Russia has control of one-fifth of all the uranium production capacity in the United States thanks to Hillary Clinton and the Obama Administration. Now, that bothers me…


iPatriot Contributers


Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.


Need help, have a question, or a comment? Send us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as possible.


Log in with your credentials

Forgot your details?